In terms of the metaverse, which is a social ecological system that integrates virtuality and reality, its development is inseparable from the establishment of universal rules. The building automation standard, or BAS, represents the concept of interconnection and efficient collaboration, which is precisely the cornerstone for building a unified and open metaverse. The real challenge is how to apply the standardized thinking of the physical world to a decentralized and rapidly evolving virtual world, and to ensure that it serves people rather than just the technology itself.
Why does the Metaverse need unified building automation standards?
The Metaverse is not just a space for entertainment. It is transforming into a complex digital society that can support work, social interaction, and the economy. This society needs the kind of infrastructure that operates stably, just like buildings in the real world require reliable power, networks, and security systems. The unified concept of building automation standards is precisely to ensure that various systems within the Yuanverse's "digital building", such as rendering engines, data streams, and identity authentication, can cooperate as seamlessly as the building automation system (BAS) coordinates lighting and air conditioning.
This kind of synergy is a prerequisite for achieving the core features of the Metaverse, such as high immersion and real-time sustainability. The lack of unified standards will cause each virtual platform to become an island, making it impossible for user assets to be migrated and the experience to become fragmented. The purpose of standardization is not to stifle innovation, but to build basic interoperability protocols and pave the development path for a wider range of innovations, so as to prevent a few platforms from forming monopolies through technical barriers, which ultimately harms the interests of developers and users.
How to develop a globally recognized standard for Metaverse interoperability
The formulation of globally recognized standards requires extensive international cooperation and a multi-dimensional framework. United Nations specialized agencies such as the International Telecommunication Union have taken the lead in establishing the Metaverse Focus Group. This focus group is committed to customizing all-round guidelines, covering terminology, architecture and technical specifications. The purpose of these actions is to ensure the possibility of communication and dialogue between systems in different countries and companies.
The formulation of standards must cover multiple levels. For example, at the technical level, 3D asset formats such as glTF and USD must be standardized, as well as real-time communication protocols and data exchange interfaces. At the application level, general rules for digital identity, asset ownership, and economic activities must be defined. Currently, organizations such as the Metaverse Standards Forum are gathering industry forces to accelerate the incubation and implementation of open standards. This process is bound to be long and full of negotiations, but its direction is determined: to build a metaverse "lingua franca" that is as basic and open as the Internet's TCP/IP protocol.
How to transplant existing BAS principles to virtual space construction
The core of transplanting real-world BAS principles to the Metaverse is to draw on the intelligent logic of "centralized management and decentralized control." In smart buildings, BAS serves as a unified platform that can monitor and coordinate all subsystems. In the Metaverse, there must also be a similar "operating system layer" or "coordination framework" to manage the underlying computing resources, network allocation, and upper-layer application services.
To elaborate, Metaverse’s “BAS” can manage resource allocation in the virtual space, such as the maximum number of people online at the same time, data transmission priority, etc. It can also enforce environmental rules, such as the consistency of the physics engine, and ensure that security protocols, such as identity verification and anti-fraud, are effective across the entire platform. It allows the virtual world to be dynamically adjusted like a smart building based on the needs of "users", that is, visitors, to achieve efficiency, comfort and energy saving. Energy saving here refers to the optimized operating status of computing resources and bandwidth. Provide global procurement services for weak current intelligent products!
What specific obstacles does the lack of standards pose to Metaverse developers?
The most direct obstacle to developers is the lack of unified standards, which is extremely high development costs and complexity. In order to make applications available on multiple metaverse platforms, developers have to develop repeatedly for each platform. Adaptation also requires debugging, because each platform is completely different in terms of rendering interface, payment system, and account system. This greatly consumes the manpower and funds required for innovation.
Higher-level obstacles are restrictions on innovation and business risks. Developers may be forced to be bound to a mainstream platform to accept its high share and strict policy restrictions, otherwise they will lose a large number of users. At the same time, in view of the inability to cross-platform assets and user data Migration, the value of the content created by developers for a certain platform is locked. Once the platform declines or policy changes, all investments may be at risk. Such a fragmented situation will eventually inhibit the participation of small and medium-sized developers, causing the content ecology of the Metaverse to become homogenized and monopolized by giants.
How Metaverse standards ensure user security and data privacy
In the highly interconnected environment of the Metaverse, user security and data privacy are the bottom line for standards that must be solidified. This requires standards to embed privacy protection and security principles at the architectural design level. For example, standards should mandate the decoupling mechanism of digital identity and personal real biometric information, promote decentralized identity verification, and clarify the collection, storage, use, and cross-platform transmission boundaries of behavioral data in the virtual space.
As for the standards, we need to set up protective walls against risks unique to the Metaverse, such as virtual harassment, unified definitions of fraud, reporting and handling procedures, confirmation of digital asset ownership, and protection mechanisms, as well as specifications for traceability and labeling of AI-generated content, that is, AIGC. The European Union and other institutions have emphasized that technological readiness does not mean social readiness. Standards must reflect social values and put human safety first. Without such standards, the Metaverse could become a breeding ground for cybercrime and data misuse.
What is the biggest challenge facing the standardization of the Metaverse in the future?
Looking forward, the most prominent problem faced by the standardization of the Metaverse is how to find a balance between rapidly changing technological trends and stable and universal rules. Technologies related to the Metaverse, such as AI, blockchain, and XR equipment, are developing and changing extremely rapidly, and the speed at which standards are determined may never keep up with the pace of innovation. Under this situation, it is necessary to reserve sufficient scalability and adaptability in the standard to prevent it from being no longer in line with the current situation just after it is released.
Another core challenge lies in coordinating diverse global interests. Technology companies in various countries have their own governance ideas for the Metaverse. Industry alliances also have their own governance ideas for the Metaverse. Sovereign countries also have their own governance ideas for the Metaverse, but there are differences in this regard. Even the data sovereignty and economic models involved are deeply divided. The standardization process may evolve into different technical paths. The online gaming field may also evolve into a gaming field of different business interests. Whether a governance mechanism that is inclusive, transparent, and multi-stakeholder participation can be established will determine whether the future metaverse is a divided "universe" or a real "universe". Just as the success of Internet standards in history has revealed, openness and collaboration are the only path to prosperity.
Do you think that the process of promoting the standardization of the metaverse should be led by technology giants, or should it be led by neutral international organizations to ensure its openness and fairness? Welcome to share your views in the comment area.
Leave a Reply