Bitcoin Forum

https://i.imgur.com/sNbD0Pb.pnghttps://i.imgur.com/T8jhAf4.png

 Facebook Rebrands Name To Meta (https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/28/facebook-name-change-rebrand-meta)

https://i.imgur.com/J1lE6tC.png

There are feeling from critics of Facebook that the name changing is made out of hiding from public criticism. Do you think this planned rebranding will change anything on the PR crisis or is going to remain despite the name changing ?

I've only heard bits of info here and there about what's going on with Facebook as far as their problems are concerned, but as I understand it they're coming under a lot of scrutiny from the government for their privacy policies and whatnot.  That's so hypocritical of the US government, it's almost laughable if it weren't so Orwellian.

And yes, I do happen to think this rebranding/renaming of their shiny new thing is a blatant attempt at misdirection and distraction.  They know damn well they've reduced people's attention spans to a small fraction of what they used to be, so obviously they think if they fart in the room loud enough, people's heads will turn away from the main issues long enough for them to come up with a plan.

Also, fuck Facebook and Zuckerberg.  Both of them are the reason (along with the existence of smartphones) why 20 people can be standing in a room together and not be genuinely social--because they're on a cheap substitute, i.e., social media.  It's sickening, and I'll have no part of it.

Yeah I kind of really consent with this and this is the major kind of criticism on Facebook. It has over blown the social media gig, has made fake life glamorous , giving people out as friends and yet they are far apart in anything that looks like such.

The fake life and criticism will soon spill into the new acquired (WhatsApp) just like Instagram has already been bastardised with nudity, the sanity of friendship is far from the technology for now. Not caring about the negative influence of young people and people in general while connecting people.

Many people have also been scammed through Facebook by people who hid on guise of friends. There are lots of security issues and those are the critism.

Im not sure if this is intended for some sort distraction but Facebook are building 'metaverse' so some rebranding might make sense. I mean the word 'facebook' doesnt really fit the metaverse image though


Yeah exactly unless they completed that whole metaverse project then all eyes are going to still stare at facebook and Mark. Once they completed the whole project then perhaps they could divert some of the attention away but that is probably going to take years before it is completed


One of the negative effect of it yeah but informations are spread much faster with social media nowadays.

Seems we forget how massive of an impact Facebook has contributes to the growth of the world been one global villages. We shouldn't blame the creators of innovations that changes the world just because few people are using it wrongly. If you're blaming Mark for the fake life people are living online then you should blame satoshi for giving scammers an avenue to scam with the tendency of never getting caught.

You think without the social media the gospel of a decentralized currency, taking power from the elite and giving it back to the people would had been heard by many. Facebook and other social media did have their contributions, them been poorly manage shoudn't be used to downplay that. Let talk about smartphone, without them would we even be here today taking about a way to send money from the comfort otnour home decentralized.

Are we just going to throw away all the positivity social media has brought into the game, I don't care whatever Facebook or mark is planning, provided it increase awareness about bitcoin we're good as with time, truth always prevail.

The metaverse that is not yet existing and that will take time before it will exist. I see this as a reason Facebook is rebranding its name earlier:

I think that people that fail to see this simply do it because they choose to do it since all the sights are there. Very few countries are covering just how dark things run behind Facebook. We already knew that a massive company harvesting an incredible pile of user/personal information isn't always a good sight, and I think the first "public" perception of how big is Facebook reach was when the Cambridge Analytical case hit the news[1]. Fast forward some time to the present we've got to thank Mrs. Frances Haugen - an ex-product manager at Facebook now a recognized whistleblower of the company [2]- for providing the world a pile of documents that show how they do not care about the end users. Whoever is able to spend some time - which I recommend - I highly encourage to just "loose" yourself in the pile of documents that were exposed[3]. From the pile of information, I highlight some here[4][5][6] (I haven't went through all the documentation sadly) - but there are reports that there will be a lot more to be revealed daily in the weeks that follow. At least there are news outlets that throw the suspicion out in the air[7] and doesn't let it sway from their true intentions:
This grinds my gears a lot - what stories will we have in the future about our relationships and good times spent with our colleges? I don't want to look back on my life and think that I spent a good chunk of my it browsing endlessly on social media (which I don't thank god) but I really don't think that people make this kind of introspection nowadays. It saddens me whenever I see groups of people that are all focused on their smartphones, sometimes even commenting each others social media instead of enjoying the fact that they are together and that they should seize the moment because one never knows where we might be tomorrow.

And as for the Metaverse? I don't have the sufficient knowledge to have an opinion about it even thought that it may even the future. However I would really like for them to solve their "infrastructure" problems of today before thinking into jumping into the future.

---

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal)
[2]https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/24/frances-haugen-i-never-wanted-to-be-a-whistleblower-but-lives-were-in-danger (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/24/frances-haugen-i-never-wanted-to-be-a-whistleblower-but-lives-were-in-danger)
[3]https://www.protocol.com/facebook-papers (https://www.protocol.com/facebook-papers)
[4]https://www.theverge.com/22743753/facebook-tier-list-countries-leaked-documents-content-moderation (https://www.theverge.com/22743753/facebook-tier-list-countries-leaked-documents-content-moderation)
[5]https://www.reuters.com/technology/facebook-knew-about-failed-police-abusive-content-globally-documents-2021-10-25/ (https://www.reuters.com/technology/facebook-knew-about-failed-police-abusive-content-globally-documents-2021-10-25/)
[6]https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/facebook-failed-the-world/620479/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/facebook-failed-the-world/620479/)
[7]https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/28/facebook-changes-company-name-to-meta.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/28/facebook-changes-company-name-to-meta.html)

About their planned of rebranding, we didn't really expected them to that but about them going to meta, crypto and all of related to it, they've planned it long time ago.
I don't think that they've done that to just cover up themselves from criticism because it's just a rebranding. But I don't like a lot of things about Facebook but we'll see if the next plan they have about going with metaverse is going to benefit anybody but for sure, they'll be the ones that will benefit the most.

I don't think that renaming will somehow change the reputation of the social network itself. Those who did not trust Facebook before will remain in their positions. META - does this mean that the social network will collect user metadata even more?
I liked the article in The Economist magazine, which very competently says: "Who wants a metaverse created by Facebook? Perhaps as many people as would like their health care provided by Philip Morris."
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/10/09/facebook-is-nearing-a-reputational-point-of-no-return

No, it wouldn't. The most it's gonna change is that people would probably turn their attention into the name change, instead of the real issue that caused Facebook to pull out these changes to change what the public has their eyes on right now. Facebook was a bright idea in the beginning but just ended up really, idk, disappointing nowadays? Not to mention the privacy issues and whatnots that Facebook has been facing right now. And honestly, I expect their rebranding shenanigans to not even have that much impact on what their company is going to do. Heck, it might even flub all on its own imo, it is Facebook we are talking about after all.

So, this is about changing the name of the Holding Company (which include Facebook, Instagram, Whatapp etc) to Meta rather than changing or rebranding Facebook name.
I guess they are doing the name changing to suit the kind of Virtual World they will "evolve" into in the future which is called Metaverse

In regards to the question, It really depends on whether he(owner) is doing that to distract people from the alleged PR Crisis, which I don't know much about.

Adopting a new company brand for a well established company is rarely a good idea. Idk, maybe they at facebook don't like their current reputation that much? And maybe for a reason.

The more I watched this video named "Everything Facebook revealed about the Metaverse in 11 minutes" (https://youtu.be/gElfIo6uw4g)

https://i.imgur.com/sAo1dpp.png (https://youtu.be/gElfIo6uw4g)

the more it reminded me of this scene from "The Mitchells vs. the Machines" (https://youtu.be/WYzj6y3BN2U)

https://i.imgur.com/43VeSvb.png (https://youtu.be/WYzj6y3BN2U)

In the film it didn't end up well, it almost caused the end of human civilization. But that's just a film, right? We'll see what happens in real life.

Facebook stopped being "cool" years ago.In the last few years,Facebook turned into the social network of the old people.The young people moved to Instagram,but Instagram turned into Facebook 2.0 so the young people moved into apps like Tik Tok and Snapchat (which are totally stupid and cringe,but what else can you expect from kids and teenagers).
Zuckerberg wants to squeeze as much profits from Facebook and Instagram as he can.There's nothing wrong with that,after all,this is a business like any other business.Selling user metadata and maintaining a toxic and addictive social media environment are bad business practices,but they aren't considered illegal.
Maybe Facebook is doomed to become the new MySpace and disappear into oblivion.Changing the name won't help the company to become better.

Facebook has power in many areas. We usually say Facebook when we're talking about the social media platform, but it's also Oculus (VR), Instagram and WhatsApp. Facebook has been in big scandals over the years, so Meta is supposed to be a more neutral name for a parental organization that would signify power, but also not associated with privacy and mental health concerns yet. Also, perhaps it's somehow helpful with lawsuits because if the name's different, they're not suing the right company. On the rebranding note, after facing tons of criticism with Libra, Facebook renamed the project Diem and decided to start over.

I've seen anime that has a virtual reality theme and now it looks like Mark Zukenberg will realize it via Facebook for the first time.  However, there will be positive and negative impacts from these changes and innovations.  We should have prepared ourselves for all eventualities.  If there is criticism, it seems that it should only strengthen innovation because correcting an innovation means slowing down the course of global development.  Maybe this metaverse project is 100% real, it will take a long time, but this is also the first step that can't be faulted.  The positive thing for the crypto market, I see this will be a company that will support crypto in transactions in it because I believe this metaverse will not only focus on virtual reality but will also be related to crypto and NFT.  Isn't this good news for the market?

exactly,, Facebook now is going to having change had name meta they well  know now at no longer have change still it meta, anyway even if Facebook had changed to meta no matter what happened still at there will maybe something gonna happen but still in our mine that Facebook are good memories for many people going as part members  in a social media crypto or else.

Just a heads up to the readers: Facebook, Inc(the company) =/= Facebook(the social media platform)

They are NOT renaming the Facebook platform to Meta lol. Facebook will still be Facebook, Instagram will still be Instagram, etc. They're just renaming the umbrella company(Facebook, inc), because Facebook, Inc(now Meta Platforms, Inc), owns a good number of platforms. Namely: Facebook/Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp, Oculus, and etc. There seems to be a lot of confusion lol.

 :o ;D lol nope . No doubt Facebook has been highly instrumental to the digital revolution so far. Yes bounties have successfully reached out to people via social media and all those are part of the crypto revolution but as always there are two sides to a coin, there are disadvantages and advantages, two sides to every story too. The PR critics are exploring the insecurity in social media and Facebook is just the present culprit for now either because they are trying to hide on a new umbrella name (meta) , who knows what twitter will come up with  ;D

Nice video. I was actually trying to see how useful this is. I think it's interesting, especially the part about working remotely in a Virtual World... that part calmed me abit. Even though I haven't finished the video, I think there is still the possibility of abuse/misuse just like any other thing humans have ever created.

Elon Musk offered to buy and delete facebook awhile ago. Is the offer still on the table?

If I remember right, data about facebook surveillance came from internally leaked information. Which was irrelevant. Due to surveillance of social media being completely normalized policy. Desktop operating systems have always logged and tracked end user data. Not many know Windows 98 had a index.dat file which secretly logged emails, visited websites and other end user meta data. Oldbies would routinely purge the file to prevent tracking. Today's operating systems and social media platforms should be expected to utilize far superior tracking by default.

Surveillance is an irrelevant point IMO.

AFAIK facebook's troubles stem from it doggedly pursuing first its own native libracoin cryptocurrency, and now the rebranded diem cryptocurrency. I think if facebook abandoned efforts to deploy its own crypto, their problems would disappear.

Of course it is the name that Zugerberg is changing if you have watched the interview yesterday. The purpose, technology and mission still remain the same but there is something to a name because it will now have a new logo and identity. You don't rebrand without changes either in the name, identify , technology and mission.

The damage has been done and the world already knows how Facebook operates behind the veil. No matter how many name changes they undertake, those who knew of their doings will always bring up the past that they are trying to bury by using the 'metaverse' and other buzzwords to sway people off of the controversies they're still tied to. While their technology, the innovations, and other such accomplishments helped shape the current world, Facebook (Meta), as a company, IMO, is still nefarious at its core.

Rebranding would not work until and unless they solve the issues that are already happening within the company, one have to understand the fact that privacy is a big issue for most of us and thus if they couldn't even take care of that sector then how could changing the symbol to infinity?? Or changing the name of the company work?? I do believe they should take responsibility of what they have done, keep the same old name and make improvements first.
Their business model is still the same old one, it being slowed down a couple of times is something that showed how bad they are struggling, they must be investigated first since we do not know how deep rooted their probelms are.

This was something that they needed for a long time. It was a weird situation to have both facebook website and also the general company called facebook as well, just like google changing to alphabet, they needed a change. Sure meta could be something that is a lot more futuristic in the metaverse world, and we are going to see metaverse probably getting a lot more attention because of this in the near future as well.

However this was probably not just done because of that name, it was probably something they considered for a long time. I am expecting Musk to do something similar as well, I do not know if it is possible but tesla+spacex+solarcity all seem like great business' that could gain a lot of power if they could get together. With such a power, dude could basically just rule them over all together in one headquarters as well.

Pretty much. Everyone's speculating that it's to sort of clean their name's bad reputation or something; I think everyone's just overthinking it. It's simply just a re-brand due to their main umbrella company now having multiple(and increasing number) of brands.

So far it's because the news is still new and we haven't gotten the gist of the result of changing the name or something to Meta. Too confusing and still waiting for the program and things that might have an impact after the launch on the first day.

However, responding to the pros and cons certainly presents a lot of speculation, whether it has an impact on technological developments and there is a shift in growth in cryptocurrency or it doesn't exist at all.
What is certain is that behind all this, there is a further development goal to be achieved as a form of adapting today's technological intelligence.

So, until this moment we haven't seen any impact on social media, especially Facebook itself, is there a complete overhaul or maybe the level of business that will be inserted later? maybe

 Zuckerberg wants to build his empire again. He has already been given a hand with his Libra once. This is a continuation of the same story. He again wants his Facebook to unite not only the social network but also online games, stablecoin and cryptocurrency. He has already released the Novi wallet and wants to use his Diem stablecoin there. However, five US senators have already sent him a letter demanding that Novi be closed. No, I don't think Zuckerberg will succeed. He may be able to rename Facebook. But not more.

I would never use these sort of social media platforms and generate an account to upload my information so it can be input into a data center somewhere and be sold to advertisers, but that being said, Facebook is the only platform that is even attempting to allow free speech. They do a poor job but put in more of an effort, relatively speaking, than twitter does, But they cannot escape their PR woes, and they are trying to combat the calls for regulation of outright censorship of any "inconvenient" speech.

Rebranding "facebook" and their and operating their subsidiaries under "Meta" is an appropriate business move. Letting Facebook take on government regulators and while keeping other entities away from the political flames is smart.

Nothing will really change despite the rebranding since it's still the same set of developers and  even with a new concept or idea their users will find it quite difficult to adapt and even they do it would take time. To me the rebranding isn't necessary

The change is actually minimal, it's even less than what happened when Google created Alphabet, this is just a name change, with google it was a restructuring process that did a few changes making Google inc an actual subsidiary, it was a move to prepare for a lot of incoming lawsuits.

This one is just marketing, they are trying to create the impression the parent company has a lot more stuff going on and that the troubles with Facebook are not really that serious nor could they completely harm the entire holding. But in reality, Facebook is the moneymaker if that goes down there is no way for Instagram or Whatapp to compensate for this and they are probably using this name change to avoid a chain reaction if some more bad things.
But just as the Alphabet change didn't matter to the average Joe neither will this name change, the ones using Facebook will keep using the ones hating it will still do, nobody is forcing you to use it, I've always wondered why the poeple who are most pissed at FB are the ones that claim to never have an account on it.

Anyhow, nothing to do with crypto nor bitcoin, and won't have any impact on anything related to bitcoin.

I just saw a news on Instagram where Mark Zuckerberg was talking about this Metaverse. I thought that it was going to be maybe another platform and an application that they want to create, I didn’t know that the company had a plan to change its holding name to Metaverse.

Anyways, I can’t really tell what's their plan with changing their name, but whatever it is, I think it would be best for them to focus on the crisis that they are having and listen to the people, and then look for solutions to the problems that they’re having now and try to fix it. Running and hiding is not going to be the solution to any problem that they may be having now, because even if they should change their name, as long as that same issue remains to be there, they are always going to face this same crisis that they are facing now in the future.

We will know such impact after few months of implementation. Maybe, at first, some will criticize the change but later on, they will just accept it. People can easily adapt to change. Anyway, they can't do anything much about it, right?

So wondering upon logging in to your fb, are they going to direct you to a new site, meta?

I think that this move was very carefully thought out and runs deeper than people believe.

There are speculations that facebook is doing this to separate their assets from their original brand to be able to preserve them under another limited liability corporation. With all due respect, I wouldn't be surprised if this was actually the case.

Hopefully this is a starting point for mainstream adoption of Metaverse technology though which is something crypto is going to be at the forefront of.

Hopefully. Its new name Meta might open more opportunities for crypto to be more acknowledged from its beginning until it will become a mainstream. Not just for Meta alone, but even for all social media platforms that have been very helpful to spread the news about crypto and luckily, also gain positive feedbacks.

However, this new name Meta from Facebook Inc. has its new plan and will focus more on the metaverse. Mark said that the decision was made to "reflect who we are and what we hope to build" refers to the company's new plan. I guess this is something that we should look forward to as it entails better visions compared to its previous name. And i hope crypto will be a part of it.

Facebook and its subs WhatsApp and Instagram have been both under the question of leaking users' data and selling them. Rebranding its name to 'Meta' proves that they are diverting people's attention by bringing the subject of Metaverse between what they were facing. Zuckerberg claimed somewhere that this (Metaverse) had been a long-thoughtabout subject since over a decade so he wanted to bring virtual reality in Facebook but the reality is, he stole the idea of Facebook then and now trying to steal Metaverse.

The metaverse intends bringing a real world experience to the internet. It's going to be an improvement on what the social media has always been with job opportunities, business network on a more advanced scale. The only difference between the physical event and the online option is the wide range of people that could be networked with over the app

+1

Pretty much the same thing (AFAIK) happened in 2015 when Google changed the name to Alphabet as they were expanding the business. That name didn't stick though (at least I never heard anyone calling parent company "Alphabet) and I guess it might be the same thing with Facebook.

You are missing the point, crypto don't need Facebook to be relevant, not in this present time, if we are talking 5 years back I would agree but now in 2021, not anymore,  the reverse is the case here, Facebook with all it's attempt to launch libra failed at it and keep pushing to gain relevance in the crypto space,
After so much brainstorming, they came up with this hoping this will pull through eventually,  at the end of it all, it won't be anything like the real crypto, so there is no way it can make crypto relevance, crypto doing that just fine without Facebook.

I don't see any problem with it and in fact, the developer has the right to do whatever he wants as long as it would help in the development of their site. What important is that it's still providing a good service and wouldn't affect the function of Facebook regardless of the name that they're going to replace it.

this is the important point and i agree with what you are saying.
when one of the well-known brands is considered to be damaging or indeed poisoning young people or making them addicted to it, the blame is not on the brand because they did not create a brand with such a purpose, but indeed there are a small number of people who abuse this media to benefit themselves.
Besides that, I think it would be better if other features were added, especially in terms of privacy, because when I saw Facebook, they were still not good at filtering content and privacy.

Well, that's part of the technological advancements. Social media, connecting people from all over the globe yet disconnecting people near you lol.
We might've enjoyed this kind of modern innovation, but yeah fuck the social media.
Now, it depends on a person how he deals with giving attention to social media and most especially giving attention to the person who's near you.
And here's a new innovation called meta where metaverse has been develop. Maybe because the reality is just too harsh for most people.

It's basically the formulation of a holding company with a bit more fanfare than usual. These billionaires are just rolling in money and any slight diversionary tactics they can use to get a bit of good press (or remove some of the bad) will be jumped on. Nothing really changes, it is just another company that doesn't have any of the reputational damage associated with Facebook, so they might be able to partner with people who won't go near them previously. There are a lot of people around the world that swear off that company and deleted their accounts if they ever had one, that might be tricked back into using an associated company because they all share the same data anyway.

When you think about the unnecessary rebranding, it's using the user status while the Facebook group managers are using the business owner status and implementing a new paradigm, once this key model is strong enough, it will be a new form of business, from stock value to other ambitions in the future, it will definitely be a plus as well as a piece of paper to approve many other contracts. Just by looking at their names, if crypto is enough to deal with most governments, Facebook will randomly monopolize the metaverse brand.

The umbrella company of Google is technically still Alphabet Inc. It's just that saying "Google" is far more easier and the fact that you don't need to explain to the normies "oh what's Alphabet? It's the parent company of Google", and the fact that their stock tickers are $GOOG(class A) and $GOOGL(class B).

Yeah I know, hence my comparison with Facebook as I expect people to stick to that name, instead of Meta. Unless they push it hard and invest shit load of money into marketing, something that Google didn't do (as far as I know).

---

Talking about changes, I heard that they already implemented some changes, as if you "Facebook" set as a workplace (for whatever reason) in profile bio, its changed to Meta. I tried to do the same, and it seems like its true; you can't set "Facebook" as a workplace anymore, you get message saying that name is not supported.

It might be useful for people who do work by owning a business. But for people who are already familiar with Facebook as a social media boundary, it won't make it seem as if it's extraordinary with the rebranding.
Facebook has been known by all circles and it is the most friendly social media for anyone, children, old, young, from all elements of society. Now when the new concept is going to be implemented with several simulated implementations, I'm worried that Facebook's general early nature makes it more of a big business sector.

Remembering at that time Mark who wanted to launch his crypto was rejected and even criticized. So that behind the rebranding of Facebook actually has a goal that he has not completed.

Their change lies in their future business targets, it doesn't mean that the current Facebook platform immediately changes like the metaverse that Mark has promoted.  But this is very reasonable for a big corp, even this change I believe requires a very large amount of funds to achieve a very big change as well.  In my country, the 3 media under the Facebook company have their respective markets.  The Facebook app in my country is mostly used by people aged 35 years and over or housewives, while Instagram is dominated by young people 15-35.  I don't really understand whether they will launch a new platform specifically for Metaverse or the Facebook app itself will be developed.

It's pretty much the same thing everywhere when it comes to the average age of Facebook user.


There won't be any big changes in that regard; Facebook app will still be called Facebook, it's just that parent company is changing name. So from now on parent company of Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp will be called Meta (instead of Facebook) and that's about it. At least for now.

Facebook over the years has been developing so many social media apps that are being used by millions if not billions of people all over the world, and it is a red alert when it comes to the question of privacy and data collection, and even though people do know that they are collecting data about them they really didn't notice or make a huge thing out of it until it was taken to court, and some may say that they are renaming the company just for sake of it, but it obvious that they are trying to cover up their tracks and the bad public picture that they have got.

The rebranding corresponds to more than one factor. Firstly, the inevitable slowdown in growth - social networks have an element of fashion and novelty and Facebook's got nothing left of that. Secondly, the damage dealt to their image by yearly scandals and whistle blowers. Thirdly, a real intent of the company to transform itself to be able to grow further.

This third element is not a distraction, Facebook and other companies are considering seriously the "metalifes" or "metaverses" (think of second life as example) as their future and they are very serious about it. Facebook routinely tests products and changes and my take is that they are going to throw weight behind the metaverse idea.

It's is no coincidence that rebranding exercise had taken place at a time when social media giant is facing an existential crisis. Recently a whistle blower says facebook is being accused of choosing profit over users safety. It's money and profits over ethics.FB has lost the trust of millions of users.

"Meta" is welcoming step otherwise without any updation it will field out like "orkut".  

While meta claims to be looking into the future it needs to focus on existing controversies. A new name can't wash away the FB's crime. Otherwise the metaverse isn't new world for social interactions it's a new world for FB to mine our data.

All this is a lackluster attempt at decentralization. Actually, decentralization was proposed by Facebook after the recent collapse all platforms associated with it had. But I can't help feeling it be a bit disingenuine and this rebranding is showing just that. This is just putting lipstick on a pig at the end of the day.

The issue of security weaknesses on Facebook is still very strong so many are pessimistic about Zuck's plan, some even give META stands for "Monitoring Every Transaction Account". I am pessimistic that META will lead in the development of the metaverse.

This have unlocked the door to better crypto market into 2022, if you know what's good for you erase bear market from your mind from now on into first quarter of 2022, the market will become very bullish and BTC achieving 100k at this point is now possible, I know that BTC has nothing to do with metaverse but it has everything to do with cryptoverse, welcome to the future.

Well, if that is the case it's just a technical modification that won't have any practical impact over the public opinion. The news saying facebook is rebranding the company name to avoid criticisms are just doing this for click bait purposes then. Probably majority of facebook users won't even know or care about it and nothing regards facebook's image will change at all in the public's eyes.

The dangerous and worrying part of all of that (which pass unnoticed sometimes) is "Meta" controlling the most popular means of communication in the virtual universe.

Not so long ago, Facebook was a fairly respected product for me, interesting technologies, and Mark, you guessed it, was the most interesting manager of our time! The product, of course, was aimed at advertising, and selling "the largest audience in one application". Ok, everything is fine, business as business, people like it, everything is fine.
But somehow imperceptibly, in addition to the economic component, the political conjuncture began to influence the work of the system. Plus, as it seemed to me, Mark / company had a feeling that they "caught God by the beard" and they are allowed not only everything, but even more. And as it should be in such situations, problems began. You can decide for any, but one of the key goals is to minimize reputation losses. This is not a simple matter, and even complicated. Reputation is not a buggy block for sending photos, reputation losses are very bad. Losing a reputation is easy, to restore, difficult, so much so that sometimes it is not even possible. What's up with Mark and Co? Well, as one of the ways to minimize problems, yes, rebranding. Why not ? But the question is how to remove the odor, the memory of a billion users, and the all-remembering time machines with articles? :)

I do somewhat really agree on this one when it comes to sociolizing kind of topic then we could really say that there is really a big impact of this current technology we do have and yes its true that it is one of the cons.

We are living on a world on where people arent really that interacting personally and just facing on their own respective mobile phones.

Facebook changing its name to Meta doesnt really changed up everything.We are still shackled into this reality.

I see some projects having a meta in their name pumping after this. I dont know if its correlated to this news or just because of BTC pumping but virtual reality related projects are getting into mainstream. They just didn't know that Meta the new facebook will be their greatest rival in the field and could potentially eat their mc. Lol.

The world is going to be changed in 2024, this is the beginning.