Meta Says Its Metaverse Ambitions Won't Be Possible Without Better Cellular Networks (cnbc.com) 43
Meta, formerly Facebook, has said that its grand ambition of building the ultimate "metaverse" won't be possible if there aren't drastic improvements in today's telecoms networks. CNBC reports: Dan Rabinovitsj, VP of connectivity at Meta, told CNBC at the Mobile World Congress tech event Monday that home networks and cellular networks aren't yet ready for the metaverse. "We're working closely with our colleagues to think about what's the next step in terms of innovation," he said, adding that Meta is also working with cellular partners. "If you really look at the pace of innovation in the telecom world, compared to other markets, it's been harder to go faster in this space," Rabinovitsj said. "One of the things that we've tried to change is that trajectory of innovation."
"We need to develop a common language around the performance of networks," Rabinovitsj said. "We're actually big believers in measurement as foundational in this next phase of work." Mark Zuckerberg, Meta's founder and CEO, said in a statement Sunday that "creating a true sense of presence in virtual worlds delivered to smart glasses and VR headsets will require massive advances in connectivity." Zuckerberg said this will need to be "bigger than any of the step changes we've seen before," adding that things like wide-scale immersive video streaming will take entirely new types of networks.
In response, Marc Allera, CEO of the consumer division of U.K. mobile network BT, told CNBC Wednesday that he expects the metaverse to place a strain on today's networks. However, he said the telecoms industry is spending billions on new technology. "When you stop and think about what you're able to do on a smartphone today, compared to 10 years ago, that's as a result of this industry and network operators investing huge amounts of money with no contribution made by content companies on these networks," Allera said ahead of a meeting with representatives from Meta. "I'll try and understand what their role in supporting this ecosystem is other than just asking what we're doing about it," he added.
"We need to develop a common language around the performance of networks," Rabinovitsj said. "We're actually big believers in measurement as foundational in this next phase of work." Mark Zuckerberg, Meta's founder and CEO, said in a statement Sunday that "creating a true sense of presence in virtual worlds delivered to smart glasses and VR headsets will require massive advances in connectivity." Zuckerberg said this will need to be "bigger than any of the step changes we've seen before," adding that things like wide-scale immersive video streaming will take entirely new types of networks.
In response, Marc Allera, CEO of the consumer division of U.K. mobile network BT, told CNBC Wednesday that he expects the metaverse to place a strain on today's networks. However, he said the telecoms industry is spending billions on new technology. "When you stop and think about what you're able to do on a smartphone today, compared to 10 years ago, that's as a result of this industry and network operators investing huge amounts of money with no contribution made by content companies on these networks," Allera said ahead of a meeting with representatives from Meta. "I'll try and understand what their role in supporting this ecosystem is other than just asking what we're doing about it," he added.
Fantastic reason not to build them ! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Who would want VR based off of a smart phone? Get a computer and use the wifi from your ISP, or a wire to the modem (though it's a tripping hazard when you're blinded by the goggles). Cellular is for when you're away from your internet and still want to see a tweet because of an addiction.
Re: (Score:2)
Reading a book is hard in a passenger seat of a car... and I doubt you want to wear VR googles in public. So, this is trapped in the home, isn't it?
Re:Fantastic reason not to build them ! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, this doesn't make any sense. Does he expect people to carry around a headset everywhere they go?
For what purpose? Does he people to strap it on when they're at the bar? Wander around busy parking lots blind?
It's bad enough when people gather together just to ignore each other and stare at their phones. (I made it a point to avoid using my phone when out with friends.) Does he expect people to gather at a park or cafe then meet in VR anyway? What's the point?
Re: (Score:3)
I think he sees it a lot less like the current day VR headsets. I expect he sees technology catching up fast and allowing low powered small form augmented reality glasses akin to what's been tried by many - but the tech is just not there yet.
He also hopes people will want them on all day. This will only happen if they are useful, which they may be.
I hate FB/Meta and the entire living in VR concept - I'm not supporting it, I'm just trying to understand it.
Re: (Score:2)
I hate FB/Meta and the entire living in VR concept - I'm not supporting it, I'm just trying to understand it.
If a metaverse is ever realized, it will be like reading - something you do for necessity, or as entertainment when you're in the mood for it. You don't live in text, even if you're never too far away from written text nowadays; it's a tool, a vehicle to something else.
Not something that you "experience" for the sake of just doing it, and certainly not 24x7. We don't do reading when we are socially gathering with friends, it would be rude, unless the meeting has been specifically built up for reading among
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
The idea they are referring to is surely AR, something like Google glass, or this fake demo which looks amazing, which Facebook bought [youtube.com].
In terms of something that people would want to use and get involved in, this is the best we have [smbc-comics.com] except people would get bored of it after a few weeks.
Imagine being able to overlay video over any object in the real world. It would be like Pokemon Go but better. That is what Facebook hopes for but doesn't have the people capable of creating it.
Re: (Score:2)
Who would want VR based off of a smart phone? Get a computer and use the wifi from your ISP, or a wire to the modem (though it's a tripping hazard when you're blinded by the goggles). Cellular is for when you're away from your internet and still want to see a tweet because of an addiction.
It is the next level of "embrace" (from embrace - extend - extinguish), where they want to make sure you cannot even get away from them if you go outside.
Re: (Score:2)
"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
I agree that in our current state you might be right, but the future is bold, and we can't see from here where it is eventually heading. I'm thinking this isn't about VR so much as it is about AR.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm thinking this isn't about VR so much as it is about AR.
Okay.... but AR should take a LOT less bandwidth than VR.
What planet are these people from? (Score:1)
Great! (Score:3)
home networks and cellular networks aren't yet ready for the metaverse
Phew. Crisis averted!
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be safe, lets switch back to dial-up and AMPS.
Re: (Score:2)
home networks and cellular networks aren't yet ready for the metaverse
Phew. Crisis averted!
Looks like it. Close one! But I cannot help wondering why they did not look at this _before_ they changed company strategy. You know, like sane people that have more than two functioning brain-cells would have.
Then Zuck should pay for it (Score:2)
If he wants it, then he should fork over the cash. I don't want to foot the bill for something I don't want and something that will probably fail.
Aww (Score:2)
The more I hear... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That sentence gave me a mild headache.
Though on the bright side, it looks like they finally started to grasp how networks work. Started, still being quite euphemistic.
Re: (Score:2)
red herring (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. This is a guy explaining why what he's working on won't work while absolving himself of blame.
it's tragicomic ... (Score:2)
... to see such an evil company desperately trying to stay relevant with these pathetic crap ideas before his one-off lucky hit definitely phases out. good riddance, the world doesn't need you and will be actually better off without you. enjoy your well earnt millions and fuck off.
Welcome to 1960 (Score:3)
"We need to develop a common language around the performance of networks," Rabinovitsj said. "We're actually big believers in measurement as foundational in this next phase of work."
That work was done in 1960, if not earlier. Stop making excuses.
Re: (Score:2)
What I read between the lines is that they want new global standards that make all networks behave in a way that can be algorithmically predicted by them. Of course that likely won't solve the issues, unless they find a way to actually predict the future, which they might believe to be possible by utilizing AI (neural n
Re: (Score:2)
What I read between the lines is that they want new global standards that make all networks behave in a way that can be algorithmically predicted by them
That sounds impossible. The TCP solution to measuring bandwidth is probably close to optimal.
Re: (Score:2)
Though I have to admit that it's my interpretation that is based on very common plot enabling device in fiction where something akin to a metaverse exists. At least in the case of writers that care to recognize the issue so it can be handwaved away that is the case.
To make the plots and story work the fictional societies either having discovered a way to effectively break causality by FTL communications, which can keep latencies constant and guaranteeing synchronicity.
Re: (Score:2)
Although I admit practical FTL communications would be very useful.
Re: (Score:2)
"We need to develop a common language around the performance of networks," Rabinovitsj said. "We're actually big believers in measurement as foundational in this next phase of work."
That work was done in 1960, if not earlier. Stop making excuses.
Indeed. This person is both a liar and incompetent.
Formerly Facebook (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It's Facebook by Meta, not Meta formerly Facebook. You don't keep saying "Alphabet, formerly Google" so stop the gaslighting.
You're not using the right word. Gaslight does not mean what you THINK it means.
gas + light. The verb sense derives from the 1938 stage play Gas Light, in which a husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is insane by manipulating small elements of their environment.
How does that, in any way, relate to anything anybody said about Facebook?
Advancement of Content (quality)is lacking (Score:1)
Maybe stop the non-stop lobbying for tax cuts (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Hehehe, indeed. It is always hilarious when companies like Facebook essentially choke themselves out and then blame others. No investments - no results. Even a stupid business person should be able to understand that one.
Common language (Score:3)
Bandwidth, latency, lag, bits per second, routers, packets, transmission...
Maybe he meant we need common language around "why would anyone need Facebook's metaverse on their phone". I am at a loss for words.
Good news everybody! (Score:2)
So there's still a chance? This can all be averted??
Re: (Score:1)
"rats" by pearl jam. says it all. i'm convinced they had a time machine and traveled to november 2020 to write that song....
They would make it bloated/slow no matter (Score:2)
Moar Gâ(TM)s (Score:2)
Neil Stephenson should sue Zuckerberg (Score:2)
Aha! They started looking for somebody to blame! (Score:2)
That happened faster than expected. Of course it is not that ZuckerFucker is too stupid to come up with a good strategy and had only one moderately good idea ever that he was lucky to have at exactly the right time. No, cannot be.