Talk:Metaverse

message: In the second paragraph of Implementations, there's a reference to ChatGPT. This doesn't make any sense. Stray edit from something? 136.159.213.1 (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to ChatGPT doesn't make sense 

message: I suggest adding these issues to the criticism and concerns on social issues:
As people increasingly pursue social interactions in the virtual world, concerns have been raised about ethics, sexual predators, terrorism entrapment and indoctrination, privacy, and security. While big tech companies pursuing the Metaverse concept are aware of these issues, they could deter people from enjoying and exploiting the total immersive experiences that the concept provides. Another challenge that may confront the Metaverse concept is the cost for hardware such as headsets and other products that will allow people to enter the virtual world. This could lead to social segregation, as the poor and people of limited economic means may be locked out. The Metaverse will also not suffice the interaction quest for people with different physical challenges, especially the blind and the deaf. The visually impaired will be greatly disadvantaged unless advanced technologies are available to address their plight.
Source: https://www.mdpi.com/2624-6511/5/3/40 Resilientcity (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Already mentioned in this article are the concerns around sexual harassment, privacy and security, cost, and social isolation. You raise a good point about accessibility to those with physical disabilities, and that is absolutely necessary to include. I've added a sentence about it in #Social issues. There might be more in the article, but I'm wary of how closely they wrap Facebook in to the metaverse. Are you one of the authors? Your username suggests that you are in some way involved. SWinxy (talk) 14:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2023 

message: It is fundamentally difficult to speak of "lack of adoption", of something that does not yet exist extensively. Decentraland and Meta's platform are specifically mentioned here as negative examples, which do not even fulfill the criteria of the Metaverse, such as interoperability, economic exchange, AR and VR, etc. The Metaverse is still in its absolute initial stages of development, and for example, according to reports from City Group, McKinsey, PwC, will only be ready for the market in 5-15 years. It is a slow process in which many standards must first be created and everyone continues to work on it. Furthermore, it is nonsense to compare Metaverse with AI, since AI will be a core technology of Metaverse. Using opinion articles with clickbait character as a basis for statements here should be reconsidered. Dave-George (talk) 12:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with Dave-George. Specifically highlighting Decentraland's concurrent user of 8000 is a disservice to other metaverse implementations such as Second Life, Roblox, etc., which individually has daily active users orders of magnitude higher than Decentraland's. pepoluan (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerns about the section "Lack of adoption" 

message: Hi,
Please add sources to the sentence "Proposed applications for metaverse technology include improving work productivity,[31][45] [XX], ..."
We wrote a paper about the use of metaverse in the workplace and we would like to get it to a wider audience.
Thanks in advance,
Tereza Tersi Science (talk) 12:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2023 

message: The "Blockchain-Powered Crypto Metaverse" seems to be placing undue focus on this one particular possible way to implementing a metaverse. It has citations, but seems to be weaving a narrative that is borderline POV-pushing re blockchain generally. Unsure why this is even here, as there doesn't appear to be any major public discussion on using blockchain to power the metaverse. I think it should be trimmed considerably. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it's going into essay-like territory, it's probably better to remove tbh. SWinxy (talk) 19:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Looking more closely, the first citation is just promotional "partner content" and not really a valid reliable source. THe rest was just hype trying to support crypto generally. Maybe there could be a one-sentence mention of how blockchain might be part of a future implementation of the metaverse, but this is very WP:CRUFT. I cut it all. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, cool. partner content. i love when places do that. SWinxy (talk) 02:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blockchain-Powered Crypto Metaverse 

message: I suggest updating progresses regarding metaverse-enabled interactive learning environments into the "Implementations" section (which is currently mentioned shortly as a promising direction in the last paragraph). For example, Edverse launched Edverse Meta Classroom , which provides educators and learners with 3D visualizing and storytelling functions to facilitate K12 education. Another example is that The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology implemented the MetaHKUST  platform in 2022, which integrates learning resources and opportunites  that surpass geographical boundaries for university students and teachers in both Hong Kong campus and Guangzhou campus. CLclclclcl (talk) 06:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The first source reads like churnalism derived from a press release. It also makes some dubious claims, and I don't think this source would improve this article. The second one is more plausibly useful, but your proposed wording is far, far too promotional. Could you please explain what should be added from this source without using business jargon or WP:BUZZWORDs? Thanks.  Grayfell (talk) 08:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 Oct 2023 

message: Re:
Criticism and concerns
Feasibility
[para 1]
[para 2]
"In an article for The New York Times on October 26, 2022, Ryan Mac, a technology reporter, claimed that for the past year, Mark Zuckerberg has struggled to find the best way to achieve the metaverse. He failed.[69]"
Given source article, suggest this is excessively negative interpretation, which mentions metaverse investment as only one factor in FB earnings call.  Still - given reasonable editorial leeway - suggest minor edit (sentence 2) may be sufficient for a fix.
"In an article for The New York Times on October 26, 2022, Ryan Mac, a technology reporter, claimed that for the past year, Mark Zuckerberg has struggled to find the best way to achieve the metaverse. He has yet to succeed.[69] 203.118.175.40 (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thriftycat Talk • Contribs 03:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2023