Dude is really living that thesis that "the most reliable indicator that someone will believe a conspiracy theory is if they already believe a different conspiracy theory, even if it is unrelated (or even contradictory)."
Interesting talk about "the metaverse". I currently lead a group that builds metaverses for clients. We have about 15 on the go right now, each in the $10m range, and an overflowing pipeline. They have very little overlap in what they're looking to accomplish. And we're winning international awards for the work we're doing. https://www.yvr.ca/en/blog/2022/yvr-digital-twin-launch I sit on the 3 most popular standards bodies for metaverses. So yeah, the whole "Ready Player One" idea of a metaverse is bullshit, IMO. Technical interoperability is not a thing that will happen any time soon, but there are a bunch of people trying to make it happen. It took 30 years for the internet to get where it is now... it'll be interesting to see where this "web3" shift takes us over the next 30. (And web3 does not have to mean crypto). It's much like NFT's. People that don't work in the field don't really get anything other than what they think they understand of it and how they envision it. Bored Ape shit. But if you look under the hood, at the world of finance, it's starting to make a huge difference. This month one of the teams I work with performed the first NFT based fractional deposit internationall (an OCC approved alternative to SWIFT), all without counterparties. Based on NFTs. We're also part of Project Guardian... again, based on asset tokenization... NFTs. https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/media-r...industry-to-pilot-use-cases-in-digital-assets Player economies, creator economies, etc, are all based on digital assets of value. And any metaverse worth its salt has a digital economy. And they're all being regulated. The economies exist... just go look at the multi billion dollar underground for Diablo. We're just working on making them legit, among other things.
And for what it's worth, I think Meta's view is bullshit. It makes no sense, they just want to be first to market with the toolset and hardware to build metaverses, and their first view looks like ass. What you don't see is the 99% of the infrastructure they're building that made that happen, and can build a shit ton of other, better metaverses.
lol, he's from Canada. CLOSE THE BORDER! But, seriously, wtf? Not "immediately" enough, if you let him smack Pelosi with a hammer. So, you saw crazy guy and an octogenarian struggling for control of a hammer and thought, "let's see how this plays out"?
Probably happened fast. They enter, attacker rips the hammer out of Pelosi's hand and swings, they tackle him, one good whack is all it takes to drop an 82 year old. Could have all happened in a few seconds.
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1586060529767956481 I'm concerned that Republicans might genuinely believe that if Nancy Pelosi is no longer speaker that she isn't still the House Rep from CA-12.
On the Meta thing....I think this has a lot more legs than people realize. In some parts of the world, Facebook is it's own isolated micro-internet. Every app, every major utility or site has it's own variant in the FB environment, to the point where you don't use "traditional" internet. It's sort of a blend between the apps you got on a Nokia in 2003, itunes and the current iteration of the app store. So, think of your entire experience of the internet being through FB. Now, with Meta, they can "load" all of that data into a sandbox environment and play with it. Think about how much information FB has on you, and then think of that feeding an environment where you interact with other people's data. Want to test how your product will do with 21-28 year old Nigerian anime fans? FB can give you that ability and let you test what their interactions would be. IE, the Facebook Meta experiment isn't just you, your data versus the marketers, now it's you and your entire social sphere having a sims-esque sandbox to tinker with. The value of Meta isn't a virtual high school reunion, it's a VIRTUAL place where your data functions as an avatar of you, without you needing to fill it in at all and said data acts as it predicts you would. It's a place where you don't need data science to play with the immensity of FB's data pool, and it opens up a dizzying array of opportunities. The best feature of this is the ability to plug in live, actual users.
The big thing that Meta fucked up was their attempt at a virtual currency.. .Libre. They had a shot to be THE de facto virtual currency, and they fucked it up. They were a bunch of video game devs that tried to do Fintech, and they got laughed out of that arena. The OCC, and every other regulatory organization laughed at how fucked their attempt was. They had zero clue, and they lost their best shot. Honestly, the reason I'm involved with a bunch of these groups is that I'm leading the charge to do exactly what Meta tried to... but I have the support of the likes of JP Morgan, DBS, etc. I am building out payment rails for the metaverse... where you can transact in digital assets of value, with full compliance. The only other company close to that right now is Tillia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...egic-investment-from-jp-morgan-301652447.html The best part is that my company is in a position to truly become the 800 lbs gorilla in that space due to our size and market share when it comes to gaming and virtual environments. It's a lot of work, but it's pretty fucking fun right now. I mean, I have have weekly calls with the CEO of JP Morgan, and their digital payments/asset company, Onyx. I never thought that would ever be a thing.
My understanding of what you're doing that's different is that it's an "enclosed" space, so to speak. IE, the currencies are all part of a system, like Diablo, and have limitations and constraints because of and within said system. The data and assets generated all have to be within that system. I get it's a huge liability for say a Nigerian Diablo player to generate assets that if converted into local currency are worthless , and vice versa, the company making Diablo can't really generate revenue based off of said player. What it sounds like is a way for a digital currency to allow for more seamless tranactions and transfers to allow that value to be exchanged fluidly. The other conceptual usage I understand is a sort of "verified digital original", like if you somehow had the Mona Lisa inside a Diablo environment, and wanted to control it so that anything else would be clearly labelled a copy, and the value of the original could be maintained. I see this for like celebrity endorsements, characters or art within gaming environments. I don't understand how this translates out of said environments and into like...actual money, where JP Morgan would be involved.
You're talking about the difference between a closed loop and open loop economy. Classical tokenized monetization within a video game or world, where you can't cash out and trade outside of that world, is called Closed Loop, and it's as old as video games. As soon as you allow digital assets of value (I use that term specifically for what it means) to be exported from the system, or to be paid out for, you are in an Open Loop economy. This means that you now have a ton of regulatory requirements that you have to be in compliance with. The concept of earning/winning a Pink Cadillac in Need For Speed as an NFT, and then selling it to someone else outside of the Need For Speed world, has a ton of AML/KYC (anti money laundering and know your client) oversight requirements. Being able to take some sort of digital asset of value, and then selling it to someone in some sort of secondary market, it a shift that requires higher regulation, oversight, and reporting. JP Morgan is one of the few global entities that provides all of those oversights. They basically underwrite the transactions and ensure to the reporting parties (governments, etc), that things are above board and are being done properly. They also have the cash securities to cover any such digital asset transactions. Overall, there are 9 basic jurisdictions that make up the global economy. If you have appropriate coverage/oversight for those 9 base jurisdictions/countries, then you are good for the entire world. For instance, if you are approved by the Bank of Singapore, then you are covered for about 30 other countries that recognize that coverage as "suitable for us as well". The one big thing that JP Morgan brings to the table is a stable cryptocurrency that is tied to the USD. It's a stable coin, and they have the huge cash reserves to back it properly, unlike Tether or the other attempts. If you have one JPMCoin, then it's value is covered. You can show up to JPM with that coin and they will redeem it, and that is guaranteed by the OCC and other sanctioning bodies. We can use that JPMCoin, or a white labelled version of it, like the IdiotBoardCoin, in lieu of cash in those digital economies. They can be cashed out at a set value, which is the USD.
The current market strategy of Microsoft Activision Blizzard would say otherwise. All they do is squeeze every penny out of the player base, whether it’s Diablo or MW.