This raises a subject that's interesting to me, & hopefully not too boring
to others: Spending money on SL.

During the big SL commercial land-grab, companies were spending vast amounts
of money to construct & maintain presences in SL. Vast.

But (as I understood it) public institutions were going into SL at the same
time because they saw it as a *cheap *way to get virtual presence.

You and Alicia have talked about SL as VR-telepresense (by which I mean
being telepresent in VR rather than in RL) as it's used by real, serious
organizations like NASA and scholarly organizations. I have a hard time
wrapping my mind around that, but it's obviously working. Alicia described a
scenario resently where she was talking with someone at NASA and another SL
avatar walked up and interrupted to ask a question that Alicia quickly
realised was work-related. *IOW, NASA's SL space was a real and really-used
extension of their RL space.* Much as I have a hard time imagining that
working well for me, I think it's pretty wild.


On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Pat Rapp <[email protected]> wrote:

>  Just to clarify: Spending money to create 3 dimensional art is not the
> only valid form of involvement in SL. None of my five avatars has money to
> spend in SL, but that doesn’t mean they (or I) are not actively involved.
> (i.e. “The two avid residents…”)
>
>
>
> Just sayin’…
>
>
>
> : )
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
> Behalf Of *Sal Armoniac
> *Sent:* Friday, October 29, 2010 4:52 PM
>
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Av Rights
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.

Reply via email to