Believe it or not, a lot of people are accessing SL on their iPhones. But really only to get and respond to their IMs and not move their avatars. The AR/VR overlap is already happening. I've corresponded with people that way.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Pat Rapp <[email protected]> wrote: > I don’t think it’s an either/or situation. VR and AR are both valid and > valuable, but suit different needs. Yes, both are here, just not well > distributed yet. The advantage AR has is that it fits nicely onto our > phones. I personally can’t imagine a virtual world on a phone due to the > high demand of data download. An AR overlay is significantly more portable > than a rich 3d world with it’s intense graphics. That’s not to say it won’t > happen. We all remember large graphics bringing 2d websites to a grinding > halt in the early days. Our technology had to catch up. > > > > I’m just sayin’ facebook’s user base is humongous due to that fact that it > takes very little effort to learn how to use it. That doesn’t mean virtual > worlds will die and drop off the face of the technology landscape. They are > widely used for other purposes, and provide a rich “you are there” interface > that cannot and will not be displaced by AR or social networking. That’s all > I’m sayin’. : ) > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Eric Scoles > *Sent:* Friday, October 29, 2010 9:53 AM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Av Rights > > > > I'm increasingly thinking that SL-style virtual worlds may never be > mainstream in the way that web-based social networking is. I'm thinking most > people will bypass that adoption phase and go straight to augmented > reality. > > > > I also think the successful future path for Second Life / Linden Labs is in > interfacing somehow with Augmented Reality. (And the real path to absolute > dominance for Facebook is to project into Augmented Reality, not retail. But > that's another thought for another time.) > > > > I realize both of these ideas arguably miss at least part of the point of > Second Life in that the SL avatar is an avatar -- you can hide behind it, > and certainly some (prob. a lot of) people do that with their SL (or WoW) > avatars. But what Facebook has taught me is the degree to which people are > willing to *expose* themselves. Too, Augmented Reality is sort of > dimensionally contextual (tessar-contextual?) in that people and places may > look different depending on the network-identity of the person looking at > them. So you can be different things to different people, depending on how > they're connected to you. And if there's a gateway to VR from AR, you can be > in virtual places that are connected to or overlayed onto LR [Literal > Reality]. (I was going to call it 'RR' for 'Real Reality', but I don't want > to pick a fight.) > > > > Up until recently I would have thought this level of augmented reality was > years away, but I gather it's pretty much just not very well distributed > yet, to paraphrase the Chairman. You can already be AugReal with an iPhone > or Android phone; the Apps For That are as far away as people's > imaginations, at this point. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Pat Rapp <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, the user base has a lot to do with that. The learning curve for > facebook (and it’s games) is minimal. Second Life is still disorienting for > all but the most enthusiastic adopters. As immersive websites become more > prevalent, virtual worlds will become more mainstream. > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *David Henn > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 27, 2010 8:38 AM > > > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: Av Rights > > > > At least one reason for this is that facebook and Zynga are making gobs of > money, whereas Second Life has seen its revenues plummet and has had to > close three of its endeavors. Money talks, and all. > > > David > > On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 23:06 -0500, Sal Armoniac wrote: > > Just goes to show you that Face Book is taken more seriously than Second > Life. ;) > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Pat Rapp <[email protected]> wrote: > > Interesting … > > > > http://bit.ly/8ZRbw5 > > > > “Under Italian law the virtual burglar's actions are considered "aggravated > entry" and can draw penalties of up to five years in prison.” > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Alicia Henn > *Sent:* Friday, October 22, 2010 5:00 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Av Rights > > > > > > http://www.jmir.org/2010/3/e28/ > > This is an interesting article on rights for avatars. It seems reasonable > and yet ludicrous at the same time. My officemate and I have had a great > time expanding on it. - Alicia > > Get Your Paws off of My Pixels: Personal Identity and Avatars as Self > > Mark Alan Graber1,2, MD; Abraham David Graber3, BA > > *ABSTRACT* > > There is an astounding silence in the peer-reviewed literature regarding > what rights a person ought to expect to retain when being represented by an > avatar rather than a biological body. Before one can have meaningful ethical > discussions about informed consent in virtual worlds, avatar bodily > integrity, and so on, the status of avatars vis-à-vis the self must first be > decided. We argue that as another manifestation of the individual, an > individual’s avatar should have rights analogous to those of a biological > body. Our strategy will be to show that (1) possessing a physical body is > not a necessary condition for possessing rights; (2) rights are already > extended to representations of a person to which no biological consciousness > is attached; and (3) when imbued with intentionality, some prostheses become > “self.” We will then argue that avatars meet all of the conditions necessary > to be protected by rights similar to those enjoyed by a biological body. The > structure of our argument will take the form of a conditional. We will argue > that *if* a user considers an avatar an extension of the self, *then* the > avatar has rights analogous to the rights of the user. Finally, we will > discuss and resolve some of the objections to our position including > conflicts that may arise when more than one individual considers an avatar > to be part of the self. > > *(J Med Internet Res 2010;12(3):e28)* > doi:10.2196/jmir.1299 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > > > > -- > -- > > eric scoles | [email protected] > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.
