Comment by HarHarVeryFunny
7 months ago
Coming from Meta, I have to wonder if the reason for this isn't more down to Zuck's ego and history. He seems to have somewhat lost interest in FaceBook, and was previously all-in on the Metaverse as the next big thing, which has failed to take off as a concept, and now wants to go all-in on "super-intelligence" (seems to lack ambition - why not "super-duper extra special intelligence"?) with his new vision being smart glasses as the universal AI interface. He can't seem to get past the notion that people want to wear tech on their head and live in augmented reality.
Anyhow, with the Metaverse as a flop, and apparently having self-assessed Meta's current LLM efforts as unsatisfactory, it seems Zuck may want to rescue his reputation by throwing money at it to try to make his next big gamble a winner. It seems a bit irrational given that other companies, and countries, have built SOTA LLMs without needing to throw NBA/NFL/rockstar money around.
This rings true. Zuck wants to go down in the history books like Jobs—as a visionary who introduced technology that changed the world.
He's not there yet, and he knows it. Jobs gave us GUIs and smartphones. Facebook is not even in the same universe, and Instagram is just something he bought. He went all in on the metaverse, but the technology still needs at least 10-15 years to fully bake. In the meantime, there's AGI/super-intelligence. He needs to beat Sam Altman.
The sad thing is, even if he does beat Sam to AGI, Sam will still probably get the credit as the visionary.
> Jobs gave us GUIs and smartphones.
Steve Jobs neither gave/invented GUIs nor smartphones. :-D
Xerox created the GUI, and much of modern computing, but Jobs/Apple certainly deserve credit for the smartphone.
Before the iPhone the phone market was primarily "feature phones" - flip phones with a keyboard and a few built-in JavaScript apps. The Blackberry wasn't much different - just a better keyboard with a focus on messaging/business use.
The iPhone was quite radical - masterfully presented as an iPod, phone, and internet communications device, before revealing that they were all capabilities of the same device.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7qPAY9JqE4
The effect on the phone market was immediate, and turned the market upside down. It was basically the end of Nokia who had been dominant up to that point, and caused everyone else to scrap current plans and go back to the drawing board, realizing that this new pocket-computer smartphone concept, with it's large touch screen interface was obviously the future.
5 replies →
He didn’t have to be the first to be the one most associated with popularizing the technology.
4 replies →
Lmao right!? Dude stole all that from Xerox and MS came out with palm pilots early 2000s then you had black berry. Amazing how many people think CEOs actually did the work they get credit for when they almost virtually all were in the right spot with the right people. Notice none of them can reproduce or start another ultra successful startup… Zuckerberg is a perfect example of one hit wonder and he wasn’t even the first to create social sites.. You had MySpace and a ton of others..
1 reply →
Zuckerberg is one of the reasons I think AI is a bubble and overhyped. He lacks vision. Remember when they renamed the company Meta and the metaverse was the whole future of the company?
This is the same thing. It is the new shiny tech demo that is really cool. And technically works really, really well and has some real uses, but that doesn’t make a multi billion dollar business.
Can you blame him ?
Facebook is a sewer (like all of internet to some extent); Instagram is a teenage depression-inducing drug; and Whatsapp is sufficiently important that it can't be monetized to destruction.
I'm surprised Meta is valued like Google, and not like HP or some other has-been, given that it's running on the spamming crummy ads towards lonely boomers and divorced millenials.
The only bright-spot is their AI lab with Yann and the PyTorch team.
I don't think he gave up on the metaverse. Isn't AR glasses a stepping stone towards that? Or rather LLM voice assistant a stepping stone towards AR glasses? And the metaverse being a stepping stone towards a holodeck?
I mean I'm with you, I think these things are pretty far away and are going to cost a lot of money to make and require a lot of failure in the mean time. But then again, it looks like they spent ~$18bn on Reality Labs last year. So if he was funding it all on his own dime, his current $260bn of wealth would give him a good 14 years runway if we ignore interest. It would be effectively indefinite if he earns about a 5% interest on that money.
I guess I'm just trying to say, it's hard to think about these things when we're talking about such scales of wealth. I mean at those scales, I'm pretty sure the money is meaningless, that money (and the ability to throw it around) is more a proxy for ego.
The Metaverse was more about virtual reality than AR .. a virtual place where remote teams would work and business meetings be held etc, and as such seems to be a complete flop. This is just not how remote teams want to work. Superior VR googles are of course used for gaming too.
AR seems to be mostly a solution, or technology, looking for a problem. It's a bit like envisioning a future full of flying cars, or humanoid robots walking among us, or even wired picture phones (World Fair 1964). Just because you can, doesn't mean you will have "product market fit" and that people will find a use or want to use what you have built.
Maybe AR will find niche professional or entertainment uses (cf Segway) - could imagine using them in a museum or on a guided tourist tour, perhaps.
It's funny that Zuck as creator of FaceBook, seems to misjudge human nature so badly in the case of Metaverse or mass-adoption smart glasses AR. It seems he maybe just got lucky that his college dating app grew into something much larger and more successful, although he does seem quite competent as a CEO, just not as the serial entrepreneur he seems to fancy himself as.