A letter to Zuckerberg: The Metaverse is not what you think it is

Dear Lord Sugar Mountain,

Attention: to my Facebook friend who is towers a version of the metaverse that nobody wants as a starter.

The last few years must certainly not have been easy. Your merchantry model centered virtually polarization and, subsequently, outrage has ironically unified many of us versus relying too much on your social media platform. Your government — whose sniper rifle verism you know all too well as they took out your ill-conceived stablecoin project shortly without your expensive global razzmatazz wayfarers went live — has tuned in to the many whistleblowers exposing how your visitor captures and sells attention. It has tabbed you in for questioning. Although to be fair, they moreover needed to speak with you to largest understand the nuts of digital ad revenue.


What do people do when they are cornered? One of two things: fight when or flee the scene. As the walls tropical in, it seems that you have chosen to flee. Instead of addressing the deep-rooted issues of your merchantry model, you’ve simply renamed the company, borrowing from a cyberpunk term coined in a 1992 dystopian novel that’s all well-nigh escaping a perishable world and getting hooked on an volitional illusionary reality, only to completely condone the shortcomings of the real world. That’s probably not the connotation you had in mind when you rebranded the company, but it is the increasingly well-judged version of what you are promising to build.

Related: What Facebook’s rebranding tells us well-nigh Big Tech’s ‘Game of Platforms’

Understanding the Metaverse

There is no ultimate definition of the Metaverse yet, but Grayscale’s struggle in their recent report is getting very close. It depicts the Metaverse as a set of interconnected experiential 3D virtual worlds where people located anywhere can socialize in real-time to form a persistent user-owned internet economy spanning the digital and physical worlds.

While most of the adjectives in that definition are subject to debate and interpretation, one, in particular, stands out and is perhaps the most aligned with what we’re towers in Cryptoland: user-owned. In the metaverse, we are constructing projects like The Sandbox, Decentraland, Axie Infinity, My Neighbour Alice, Star Atlas and Revv Racing. It is the users that ultimately own content as in-game NFT assets. The idea is that everyone has equal wangle to the ways of production, in-game economics and consumption rooted in verifiable ownership of digital assets. What’s more, these in-game resources are transferable, ready to be traded on marketplaces and, at some stage even, to slide between worlds — your racing car skin designed for Revv Racing could be sent to flipside wallet unfluctuating to flipside racing game, giving your FlameBoi Design flipside endangerment to navigate the polychrome line and take the gold. Yes, one day, our user-owned in-game resources will slither wildly as they slip yonder wideness the Metaverse.

This vision for the Metaverse has little to do with your corporatized version of a nauseating virtual reality (VR) game of ping-pong with a diaper friend in a variegated timezone, wearing a disorientating headset that scans everything in the room, only to be fed you the “Recommended Purchases for You” sidebar minutes later.

Related: New tribes of the Metaverse — Community-owned economies

Building something new

You talk well-nigh replacing precious real-world social interactions with a digital immersive “experience,” conveniently overlooking that your visitor will then own everything well-nigh that wits — from the visible interactive game elements all the way lanugo to the metadata. Instead, the crypto version of the metaverse is driven by the same motivation as other Web 3.0 projects in this space: rebuilding our digital world to restore ownership to the individual. It has nothing to do with VR or your vision of a “better world.”


We’re towers a new environment to spend our time and creative energy in. One that is equally accessible, rooted in crypto-economics and, at some stage, perhaps largely run by decentralized voluntary organizations (DAOs). And while corporations are welcome to participate and produce their own resources in the crypto metaverse, they should not own any outsized part of it, as it takes the power yonder from the individual and from the main goal in question: to create a Metaverse that is user-owned.

Centralized dreams have no merchantry snooping virtually the metaverse. Not going to make it.

This vendible does not contain investment translating or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should self-mastery their own research when making a decision.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s vacated and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Ben Caselin is the throne of research and strategy at AAX, the crypto mart to be powered by London Stock Mart Group’s LSEG Technology. With a preliminaries in creative arts, social research and fintech, Ben develops insights into Bitcoin and decentralized finance and provides strategic direction at AAX. He is moreover a working member of Global Digital Finance (GDF), a leading industry soul secure to driving the velocity and adoption of digital finance forward.

Live news: Walmart, CVS and Walgreens to cap purchases of at-home Covid testing kits

5×7 Bathroom Remodel Cost Breakdown: A Complete Guide