Just wanted to jump in here. I find SL actually more populist, far far more grass roots than opensim, etc. It's like linux - I love linux, but grass roots is Windows, which does things for you; linux is for people who want to operate the OS in depth. My work's no more for geeks than any other population, and a lot of things we do limit that population in terms of knowledge, even economics in a way.
As far as corporate stuff goes, for me there's a mix of available tech, being aware, using things - even our computers, for that matter the fibers this stuff goes out on - it's all corporate. How we situate ourselves, how we fight abuse, those are integral to this, but I don't feel withdrawal - which is only an inauthentic withdrawal (in the Sartrean sense) - is any sort of answer. This screen is illuminated by _coal._ - Alan On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, marc garrett wrote: > Hi Corrado, Alan & others, > > There is nothing that I actually disagree with here, but I cannot help > feeling uncomfortable with the creative industries and corporate > companies, hijacking or diverting media artists and related practices > from working with more 'grass roots' platforms, even if they are glitchy > and may not have the cash and the mass audiences out there. > > And yes, I understand most of the arguments which are pro SL from those > artists who are exploring their own creative presences within it, and I > have had quite a few discussions with Patrick Lichty on this very > subject. Many of us use Facebook and other social networking platforms, > but as far as I am concerned, I'd rather be part of an environment where > those who share it actively are aware of the responsibilities of being > indpendent and equally part of something special, other than a conveyor > belt, money making machine. > > Your right - but that's part of the problem, everywhere... > > marc > > > Indeedy... > > But, to lose, as Alan has mentioned the 'walk in crowd', which is a > significant part of the engagement with the environment would be > troublesome. There is a massive difference between an engine re-purposed to > produce art-artefact (quake etc..) and using a virtual environment with all > of it's issues. I have issues with SL's marketing and capital scheme, > however that is intrinsic to working within it. I'm not sure what production > within another 'environ' would mean. Sure, we can talk about the freeness of > it, but working within a space with potentially 1265zillion users changes it > bigtime. And learning a new set of tools in an environment that may not have > the same discourse. This may seem churlish as I have not tried these vw's > myself but SL, for all it's faults, has some significance. The nominal fee, > which I'm not sure if Alan is at issue with, maybe more the fact that land > (virtual) is more problematic. > > Alan...over to you. > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > == current text file: http://www.alansondheim.org/qh.txt last text file: http://www.alansondheim.org/qg.txt email archive: http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ webpage http://www.alansondheim.org sondheimat gmail.com, panix.com == _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
