Yeah... didn't see this remark of yours.  It's absurd to claim that the
avatar apart from its driver is a "person."  I see it as a puppet, a
prosthesis.  Damage my puppet and I'll come after you with a jig saw. ;)
But can Pinocchio be paid a check if he wins the poetry prize?  Or do I get
it?  What if I don't want to be revealed?  Can Sally Caves open a bank
account?  How do I ensure absolute privacy?


On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Eric Scoles <[email protected]> wrote:

> I misunderstood what this was about when we were talking about it the other
> night. This seems to be about the avatar being an extension of your person,
> not the avatar being a person in its own right. It's arguing that damage to
> the avatar is at least analogous to damaging your body. That's at least a
> little less absurd than arguing that the avatar is a person.
>
> So "Avatars *as self*" (from the title) is really a mis-statement of what
> the paper's about -- it's really about avatars as an *extension* or *
> manifestation* of self. By definition, an *avatar* can never be *identical
> * with the self. If they want to claim the avatar is a self, they need to
> find some word other than "avatar" to describe it.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Charlene Brusso <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Thanks for posting this, Alicia. The topic itself is provocative, but even
>> better are the journal links at the end: 'Games & Culture" & 'Journal of
>> Virtual Worlds Research' definitely go into my tickler file!
>>
>> -Charlene
>>
>>
>>  On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Alicia Henn <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Charlene Brusso
>>
>> --
>> 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].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.

Reply via email to