Sean FitzGerald has been doing a good job rebutting the rather shallow criticisms of Second Life that have been coming out of late. Here’s he’s response to to Graham Attwell’s post – Creativity Costs Money in Second Life. I have been bookmarking some of the other criticisms coming through, but am yet to read a single thing that even scratches beneath the surface of Second Life experience. What a shame some web2 spokes people are so entrenched and negative towards this early rise of web3 and can’t bring themselves to look and think deeper about the phenomenon – or at least start by getting the right end of the stick!
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 20, 2006 at 4:14 am
Sean FitzGerald (aka Sean McDunnough)
Thanks Leigh. I’m keeping track of articles I’ve been rebutting here – http://seanfitz.wikispaces.com/writings
December 20, 2006 at 12:34 pm
Stephen Downes
On what grounds would you assert that critics of Second Life are “so entrenched and negative towards this early rise of web3 and can’t bring themselves to look and think deeper about the phenomenon”?
I for one am not prepared to hand over the keys to the internet to some commercial company based in the U.S. that would privatize the entire online world.
I am moreover concerned about the power of an entity that can, which process or justification, simply rule that something is against the terms of services (as it did regarding the copybot) or to simply rule large swaths of the net ‘out of bounds’ (as it did for the teen area).
If these practices were tried on the web, they would be unacceptable and you would probably be among the first to rail against them, if your criticisms of EdNA forums are anything to judge by.
So why does your stance switch when faced with a slick corporate production? And why does your response tend to personal characterization rather than reasoned consideration?
December 20, 2006 at 8:04 pm
leighblackall
Yes, I agree with those concerns entirely – but they are not the concerns being articulated by the critics. Particularly in the articles that Sean has been engaging in – those criticisms have been leveled at the idea of virtual worlds being gimmicky, maladjusted, and even a social concern… The link offered to one of Sean’s responses I included in this post, but he has been present in all those Del.icio.us bookmarks I offered as well. From them you can see that the criticisms he is responding to are not the sorts of points you are making as a comment here.
From what I have heard (and I hope others will rop links here) SL appreciates this concern is about to make their platform open source. Not to mention that there are already open source Virt World or 3D interfaces being developed.
I would be very interested to see you more fully articulate your concerns regarding Second Life that you have started here. I think I would share your concerns all the way, the same concerns I have with the popularity of MySpace for example.
But more interesting would be for you (and others) to go further than you have already in your criticisms for virtual worlds, or 3D interfaces as a possible platform. Especially considering your experience with MUDs. To date, I haven’t read anything that indicates an experience that I would recognise as similar to my own when trying out this SL stuff. I find it very compelling and impossible to dismiss.
December 23, 2006 at 2:28 am
Alexander Hayes
Aww ….come on you two.
Concerns aside lets have a play in SL and scope out some other virtual “worlds” that may have some educational merit.
Lest we be accused of letting go of our progressive status.
Lest we forget that we fought at the frontlines of web 2.0 for our children and our nations to have a better world to live in.
More musings over at http://alexanderhayesblog.blogspot.com/2006/12/sl-sex-skin-and-content.html
December 24, 2006 at 1:25 am
Doug Holton
I think it helps to look at Second Life from a larger/longer term perspective. SL is better than ActiveWorlds, a 3d multi-user world that was popular before SL came along. ActiveWorlds charged even academic users hundreds of dollars just to access their 3D world. The quality of the SL world is much better. They are embracing open source technologies, such as the Mono project which now powers much of the underlying stuff, including scripting. And I think like Leigh said they will open up even more.
Eventually too I’m sure we’ll have free/open source alternatives to Second Life. Mark Shuttleworth (of Ubuntu, space tourism fame) even expressed a need for this.
On the negative side, you couldn’t access Second Life from most schools today even if a teacher wanted to. Schools today are blocking youtube, myspace, and even blogger/blogspot. So in some respect any criticism of second life doesn’t really matter since most are not allowed to use it anyway.
May 16, 2007 at 11:53 pm
Aaron Griffiths
Leigh
Was great to come across these posts and realise that the number of NZ educators experimenting in SL are growing. Have been in there for over a year now and am very involved in some of the projects you mentioned, in particular Healthinfo Island (Second Life Medical Library et al) where I’ve been the primary builder for all the landscape and outdoor structures. I volunteered in the early days of Info Island to help with my modelling skills and moved with Namro and Carolina to HII when they needed help there.
My blog on Eduforge (http://eduforge.org/projects/slcampusnz/) covers my journey there and the associated wiki has a number of links relating to educational aspects of SL. Have meet up with JoKay and Sean a few times myself in SL and also at E-Fest last year. Also have contact with Clare Atkins from NMIT who has secured space on EduIsland specifically for use in the research and development of SL educational possibilities.
Would be great to meet up in world sometime. IM me (SL: Isa Goodman) if you want a meet. Can do that either at my house or Clare’s (SL: Arwenna) garden and can show you around HII if you have the time.
Regards
Aaron/Isa