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 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 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 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