Chen Gen: the deputies to the National People’s Congress misunderstood metaverse for the cross-border proposal

Wen / Chen Gen

“‘metaverse’ has broad space and great potential, and has become an important support and key track for the development of digital economy. Which country can seize the highland of ‘metaverse’ as soon as possible, which country is more likely to lead the development of digital economy and master the voice and initiative, so as to shape new advantages in international competition.” Kong Fulong, deputy to the National People’s Congress and Secretary of the Party committee and chairman of Jiangxi Rural Credit Cooperatives Federation, told surging news that during the national “two sessions” this year, he will submit “suggestions on strengthening the top-level design of” metaverse “and seizing a new high in the digital economy”.

Kong Fulong told surging news reporters that studies have shown that “metaverse” can create an output value of at least $8 trillion only by integrating social media, streaming media and game platforms, and will bring more considerable market linkage and multiplication effect after deep integration with the real economy.

Accordingly, Kong Fulong suggested to establish a national “metaverse” R & D institution, strengthen capital, talent and incentive support, and focus on the basic underlying technologies and key core technologies of “metaverse” such as chip, blockchain, geospatial, interactive algorithm, perceptual display, image engine and 3D environment generation, so as to provide solid support for the independent and controllable development of “metaverse”.

Obviously, Kong FaLong, deputy to the National People’s Congress, Secretary of the Party committee and chairman of Jiangxi Rural Credit Union, made a proposal on metaverse. He will submit the proposal on strengthening the top-level design of “metaverse” and seizing a new high in the digital economy. From the perspective of the specific industries involved in this proposal, although it is a cross-border proposal, some research and research have been done. However, after all, it is a cross-border proposal. Obviously, there is still a problem of depth of understanding and understanding of the industry.

That is to say, at present, only South Korea has proposed the establishment of metaverse at the national level. Many behaviors of South Korea are based on the needs of national marketing, which needs the help of some concepts to make their country get more attention internationally. However, the United States, a real scientific and technological power, is very pragmatic and focuses on the construction of the underlying technology level, such as chips or artificial intelligence. The U.S. Department of defense can allocate funds to various excellent universities and scientific research institutions around the world to carry out various applied research.

For the metaverse industry, is it the future? I’ve always said that metaverse must be the future. But will it still be called metaverse on the day when metaverse is really implemented in the future? Obviously, there is a high probability that it will not be called metaverse. It will build a new noun to define that era from the perspective of science, technology and culture of that era. The essence of metaverse is only a new form that will evolve in the future under the superposition of multiple cutting-edge technologies. The essence of this form is the product of scientific and technological iteration, not the term itself.

Therefore, from the national level, I do not agree that metaverse should be defined from the national level. From the national level, what we need is to learn from the United States, cultivate and support the underlying technology industries that have a significant impact on the future, and cultivate the underlying core technology enterprises.

Because in the field of science and technology, a new outlet will appear every year, whether driven by capital demand, media traffic or multiple factors. Therefore, it is obvious that the national level cannot follow these scientific and technological outlets and continuously establish various research institutes in the name of the state, but should provide corresponding cultivation supporting policies for the cultivation of these industries through policy guidance and support and under the guidance of centralized management ministries and commissions.

This also shows us that cross-border proposals are well intentioned and well intentioned, but they often lack a real understanding of the industry because of cross-border. The proposals provided cannot be urgent for the country and the people. In particular, the current rural credit union also has many problems in the operation process. The most obvious and typical is that as a grass-roots financial institution, there is still a large room for improvement in the convenience of use.

For delegates and members, making good use of their own identity, starting from their own actual point of view and combined with their own fields, the proposals may provide more accurate and effective measures for the country and the people.