Key facts:
Metaverses are just another “blockchain fad”, with an expiration date.
Cryptocurrencies other than bitcoin, in general, tend to depreciate over time.
Since Mark Zuckerberg announced the name change of his company (from Facebook to Meta) to enter the stage of the metaverse, this last word spread rapidly throughout the world of cryptocurrencies.
It seems that nobody wants to be left out of “the metaverse” (yes, in the singular, as if it were a unitary cyberspace). Art galleries, virtual stores, casinos, markets, embassies and a long etcetera move to this virtual space. The metaverse suddenly became the great “blockchain revolution” that no one wants to be left out of.
But this metaverse is not something so new. For years these virtual universes have been in existence. There, humans interact socially and economically as avatars in a space that is considered a representation of a real or imaginary world.
The introduction of cryptocurrencies, tokens and blockchains, have given the metaverses their own economy and some decentralization. And, the announcement of the development of the Meta metaverse gave them unprecedented public exposure.
“Metaverse” is an interesting word for someone familiar with Argentine slang. In the South American country, a verse is a sweetened and pseudo-poetic deception. “Put the verse” is to effect this deception. And, “being meta verse” could be interpreted as “constantly lying.”
Here are 3 reasons why I think the supposed metaverse revolution is just that, a verse:
The arrival of a new trend in the cryptocurrency ecosystem does not surprise me and, at this point in history, does not excite me too much. Recent years have seen a long parade of ‘revolutions’crypto‘» (in quotes, lots of quotes).
The bitcoin killers, for example, they had their heyday only to fall into oblivion. These altcoins were promoted as superior to Bitcoin (BTC), with greater advantages (generally greater speed or scalability, although always at the expense of decentralization and security). The period 2010 – 2015 saw the birth of several of these currencies.
Then, since 2017, the public eager for news and strong emotions could be entertained with ICOs, which stands for “initial coin offering”. Similar to initial public offerings (IPOs), which is the sale of a company’s shares before they are listed on the stock market, ICOs sell cryptocurrencies or tokens before they are listed on exchanges.
Everything had to have its cryptocurrency or token, even professions (such as dentacoin, the currency for dentists) or cities (for example, New York Coin). Most ICOs were nothing more than Ethereum tokens with more promise than technological novelty.
The crypto winter that began in 2018 brought a bit of calm to the digital asset ecosystem, but it would not last long. Just a couple of years later, a triad of fads was unleashed that fueled consumers of “crypto revolutions”: decentralized finance (DeFi), non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and play-to-earn games.
And that’s how we got to the current fad, the metaverses. After having seen the launch of a dozen bitcoin killers per day; the presale of hundreds of ICOs; decentralized finance that would end the need to be banked; the NFTs that would revolutionize property rights; and the play-to-earn games that would change the way people make money globally… why should I think that the metaverses are something different and a true technological revolution?
All the fashions named above had their birth, their heyday and – most of them – their decline. Being the most recent, only DeFi and the NFT industry are still active, although with a decreasing momentum and in a progressive process of purging and purging guided by the market itself.
Possibly the metaverses are just that: a fad like so many others that smoke sellers take advantage of to take money from buyers of illusions.
And, like so many cryptocurrency fads, metaverses are presented in such a way that FOMO increases their presence in the unwary.
“The latest technological revolution is called the metaverse,” headlined the Spanish newspaper El Mundo last February 5. There they describe what a metaverse is: “an immersive three-dimensional environment that will serve as a meeting point between the physical and virtual worlds so that users can interact through an avatar.” I mean, a hybrid between Facebook, Google Map street view and Doom that I played on my PC in 1997 Is that really “the latest technological revolution”?
2. Metaverses: what a waste of time!
“In a few years you’re going to do the grocery shopping in a metaverse,” tweet a certain Gabriel. He is not alone. With headlines like the one mentioned above, how can you doubt that this will be the case?
Specialists from various niches also anticipate that no one will escape the “metaverse” revolution. Sergi Ramo, a sales consultant and trainer who seems like a serious guy and inspires authority, write in a LinkedIn post: “Very soon we will be able to attend events and meetings online with a kind of avatar.” Add this man: “it can be customized, it will have the ability to move and connect both worlds.”
Maybe it’s that I don’t have a gamer spirit and, therefore, the fact of moving an avatar on a computer monitor does not cause an increase in endorphins. Far from being revolutionary, I see this “metaverse” future that many imagine or yearn for as unproductive, full of distracting factors, procrastinating and childish.
The consultant quoted here does not think so. He assures: “Much more immersive and productive meetings can be held, merging the physical and digital worlds like never before (Phygital). This will allow a connection with the customer with the strength of face-to-face sales and the advantages of digital sales, all in one and raised to the power of both environments together”.
Is it a matter of taste? If I have to make an online purchase at the supermarket, I prefer a list of products ordered alphabetically or by type, with a photograph, and indicating their availability or lack thereof. Moving in a virtual Carrefour through the aisles of the gondolas, with a representation of my image, would simply delay the shopping experience without any need.
And if I have to participate in a virtual work meeting, I want it to be as short and focused as possible. Spending life time configuring how my avatar will look to be presentable in front of my interlocutors, is far from my interests.
To control a virtual character, I prefer to play Super Mario. Incidentally, the only use I can see for the metaverses is the gaming. There yes, anything goes, there is no rush, it is a moment of relaxation. But revolutionary and applicable to any facet of life? No. Pure verse.
3. Metaverses are shitcoiners
These virtual worlds have their own economy and often have their own currencies. With the ease of launching new tokens on various blockchains, each metaverse issued its own. Metatokens burst onto the market.
As CriptoNoticias reported, metaverse tokens were among the most sought after of 2021, along with memecoins (what will Hal Finney say the day he is unfrozen and sees everything that happened after his “Running Bitcoin”?).
Is it wrong for that to happen? Of course not! I raise the flag of the free market and defend the right of metaversers to launch the currency they want and that of investors to buy the Radio Caca token (no, it’s not a joke) if they so wish. But the future I see for these digital assets in the long term is a constant depreciation.
With few exceptions, that has been the fate of altcoins and will likely continue to be so in the future. Even if a cryptocurrency has a price increase in fiat money, if it is measured against a strong currency, such as bitcoin, its unstoppable devaluation is observed.
As an example, the following graph shows the case of IOTA (MIOTA)the cryptocurrency that in 2017 was shaping up to be the unit of account in the Internet of things:
It is logical that this should happen. As the economist Saifedean Ammous explains in his book The Bitcoin Pattern (The Bitcoin Standard), “there is nothing original or difficult about copying the design of Bitcoin and producing a slightly different imitation, something that thousands of people have already done to date.”
The Argentine bitcoiner and lawyer Camilo Jorajuría de León has written —shortly before the emergence of metaversomania— an interesting article in which he shows 4 steps in what he calls “crypto-blockchain industry scam cycles”. Note the similarities to what is happening in relation to the metaverse:
In the first of these steps, scammers advertise that they have made a “theoretical invention or discovery” of an alleged technology, product, service, or all of that together.
Step 2, as Jorajuría de León explains, is that the technology is put up for sale “to unsuspecting users. This is always distributed through a token that uses cryptography. He adds: “The announced technology that claims to solve the problem does not necessarily reach production, but the token that always serves to raise money does. In cases where the technology does make it into production, it doesn’t solve the problem it was intended to solve.”
Step 3, according to the lawyer, is that “fraudsters sell the digital assets they created” with almost no expense or production cost. The price sometimes increases, which provides profit to the developers and —in the words of the author— “to the speculators who entered the Ponzi before the rest”.
In step 4, the drop occurs. This is how Jorajuría de León describes it:
“Later on, after a while, there comes a time when it is inevitable that users will show that there was, in fact, no value produced by the product/technology/token. At this point and in the absence of a solution to any problem, there is a fall in the price of the asset.
Camilo Jorajuría de León, lawyer.
I adhere to the analysis of the bitcoiner quoted here. Regarding the metaverses, everything indicates that they are somewhere between steps 2 and 3. It can take months or even years to advance to the next step. But the history of shitcoins shows us that probably nothing will be able to prevent the fall of “metatokens”.
The revolution is Bitcoin and it does not need metaverses
Having said all this and having established my position on the verse that is the metaverse, let me remind you that, unlike these decentralized-looking marketing products, Bitcoin is indeed leading a true revolution.
And the bitcoiner revolution does not need virtual universes, because it is a revolution that is lived in the streets of the real world.
This revolution is led by those who protect their savings in bitcoin from the devaluation of fiat money; those who use it to donate money to a cause and thus avoid international barriers; those who send remittances to their family members in another country without suffering the theft of commissions from centralized companies; and those who use Satoshi Nakamoto’s currency to transact outside the almost omnipresent eye of the state.
This is how the revolutions that interest me are, with real benefits for real people. Without the need for avatars, without the need for virtual universes, and without the verse being thrown at us.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to its author and do not necessarily reflect those of CriptoNoticias.