I'm not sure what counts as "pooh-poohing"; for my own part, I'm simply saying something about what I think most people are going to do: I think they're going to skip virtual reality in favor of augmented reality because the barriers to entry are lower*, and that virtual reality vendors are going to find their greatest profitability in extending into augmented reality.
If that counts as pooh-poohing -- well, [shrug /]. I haven't done nearly as much stuff in SL as Dave H, but my impression has been that he's done a lot. I was kind of surprised to hear over a period of months some time back that he wasn't spending so much time there anymore. To agree with his point, when someone makes a shift like that, I tend to think their view deserves attention. It's not that they're right or wrong, it's that they made a decision to make a change, and I usually find that it's instructive to hear why. -- *Also, because it's easier to sell and monetize, which means that there will be more commercial augmented reality options. Hell, there are more *now*. See: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/big-idea/14/augmented-reality [courtesy pat] Augmented reality is bundled with every smartphone sold in America. People use it every day without knowing that's what they're doing, and that's when you've really got a paradigm shift on your hands: when people don't think what they're doing is anything special. Take Facebook, for example: Most people who use it don't think about it, it's just a more or less unquestioned part of their lives. Twitter I think is probably similar, though it's a bit harder for me to wrap my mind around. People just use these things, they don't think much about it, and the things can integrate into the daily life they already have. On SL, you have to find ways to bring the outside in; with "web 2.0" and augmented reality, it's already part of the outside -- the harder thing is figuring out how to do without it. On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Sal Armoniac <[email protected]> wrote: > I notice that the pooh poohers are two people who got in for a while and > lost interest. ;) And the two avid residents are spending money to create > their 3 dimensional art. More in response to Dana...but this is it in > essence: LL is going to sell to a web developer. Where it goes from there I > don't know. There are alternate VRs springing up, but none with the huge > capacities of SL which admittedly engages or repels those who try it out. > Maybe Dana and I find in it a canvas for expressing something we couldn't do > in any other set of media. > > Sarah > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Dana Paxson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey, Eric, great cross-post! Wanna dance? >> >> >> On 10/29/2010 9:52 AM, Eric Scoles wrote: >> >> 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. >> >> -- >> 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]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.
