2 ms·
The end is the same in both cases: Oculus and Bitcoin in their "indie" phases were both insignificant, i.e. not adopted enough to cause problems for the wider
by rchaud 4y ago
The end is the same in both cases:
Oculus and Bitcoin in their "indie" phases were both insignificant, i.e. not adopted enough to cause problems for the wider world.
Once both were co-opted by parties with enormous amounts of capital, both diverted heavily from their original missions. Oculus is now a tool for Zuck's Second Life clone, and Bitcoin has never been further away from being used as an actual currency.
- dale_glass 4y agoYeah, and? Pretty much nobody gets to change the world as a normal person. Most things/people either stay at local notoriety, or get adopted by various large entities which then do the world-wide lifting. Eg, when we think about AI art, we're not thinking about the CompVis group at LMU Munich, we're thinking about DALL-E, Midjourney and NovelAI.