An excursion into the “metaverse”

The origin of the “metaverse” can be found in the science fiction novel “Snow Crash” by Neal Stephenson, published in 1991. He describes the “metaverse” as a parallel world into which humanity is gradually retreating. It is a place that is dominated by large corporations and crime and yet is perceived by people as “better” than the chaotic conditions of reality. Since then, the “metaverse” has become the basis for numerous books and films. We also encounter its principles in the novel “Ready Player One” by Ernest Cline from 2011 and its later film adaptation. There, too, reality has long since ceased to be a place worth living in and almost all the inhabitants withdraw completely into the digital world – the so-called “Oasis” – using high-tech equipment and VR goggles. The cult classic “Matrix” also shows signs of a “metaverse”, albeit in a different form.

A “metaverse” has long since ceased to be fiction. We already move easily between the real and digital worlds, and the pandemic has accelerated this fusion even further. Zoom, Teams and online games are booming and while we sit on our couch during lockdowns, we connect with the world “out there” via consoles, cell phones and PCs. The “Metaverse” wants to take this networking to a new level. With a digital twin of ourselves – an avatar – who meets in virtual spaces, exchanges ideas and takes part in social life. Here, however, Meta blurs the distinction between virtual and augmented reality and the question arises: are we entering a virtual world (VR) or is our reality merging with digital features (AR)? We see both in Zuckerberg’s presentation, which shows that a lot is still unclear here.

Meanwhile, Meta is not the only company with the idea of the “metaverse”. Epic Games and Microsoft are also each working on their idea of it (Microsoft, for example, will launch “Mesh” in the first half of 2022: An Avatar Tool for Microsoft Teams). And this is precisely the problem with Meta and its idea of a “metaverse”, because it cannot be launched by just one company. Just as there is only one universe, there can only be one metaverse. If Facebook and Microsoft now launch their own “metaverse”, it will be just another social media platform in the sense of Second Life, where users have to decide which one they want to use.

A metaverse in the sense of his definition therefore presupposes that Meta does not claim this term for itself alone, but works on it collaboratively. Of course, this contradicts the economic idea that underlies all tech companies, as Thomas Metzinger, professor of theoretical philosophy, recently told the taz newspaper. “The business model of the interested companies is fundamentally driven by greed and growth-oriented. Building a ‘metaverse’ would never be oriented towards the common good, there is no pro-social impulse behind it,” Metzinger said. The implementation of a “metaverse” can therefore neither be claimed by Meta alone, nor when tech giants join forces and pursue commercial interests. A virtual parallel world would have to be designed according to the same rules as our reality – the state would therefore inevitably have to intervene to regulate the “metaverse”, as is already being attempted with large tech companies.

The digital world will largely merge with our reality before we completely disappear into another world that we only leave to eat and sleep. The tools that could be used for this and are currently on the market are still far too expensive, mostly unwieldy, uncomfortable and not suitable for everyday use. However, it is only a matter of time before prices fall here too and soon everyone will be wearing AR glasses or lenses – just like with smartphones. AR is clearly the next generation of our digital interaction and it will revolutionize our everyday lives and the way we work together. Whether we call it “Metaverse”, “Cyber Space” or “Rainbow Road” won’t matter in the end.