Intersting, this thread evolved into a good discussion. The way I see it, VR does has potential, as some have pointed out. There are current practical applications for it.
On the other hand, it's not here yet. Some that subscribe to the list have met me offline and know that I communicate with more than just words, though I tend to use a lot of them. Education is provided through some form of human interaction and not just text. I can bang out a powerpoint or paper, but that doesn't mean without interpersonal communication that my point will be fully grasped. Such as writing this email. Video conferencing was promised a decade ago, and now it is free. That doesn't mean that in ten years we can't communicate with VR, but I currently don't own the bodysuit. It's not a bad idea to think about, but practical applications for knowledge don't currently exist. That doesn't mean that they won't, and active development should be encouraged. This doesn't mean immediate use, but it's a decent thought. To Dan's analogy about the US military applications, that is an apt one. Teach soldiers combat before they go into it and this ties into the gaming principle and Noein's principle. What we have to bear in mind, as expressed, is that this is not an immediate application. Most of the rest of the world still learns hands on, and we haven't even come close to building a worldwide userbase either. So it's something to think about and not get into a debate about the present applications of VR, but we should follow the process of technological advancement. -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l