This is also not new. The same division has reported losses of $9.4 billion since the beginning of the year, up from the previous year’s losses during the same period ($6.9 billion).

Meta has, however, reported revenue of 29 billion in the last fiscal quarter, a 4 percent decline from the previous year.

• Facebook
• Instagram
• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Meta C.E.O., born Mark Zuckenberg, has been ordered to review his investment commitments about the Metaverse and its implementation on social platforms Facebook and Instagram.

In fact, the definition loss is often synonymous with investment, hence, future gain in the management of a Company . Of course, we are talking about $3.6 billion in losses in the last Financial Quarter alone, but, we are not talking about a family-run business.

When, we refer to a company we always think of its earnings and high margins; for high-tech companies, as you can well imagine, the R&D Department has at its disposal substantial funding that often results in successes but, for the vast majority of cases, lays the groundwork for other milestones or new organizational paradigms of existing manufacturing assets.

From the lines above, we can guess how misleading the item loss, not knowing the details of the project, can be. Indeed, by counterintuitive reasoning, the very large losses make us realize that the resources, not just financial, spent on the project are intense and that success may be just around the corner.

Let us relate to another reasoning more related to social networks; in this case, what Meta’s core business is.

Meta offers a service; something intangible and does not transform raw materials into processed or semi-finished goods. It goes without saying that innovative research on how to interface remotely, via Virtual or Augmented Reality, is the natural evolution of Facebook and Instagram.

From all this: Meta is “forced” to invest in the Metaverse for its own survival and evolution, it has no alternative.

Yet, something “physical” they produce

Last October 11, Meta unveiled its new visor for working in the metaverse, but the company’s shareholders would have been better served by a full-face helmet. Since Facebook changed its name to bet on the great future of the metaverse about a year ago, the company’s capitalization has plummeted by 60 percent. 

But the problems for Mark Zuckerberg’s creature do not seem to be over, as users of the virtual social space that Meta launched in the U.S. last Dec. 9, Horizon Worlds, struggle to increase. According to internal communications revealed by the Wall Street Journal, those who enter Meta’s metaverse use it for a short time and, after the first month, never return. To date, Horizon Words users are reportedly less than 200,000, down from the 300,000 officially reported by the company in February and far below the initial target set at 500,000 by the end of 2022 (already scaled back to 280,000). Internal communications indicate that Meta would even spur its own employees to use Horizon, with phrases such as, “If we don’t love it, how can we expect our users to love it?”

The strategy of Microsoft, another major player in this challenge, seems easier to imagine: the huge investments on video games and the acquisition of Blizzard ($69 billion to win, among others, the Call of Duty franchise) indicate an aspiration to monetize on gaming by exploiting some of the most popular video game series. Judging by the habits of those already using the metaverse, there seems to be a profitable future for this technology applied to gaming. The same Quest visor launched by Meta is predominantly used for gaming. 

The new Quest Pro is expected to seduce enterprises by bringing workspaces such as Microsoft Teams into a virtual context. Less certain, however, are the chances of success social network recreated in the virtual space. The numbers Meta is struggling with, with its world still “empty and sad” seem to suggest just that.

What A.I.LoveTourism Thinks

The Technological Ecosystem : the real problem.

In order to function most efficiently, the Metaverse needs a large number of technologies : tangible and intangible ; software and hardware.

As for the intangible ones, we refer to those related to Visual Computing, that is, to the real-time rendering of reality; replacing real objects with virtual or assistive visualizations of the same. Technologies that have been studied for decades and have reached a good level, but, which need accessories and a complex and varied “ecosystem.” We are not only talking about increasingly perfomant virtual reality viewers but, also, about position sensors, gyrostabilizers, ultra-low latency data transfer lines, ergonomics that avoid visual disturbances… and an endless array of sensor technology of all kinds. It is no coincidence that this technology is used only in the military or heavy industry.

Referring, on the other hand, to the Intangible Technologies of the Metaverse refers to cryptographic or signal transmission software, many related to the Blockchain. ( LRead Our Article about Tokens ) .

Blockchain is a mostly open-source technology which, for reasons of design and its very essence, is very difficult to privatize and bring into one’s own company as proprietary; also, the multi-powerful Zuckenberg cannot do much.

From the reasoning given, what can we understand?

The development of the Metaverse is a necessary stage for the very existence of Meta, it cannot do without it, but, the real problem is everything that revolves around the Metaverse.

The accompanying technologies that guarantee their existence are premature in some cases; not yet standardizable ; not yet privatizable ... in short, out of time - both forward and backward - with respect to the Metaverse.

Hence the title : ...A TECHNOLOGY OUT OF MINIMUM TIME.

• Facebook
• Instagram
• LinkedIn
• Twitter