jfernandez

What's the goal of posting this right now? A lot of what's written here seems to be well-trodden ground from the last two years of discussions, is it just to centralize a thesis within one post?

Sprint (product development and testing)

It left me with a more fundamental, "first principles" outlook on the 5 key stages of doing _anything_:

1. Understand

2. Explore

3. Decide

4. Prototype/Build

5. Test

So for example, when things often go wrong it's because a stage was skipped, done out of sequence, or extremely neglected.

Scary, this just convinced me to turn off text-based 2FA and only have Google Auth App (+ backup keys). Thank you.

The fact that it also gave the backstory on this being a known artistic tactic, truly awesome

Agreed, Meta's "good parts" would have a better chance to succeed if it weren't entangled so much with Mark and Facebook at large. Listening to the interview made me feel that Mark/Facebook have good intent with this work (and are clearly doubling down ala rename) but the metaverse feels like something that's being pushed through vs a natural extension of human connection. They are making sure they have a big say on how it unfolds by shifting the focus on the company towards. Good and bad.

I was "defending" the metaverse to a friend outside of the tech bubble last night and I talked a lot about how much I learned about socialization/human connection when I used to play Star Wars Galaxies and World of Warcraft. That those relationships which started somewhat "metaverse"-first meant as much as my "real" connections did... and that's what I feel the essence of Meta/metaverse is really trying to bring to everyone.

Without getting to robotic: given how I also think dang is awesome, has anyone ever tried to compile of list of tactics dang employs to receive such high praise by almost everyone on the site? Meaning, like some sort of case studies that map back to higher order principles/values he's acting on.

> Any idea that technology is an unmitigated good begins to be questioned.

I think that's where we as the more "common" society may have gone off course: no technology (chair, toothbrush, etc to be cheeky/comprehensive on my use of the word technology) lives in a world where it's an absolutely perfect good. Anything can be abused, and when we've though about adjusting or rethinking big internet-based technologies, including social media services, it seems we're not putting enough responsibility on the operators of these services.

To me, that _doesn't_ mean we expect them to be perfect either with the ability to be responsible actors, but there needs to be some agreed upon standards that we can evaluate performance of their ability to act responsibly. It can just be left up to them, which is currently the state at a high-level.

I love the thought you covered in your first video about "why not YouTube?", so best of luck with building a more specific community.

I think some will say that you'll lose a sense of discovery by not being on one of the largest video platforms, but you'll gain an opportunity to build something from scratch and see what you can cultivate. It really comes down to your goals/intent, and I think you did a great job of explaining your choice so far!

Wow, so many questions and thoughts this article raises in me.

The biggest takeaway for me was that this technology will likely naturally evolve to seeing ourselves in the content and clothing we want. Maybe it's a bit narcissistic to declare publicly, but I have personally seen through my own work the march towards personalization: what's more personal than seeing yourself everywhere doing everything?