We need to stop calling the metaverse a destination
Some see the metaverse as the replacement of the internet in its entirety, others see it as the future of all brand interactions, eliminating the use of physical environments entirely — particularly in retail. So, what really is the metaverse? Gustavo Quiroga explores the answers.
The metaverse has become the industry buzzword of 2022. In fact, research shows the use of the term has skyrocketed across boardrooms globally. However, despite interest peaking, there’s still a profound gap in its universal definition. And without a clear definition, its adoption and subsequent market potential will stumble. Bloomberg predicts that by 2024, the market size of the metaverse will reach US$800 billion, so it’s about time we get on the same page.
Some see the metaverse as the replacement of the internet in its entirety, others see it as the future of all brand interactions, eliminating the use of physical environments entirely — particularly in sectors such as retail. So, what really is the metaverse? Well to start, it should not be called a destination or a place; at best it is a new channel through which we will engage with customers and each other.
My current definition is that the metaverse is an evolving convergence of digital (e.g. online), virtual and physical worlds that is made possible by any combination of enabling technologies such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), NFTs, crypto and more. The outcome of which is a world experience greater than anyone one of these worlds on its own. What differentiates this definition is the term “convergence” — there are some destinations such as Decentraland and Fortnite, which are metaverses but not “the metaverse” in and of itself.
“Unlike the physical world where proof of authenticity requires expert verification — and even then is subjective to the authenticator’s opinion and experience — NFTs are built on the blockchain and can be immediately traced back to the point of their inception. Not only does this help eliminate artwork fraud, but so too does it help eliminate the footprint of unnecessary physical touchpoints in order to appreciate artistry.”
The idea that NFTs (the most fraud-ridden piece of technology, possibly of all time?) is somehow going to eliminate artwork fraud, is hilarious.
You can trace back the ownership of the NFT itself to the source, but this isn’t in and of itself proof of any type of relationship between the artwork and the person who minted the NFT.
The entire space is absolutely rife with fraudulently-stolen artworks that are being minted by random scammers. Opensea (the largest NFT art marketplace) has admitted that more than 80% of their NFTs minted using their tool were plagiarized, fake, or spam.
Mumbrella – I have to believe that you can achieve a higher standard than this. Literally one google search for ‘nft art fraud’ would be more than enough research to instantly debunk this kind of thing.
We encourage all opinion pieces from authors which promote debate and a critical response.
Right or wrong – whatever your view on NFTs – they are part of our industry, and we should be addressing them, questioning them, and holding them to account.
Thank you for your contribution in this regard. Similarly, we encourage all our commenters to continue to provide thoughtful responses and, where possible, to put their own names to their opinions too.