If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. You can even subscribe by email! Thanks for visiting!
Linda Zimmer (who, like myself, is a Nobody), has invited me and anyone else interested to join her and some of our other colleagues in an informal discussion group in Second Life.
She has also started a highly readable and informative blog on the subject. It is now in my feedreader.
She notes that the exceptionally fine tv channel in the UK, Channel 4, is running a series on Second Life, called Second Lives. Says the promo material:
“Second Lives is a series of four short documentaries that explores this cutting edge of the internet revolution. With much of the Second Life footage filmed ‘live’ within the world it is the very first ‘virtual observational documentary’.”
Worth checking out if you are in the UK; worth jumping into Second Life rather than waiting for it if you are anywhere else…
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
TheBizofKnowledge 08.05.06 at 9:42 pm
I’ve been wanting to give Second Life a try for some time now, but have never actually gone ahead and joined. I wish I could see the documentaries first, but Linda’s blog looks pretty informative as well. I’ll spend the weekend checking this stuff out, then will make a decision about joining. Thanks for the link to Linda’s site!!
Shaun Osborne 08.05.06 at 11:29 pm
Thanks for this Lee
Didn’t know about this until I read a blog from Oz! Checking the actual listings (Im living in UK at the moment) it looks like they at 19:55 Mon-Thurs not, as the 4 website say, 9PM.
Owen Lystrup 08.06.06 at 3:29 am
Second Life makes me fear for the future. I’m a young guy saying this.
It’s Orwelllian at best.
Lee 08.06.06 at 11:41 am
Hey Shaun: I know, it’s bizarre, huh? That sort of cross-global serendipity happens all the time to me!
Owen: tell me more, mate! Why Orwellian at best; what is it at worst?
Owen Lystrup 08.06.06 at 3:25 pm
What is it at its worst? Not as entertaining as 1984.
It’s a world of people ingoring the world and dealing with reality, by spending time creating a simulated life with just as much reality and problems.
It’s a place of vicarious family and relationships. So in that way it’s more like Fahrenheit 451.
With all the technological advancement that creates so many conveniences and connections–much like you and I having a conversation here–just as many hinderances and barriers are created.
Rather than speak face-to-face, make a phone call. Rather than make a phone call, type an e-mail. Rather than e-mail, shoot a text message during your next meeting or class when you’re not paying attention to who’s speaking. Rather than send a text messge, think over a message from your cerebral cognition (this technology has not yet been created). But you get the idea.
The more time we spend on things like this, the less connected and aware we become.
For instance, I’m typing this comment as I listen to my girlfriend and a couple mates have a conversation about religion and our future together. Here I am missing an important conversation and good debate when I should be there in the moment.
So with that, I’ll be closing by saying ignoring and escaping into a fantasy world is all good. But we do it too much. Now rather than calling it Warcraft, we call it the “other reality.”
Lee 08.06.06 at 4:40 pm
Owen, these are extremely interesting views. I’ve just recorded my report for FIR #161 (appears Monday) and included your comments — hopefully it will engender further conversation.
I can’t see SL stopping now, and as business communicators we have a duty of care to be reasonably informed about it for our clients.
But I also agree with you that our world sometimes suffers from too much electronic and not enough human interaction. Leaving your relationship ‘challenges’ behind and running off into a new city / country / world / reality only ends up with you experiencing the same challenges, but in a new location. Better to sort out the challenges in the real world first…
Owen Lystrup 08.07.06 at 4:15 pm
Lee,
I get what you’re saying about needing to abreast of our client’s conerns and interests. You’re absolutely right.
And I never said it would stop any time soon. I don’t think it will be around all that long, but it’s definitely not stopping anytime soon. I just wish it would.
Thanks for including my thoughts. I’ll give FIR a listen and weigh in if I can.
Linda Zimmer 08.08.06 at 3:39 am
Owen, I see your concerns, and they are the very human concerns that will (must) always be with us. Yours are some of the very isuses that need exploring for both our society and our businesses.
I see these virtual spacees, like Second Life, as a logical extenstion of our existing “cyber” selves. We have online identities here in the blogosphere,and email, and on our web sites. Second Life, through technological advances, is giving us more visual tools to represent ourselves in non-physical spaces. There are all kinds of activities moving from the physical world to virtual ones because of time, distance, cost and physical limitations. It isn’t necessarily about escaping those around us.
Can we use these virtual worlds irresponsibly? Of course, just as we use drugs or alcohol or work to avoid connecting with those around us. The vast majority of people keep these things in balance.
Look at the potential of projects like live2give. Adults with cerebral palsy share an avatrar known as Wilde Cunningham to experience being around other people in ways they simply can’t in the physical world. Or, those on a special island in Second Life with autism who try out social skills there that are so incredibly difficult for them in the real world. These are just two examples of things that actually allow us to connect - not avoid.
Whether there are virtual spaces or not, we humans will always have the challenges of communicating well with those in our physical space. Perhaps these worlds can teach us something deeper about ourselves and those around us, as well.
Michael Vanderdonk 08.08.06 at 11:37 am
Owen, Et al,
I understand your concerns, and agree with them in one respect. However I hold a different view in that our requirements of face to face communication is limiting our connection.
Let me explain. One hundred years ago, this level of communication that we are engaged in right now was unthought-of of. The speed and level of communication has escalated from the first telegraph, through to radio, telephone, TV, internet, cerebral cognition…
As a hypnotist I know better than most the difference between communicating face to face compared to over text. Those subtle non-verbal and behavioural messages are not always transferred and may lead to mis-communications. This is caused by a combination of our upbringing (face to face communication is all we know when born and as such we have years more experience in understanding the non-verbal and behavioural communications) and the limitations imposed by the technology. It is possible for me, and many others, to be aware of some of those non-verbal cues that most people are aware of in face to face communication and miss as soon as the ‘faces’ are removed. Just like face to face communication this is a learned skill.
The issue is not face to face versus other forms of communication. It is the quality of communication that is the issue and limiting ourselves to face to face communication because it is all we know limits us to the dark ages. To me, Second Life is the start of a long journey in the direction of making this technology as communication rich (or even more so!) as face to face communication. It has a long long way to go yet. Txting is and never will be face to face communication. It does however make face to face communication easier by increasing the levels of rapport between the parties, and continues a face to face conversation at a distance and extended timeframe. This is a fascinating topic, and one I’ve been exploring personally for some time and I have much more exploration still to do…
Lee 08.10.06 at 5:59 am
It will be interesting to see what happens in the SL space when voip is offered instead of txt, and when you can integrate a webcam, say, to provide live imagery of your face with voip, but using an avatar for the rest of your body (thus saving bandwidth). How close to a ‘real’ virtual meeting would that be?
Owen Lystrup 08.11.06 at 5:04 am
VOIP and a face imagery would be a good way to make it more real. I’m sure they would keep the option of having complete avatar characters, but it would be a good idea.