A New Dawn: The ‘Metaverse’ and an Opportunity to Rethink Privacy, Equity, Safety, and Agency
John D. Rockefeller, the late 19th-century business magnate and philanthropist, wrote in Random Reminiscences of Men and Events, “It requires a better type of mind to seek out and to support or to create the new than to follow the worn paths of accepted success.” He was commenting on what he perceived as the failings of competitive business practices in the fledgling United States post-industrialization. He felt that too many business owners were focused on duplicating efforts and diluting quality to chase money — rather than trying new things. In fact, his treatises went on to suggest that learning from previous success was fine and even encouraged, but new money, time, and efforts should focus on what is next. Furthermore, we should learn from the failings of previous endeavors and prioritize fixing the failings going forward. Seems apropos, even in the 21st-century, even discussing the ‘Metaverse.’
The ‘Metaverse,’ still wearing the quote-mark training wheels to denote a lack of commonly agreed definition, has become a hot topic of discussion recently (again). So before I dive too deep into the opportunities I see before us as an industry, I’ll first give some structure to the concept of a ‘Metaverse’. For those interested I highly suggest a listen to Charlie Fink and Ted Schilowitz’s podcast This Week in XR, specifically the 7.30.21 episode wherein they interview Rony Abovitz and get his thoughts on ‘Metaverse’. I’d also suggest Matthew Ball’s blog, which I learned about from the same podcast, as a great primer for what a ‘Metaverse’ is, from a venture capitalist's perspective. With credit to Rony, Charlie, Ted, and Matthew, I’ll add my two cents to the definition of ‘Metaverse’; The ‘Metaverse’ is a foundational, technological expansion of the internet. It is a fundamental advancement or evolution in data-sharing, specifically focused on persistent, immersive, synchronous user engagement. We love to romanticize the ‘Metaverse’ and focus on the 3D, virtual, or augmented aspects — or ‘digital twin’ or ‘mirror world’ aspects (to use a few more buzz-worthy marketing terms). While these are relevant and will be critical to the end-user adoption, it's not as relevant to understanding — those are features or sales points, not what it is.
The term ‘metaverse’ was coined in Neal Stephenson’s 1992 sci-fi novel Snow Crash, where humans, as avatars, interact with each other and software agents, in a 3D space that uses the metaphor of the real world. Stephenson used the term to describe a VR-based successor to the internet. Interestingly, the same conceptual framework goes back in cyberpunk lore, like William Gibson’s short story Burning Chrome — where it referred to cyberspace. Recognize it? Cyberspace was co-opted in the early days of the world-wide-web to describe the online world of digital information spaces accessed through a computer terminal. The differentiation becomes the user. While cyberspace is a user in the real-world (1st order reality) accessing digital spaces, the ‘metaverse’ assumes the user alters their base-reality (hence, augmented reality, virtual reality, mixed reality, spatial reality, etc). I’ll continue to argue that we should forgo all the x-reality terms and move to the concept of Reality and Reality+, but I digress… for another post.
I will couch the discussion of what a ‘Metaverse’ is for now; surrendering that argument to focus on where I think we should focus our early efforts developing the foundation of the ‘Metaverse’ — fixing what is broken with the internet now, and taking the opportunity to learn from it and be better going forward, as Rockefeller earlier counseled. No doubt, all new technologies, or for that matter digital ecosystems/platforms, have growing pains. The internet was the same. DARPAnet, the predecessor to the modern internet, was intended for academics and government agencies to be able to more efficiently collaborate on research. It was a time savings tool. Eschew couriers, letter writing, and sending data through the mail, for a digital means of communication and data transmission. In the consumer market, this would evolve into BBS (bulletin board services) and later the likes of AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, and many others that rushed to copy what worked… In this new ‘internet’ there were services, walled gardens, and no way to communicate, collaborate, or otherwise share openly cross-platform. Capitalism created convenient all-you-can-eat, one-size-fits-all, access portals to this thing called the ‘internet.’
And with it, we brought our biggest societal issues, if unintentionally, but expected because of the nature of technology adoption. The digital divide had begun. In the early 90s internet access was sparse at best. Telecomms prioritized access by population density, economic measurements, political favor, tax incentives, etc. The same metrics traditionally used as far back as electricity, plumbing, and other utilities — in the end, low-income, predominantly minority neighborhoods would be left out. Rural populations, as well. Globally, only 1st world industrialized nations would gain immediate access. Over time, the digital divide created other gaps and disparities (Racial, Age, Economic investment, LGBTQ, Gender). In recent years these differences have become amplified across geopolitical issues. Civility and discourse are losing out to tribalism. But we are at a new dawn. A Tabula Rasa moment. We have an opportunity to mitigate these issues and more, technologically, socially, politically, and morally. We can use the ‘Metaverse’ to reform digital citizenship, by working together on core issues and creating standards, frameworks, and guidance from the coming generations.
I believe there are 4 primary, interconnected areas we should focus on now, to ensure a successful path forward in the ‘Metaverse’: Privacy, Equity, Safety, and Agency. Each goes hand in hand. But doing the groundwork now will help create guard rails for the more technical issues like interoperability, data compatibility, data structures, identity verification, and standards. We should understand the who and why of users, before we focus on the what and how. That is to say, being human-centered in our approach and modeling the ‘Metaverse’ on ideals important to ethical/moral constructs, rather than worrying about pixel resolution, bandwidth, UI/IX, etc., is more constructive and necessary. We have to consider norms and responsibilities that mirror the best of humanity, while pre-emptively protecting at-risk populations of future users, and accounting for bad actors before they appear. Proactive, not reactive.
I believe all 4 of these pillars carry a significant burden and need for action. For Privacy and Safety, I will say there are amazing efforts already underway by the likes of XRSI.org who have independently built an XR Safety 1.0 framework that is constantly being revised, reviewed, and debated. I also applaud the efforts of Facebook Reality Labs many Privacy and Strategy teams that are trying to tackle these issues as well. I would include the likes of Microsoft, Google, and Apple, who each are working on similar issues in adjacent spaces like AI/ML, user safety, data privacy, and all participating in XRA.org industry groups. Furthermore, IEEE XR Ethics wants to develop standards, amongst others. (Please comment with organizations or specific efforts I have not mentioned! I’d love to learn more). To be clear, the ‘Metaverse’ is much larger than just XR, or AI/ML. These groups and others are ill-equipped to accomplish this alone in Safety and Privacy. I challenge everyone to get involved — join the conversation, volunteer, speak up for yourself, for others who can’t, for cultures and needs that the industry needs to consider.
On the topic of Equity and Agency, I’ll speak a bit from the perspective of a Media Psychologist — part of the social sciences. Putting the ‘Metaverse’ aside a moment, I want to consider Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. In the most basic sense, Diversity defines differences amongst a population. This can be your local community, school, online or offline, neighborhood, globally, or any other subset you choose to consider. Humans rightly or wrongly (implicit bias) use traits of diversity to consciously or unconsciously categorize, define, group, and compare one another. This type of compartmentalization is normal for mammals. However, it can lead to marginalization in society and underrepresentation (remember the digital divide). Equity happens, when in light of diversity, we actively promote justice, fairness, and impartiality when developing procedures, processes, and distribution of resources. Inclusion, then, is the outcome wherein diversity is welcomed, and equitable accommodations are made for all. I believe these concepts are well defined and broadly accepted, though clearly not implemented evenly, in enterprise, government, and society writ large.
In the social sciences, Agency is defined as the capacity for an individual to act independently and make their own free choice. Structure, a social construct similar to Diversity, defines attributes that frame or limit one's agency or ability to make free choices. This is how we see ourselves, and possibly how we present ourselves within social constructs like society, family, friend groups, work, school, or other social engagements. Agency is critical to our understanding of ‘self’. It is built over time as an amalgamation of our experiences, perceptions, and beliefs. It grows with us and helps to define our sense of being and purpose within the world. So you can see why, in a ‘Metaverse’, which is an extension or rethinking of our base-reality, Agency becomes a critical foundational pillar. For someone to feel a sense of Agency within the ‘Metaverse’, there must be support from Privacy, Safety, and Equity.
Returning to the ‘Metaverse’, we can see the need to build a strong foundation. If done right, Privacy, Safety, Equity, and Agency can become pillars on which we construct amazing new experiences. We have the opportunity to fundamentally affect humanity and expand human potential, for better or worse. While the early work will be difficult, the results will be worth it. We can not promise a ‘Metaverse’ devoid of the same societal issues we face now. We are not guaranteed a ‘Metaverse’ where we do not succumb to capitalist endeavors or technological pitfalls. Indeed, you could argue the ‘Metaverse’ is already here, if only in its infancy, but we have the opportunity to do better. When (not if) we succeed, I think we can take those quote mark training wheels off, and proudly everyone to the Metaverse.
Please, let me know your thoughts. I’d love to connect and hear any and all comments. You can find me on social media @MatthewPricePhD and Linkedin at https://www.linkedin.com/in/MatthewPricePhD or through my website: https://MatthewPricePhD.com