Hearts and minds, or something else?

The race to recapture the hearts and minds of jaded stock and stakeholders was raised to a new level last week when Facebook rebranded its parent company to Meta Platforms, in an attempt to own the nascent value exchange metaverse, or at least it’s version of it.

And in a similar example closer to my home, we recently heard a representative from WA’s ‘new force in iron ore’, Fortescue, say that Fortescue was not an iron ore company. 🤔

Interesting a Web 2.0 social media company making a bid for the new layer of Virtual GDP, and one of the world’s four largest iron ore companies that’s neither an iron ore company nor a hydrogen company, even though it intends to make lots of money from both - or is it trying to pivot to a Wesfarmers model?

These are just two examples amongst many that illustrate the enormous bets being made as the world starts to transition away from fossil fuels and the centralised Web 1.0 and 2.0 infrastructure (and centralised controlled global economy) to something else.

But are these moves technological revolutions, marketing spin, or some form of mass mind control reinvention to deflect and distract users and stakeholders away from core businesses issues?

I think it’s (e) all of the above and you definitely need to invest in an aluminium foil anti-mind control beanie to wade through the smoke and not get distracted by the mirrors.

But let’s look at the way more interesting move from Mark Zuckerberg as he starts his fight to control the metaverse.

Battle for the metaverse

Is this Zuckerberg trying to keep his billions of members interested by deflecting anti-trust, tax, sexism/inequality, work conditions and mental health related issues with facebook and Instagram – and focussing on a new narrative instead of the Facebook papers?

Sure, and it’s his and his board’s responsibility to keep the company relevant and meaningful. But at the same time there’s little doubt that some form of metaverse is coming.

The eventual metaverse imagined by purists is likely to be decentralised and controlled by communities and programmatic charters/contracts with a social impact, and hosted on interoperable blockchains which support digital exchanges of value and traceable/indelible user rights.

At its pure heart is true digital asset ownership and an ability for users to retain programmatic ownership rights, thus creating a brand new decentralised and content generator controlled layer of GDP. And enabled by, you guessed it - blockchain.

No, not bitcoin, but the rails that bitcoin and other digital assets run on - blockchain. Bitcoin is great collateral for decentralised finance and is probably the digital reserve asset, but it is only one evolution of blockchain technology.

Back to the metaverse and the reality is that there are many contenders for this new blue ocean of GDP, hence the very public and pre-emptive Facebook move.

Firstly there is an interoperable metaverse being built by gaming companies like Epic Games and Animoca Brands, as well as infrastructure providers like Cloudflare, virtual world gaming engines like Unity and Roblox and content, commerce, and social providers like Tencent, Sea and Snap, and a range of decentralised finance providers and the layer one smart contract platforms like Ethereum and Solana.

This has been going on for some time and is sucking in huge amounts of talent from all industries. People who are seeking to transform a centralised institutionally controlled global economy with a decentralised user controlled world - in physical, and if you choose, virtual reality.

Meta Platforms, Vitalik, kitties and DAOs

That envisioned decentralised and interoperable metaverse owned by no one and everyone may well be at odds with Meta Platforms and Zuck’s vision.

The newly rebranded Facebook has outed what it’s effectively been doing for some time now at the intersection of Oculus Rift (VR on-ramp) and Diem (Libra mark II currency) and its Facebook member base (community) - to create it’s version of the metaverse, focused on its VR and Diem bets.

But there could be some issues here. Diem (which was crushed by regulators under its first Libra incarnation) + a few billion not totally happy Facebook subscribers, makes for a massive and unashamed yet awkward challenge to every central bank and sovereign on this planet.

Next, it is questionable whether Meta will give up data ownership and allow users to completely monetise themselves. At least there’s been no blueprint put forward yet as to how value will be shared. Then there’s all the privacy concern and whether deleting facial recognition data will solve much.

The jury’s out on Meta Platforms, but then again I’m not betting against it just yet.

Next, there is Vitalik Buterin’s (Ethereum’s creator) proposed blending of decentralised autonomous organisation (DAO), blockchain and crypto to form socially impactful and quadratically voted value exchange economies in what he has dubbed ‘crypto cities’. These do not rely on VR, rather they allow physical worlds to benefit from blockchain, crypto and other technological advances.

And there’s a slew of other DAOs with ambitions to become global communities.

Far fetched? No way. In fact, here in Australia, Senator Andrew Bragg’s special committee recently proposed the recognition/legislation of DAOs. Check out item 6.9 at this link.

Know thyself, or Who dares wins?

To corporates, the metaverse means trillions in GDP that has not existed before. It’s a brand new cake in a virtual restaurant that no one has yet fully designed or built. In other words, it’s up for grabs.

It’s why Zuckerberg isn’t just deflecting (which he is) with smoke and mirrors. Rather, I think he’s trying to claim ownership and shape (with his brand of mind control) how we should all think about the metaverse.

And that’s why you need your anti-mind control beanie.

Meta is ponying up a cool $10 billion for starters in this massive game of poker. It’s just a drop in the ocean though - and to put it into context you might recall Netflix committed more than this to develop content and stay ahead in the streaming wars. Nvidia committed more than this to own the GPU market, and Amazon has spent multiples of this while it’s been eating up retail.

And, there will be more to come here.

On top of investment, there will be some fascinating hot and cold wars between various parties and communities, like:

1. Meta Platforms

2. The decentralised interoperable metaverse that’s controlled by no one and everyone

3. Vitalik’s crypto cities

4. Other DAOs

5. Status quo promoted by angry centralised institutions and protective governments

But at the centre of it all will be blockchain and a slew of native energy based assets that live on chain and can be owned and enjoyed by anyone with a connection and transferred at light speed between two parties without a central actor in between, any time and from anywhere on physical or virtual earth.

Can you see?

Mike