The Vicious Cycle

Now, I'm sure everyone is familiar with Lazarus Divine's little crusade with Impeach Bush signs over salable land. I'm going to take the expense of naming that name only once as he is a public figure at this point. This piece is not about him.


Rather, it is about the social impetus he uses to "grief by the margins." It signals an underlying issue that, while being proven more with the stick than the carrot, is worth discussing.


I'll try to keep this nice and simple, with plenty of supporting details should I pique anyone's interest.

Yet, I suspect this opinion will be highly unpopular.

--------

Cliff's Notes Version

--------

First, our assumptions.

Second Life is a contiguous world where land is rented on a laissez-faire basis. All servers are shared at some level, creating a sort of "patchwork grid." Because content is shared in the viewer and held separate in the ownership, residents are able to pursue their own ambitions at the expense of those around them. A classic "spillover problem."


The question of land griefing has come up time and again on these forums. Before the current salvo, there were such things as "ugly builds" and "giant particle-spewing, green-and-orange" structures. This really isn't anything new - it's just a more concerted effort of something that has been done.



Why, if the problem is obvious, has it not been fixed?

My personal belief is the Lindens, being human, are unsure in which direction they wish to act in the matter. Every possible outcome means more work in the short term at the direct expense of other features built onto this centralized platform. Further, it is not seen as "economically viable" to Linden Lab, and may even serve to increase their wealth.



However, it signals a serious flaw in perceptions. One that, if not addressed, can mean severe consequences for Second Life.


--------

And so, The Vicious Cycle:

Residents are commonly annoyed by neighbors in a laissez-faire, centralized system.

As a direct result, they actively seek out more control over their environment, either by purchasing it themselves or moving to a controlled sim owned by another resident.

I have found, through observation, that this is typically the direction active resident landowners move. To offer an example, both my parcels are in sims that are more or less in the hands of a few people.

The net result is the tumultuous buying and selling of land, which in turn leads to more exploitative possibilities and exacerbates the problem. All creative visions are not created equal, and the want to exercise control over one's own is more or less obvious.



As residents move to more centralized power centers, land barons and large, structured business models form and flourish.

This may take place over a long period of time or overnight, as residents seek to recoup their expenses and even profit.

This, in turn, has lead to the "commercialization of Second Life," where huge swathes of land are marked "sell sell sell," signage, and proven money makers dominate more creative or "open canvas" ventures.



The direct response is twofold, continuing the cycle outward.

Rising unfavorable commercialism may force residents in these power centers to flee to newer patchwork sims or power centers. Alternately, residents may find their sim to be a safe haven, adding to the owner's control and allowing them to expand outward. In both cases, the cycle continues.



All of this is just great for Linden Lab.

The omnipresence of "unfavorable characteristics" leads to frequent land turnover, leading to higher tier payments, economic figures, and purchase statistics. On the other hand, residents are not all that likely to leave Second Life itself in the presence of perceived options. Why mess with a good thing?



Yet, as many residents have noticed, this misses the point.

The problem is simply thus: Second Life is a central system in a contiguous world. Residents have very little choice over it without actively finding means to exert a disproportionate amount of control over their environment.




And so, the conclusion is simple:

To effectively exert control over our environment, we indeed need proxy owners for entire servers.

What we call "land barons" today are simply a gimped form of management; we need sysadmins that can be held responsible for the quality of each server on the grid.

Ultimately, my prediction is the current business model will crack, simply because "land barons" are too centralized and weak a force to effectively counter these problems. The ownership needs to be more diffuse, yet not so diffuse as "patchwork sims." Both will serve to drive residents away in the long run, as more options to Second Life that get it right open up.



The model will inevitably break down if we do not get the ability to host our own servers and, by proxy, be able to hold someone other than Linden Lab accountable for these problems directly. Renters are currently able to do this with land barons, whose power is still more political hand-wringing than useful, direct control over the environment.

And so, to break with the vicious cycle, Linden Lab would need to shatter its current economic model entirely, as it is explicitly built on tier payments and the buying and selling of currencies. Both of which are articifically aided by "public bads."

Alternately, it would need to shatter its vision of the contiguous grid, by giving the client control over their viewing experience directly, as a makeshift, client-driven control over the server.

In either case, the gulf between viewing Second Life and owning Second Life must be bridged or people will inevitably leave in the long run.



Discuss.

maybe

I only have 15 mins left on my laptop, I'd better switch batteries before I start reading, hahaha

Bold text only:

I agree with the analysis.

You have given me yet another reason to pursue land barony.

I don't think the Company will be changing their system any time soon - not as long as sim servers handle $L transactions, at least.



Incidentally, I can and *do* read posts longer than my hand - no need to dumb it down or soundbite anything.

If I can get enough seed money I'll start it up too. Not to be evil I'll at least sell usable sized chunks of land.

This is pretty much what I've been saying for a while too. To me it's a foregone conclusion. LL started off with a great idea with SL but it's flaws are becoming obvious. I say this with over a year of experience here. I love the place greatly, it's given me a great deal of pleasure, but I really can't see a long term future for me here if it continues the way it's going. I believe the demand for a system of user owned virtual world servers will urge competing developers to create one and sooner rather than later. It's an inevitable natural progression towards integrating virtual reality with the web. When that happens SL artisans will vote with their feet. ( and their wallets ). I've come to seeing LL as an innovator that will likely fail if they don't change their implementation radically. This would require such a huge change of philosophy at LL it's hardly likely to happen.


this quote is from a thread I started just to discuss zoning or alternatives out of interest to see what other people thought on the subject...

I have to say I'm completely awed by the power of these simple textured cubes... apparently they're not only capable of extortion and ruining people's second lives, now you're also imbuing them with the power to destory the entire SL system. I'd have thought that would at least require some serious scripting skills and maybe a well trained mercenary army, but apparently all it takes is a somewhat loud texture with letters on it. Amazing.

Just come up with a technical solution. Everything else is a waste of time and resources. A technical solution doesnt trample on anyones 'freedom'.

Wait, that's how pornography destroys the moral fabric of our society too!

I agree with Chip. Besides, people setting huge glowing green Light towers on over-priced land ruined SL as we know it over a year ago, and probably a million things have ruined SL as we know it before and since then.

Like all other annoyances, this too shall pass.

You mean to say "a quick, cheap technical fix", right?

:igh::

No one is imbuing the signs with special powers. A system that allows sociopaths to flourish at the expense of paying customers is not going to succeed in the long term. It's simple to understand, not amazing or awesome.

The mere fact this same discussion comes up again and again in various guises is proof enough.

I don't think this guy is a sociopath.

at first I was mad about the signs, but I have been drawn to the way Chip thinks. They can only bother me if I allow them to, Ive just started to ignore them and Im no longer upset or mad.

I agree with this completely, it's about the only sensible way to deal with it. But I think the real point of the discussion is being completely missed by concentrating it on the actions of that one person. If I caught the OPs sentiment correctly he was suggesting the implementation of the entire system is flawed. Something I also agree with completely.


( I was really mad at first, I'm not even sure why, but then I realised no-one cares enough to bother doing anything about them, and to get all stressed about it is just silly. That was when I started looking more deeply at the cracks in the system which are slowly getting bigger and bigger with each little shake ).

No. You are wrong.

I'm not so sure that SL is flawed in the world shattering way that was expressed in the initial post nor that there MUST BE a complete restart in order for LL to achieve long-term economic viability and/or a salable asset.

Hi.
Technological Fix.

kthnxbye.

It's not that the signs themselves are imbued with such risable power, it is that it casts into sharp relief how disinterested Linden Lab is in being stewards of their world but absolutely refuse to give players the tools needed to effectively act as stewards in their stead.

All human societies have governance of some kind, in bad situations because it allows a despot to exert control over many. In better situations, people willingly yield some powers to the government because it is furthers their individual interests.

I was recounting a facially paradoxical analysis to someone recently (author's name evades at the moment) that says that government benefits businesses by allowing them to be sued. How could this benefit the business? Because it allows them to enter into enforceable contracts which creates a climate where customers are willing to deal with the business because they have the power (through the government) to compel performance by the business in honoring its contract. The same argument was used to show that the ability for a mortgager to forclose on a property was a benefit to borrowers because it increased the willingness of firms to extend credit; without forclosure, the capital would "prefer" to go someplace more secure.

By taking on none of these governmental activities and preventing players from doing so, Linden Lab has effectively hobbled the development of their world in a way that is immeasureably bad. They want to have their cake and eat it too but fail to realize that holding this stance makes for a very small cake.

Incisive analysis, Mr. Gomez.

From what I've read that would require a change in whats being sent to our client. Meaning the owner of all objects are not sent by default just because its in your viewable range. This would increase the load and stress on the servers. This is based on what I've read, I could be wrong.

I would want something that could be implemented without increasing traffic or load. For example, have something like the land tools that would allow me to mark off a section of a sim to filter. The coordinates and area that I filter would be 100% on my client and my client would do the filtering based off of this. Whatever solution would also require no land ownership to use.

No offense Chip, but I think you missed the point.


The post isn't about Mr. Lazarus' cubes. They're ugly, they're annoying, but in the grand scheme of things... meh.


Rather, it's about how LL throws everyone into the same pot and just expects them to "play nice." There's currently a gulf between the view - what we see with our clients - and tangible ownership of that view. The only feasible ways to "own the view" being to reshape the current land impetus or give us the ability to block content.



Now, both of those go against the *puts on rose-colored glasses* Great and Mighty Theory of the Metaverse. But all the same, they're becoming quite necessary in the same way I wouldn't browse the 'net without an ad-blocking hosts file.


The case in point? Just food for thought on why LL doesn't seem to do anything about these builds. Economic bads like "unfavorable view" artificially stimulate LL's cashflow and would be work to fix. Why mess with a good thing?

User control of dimensions would be fun. Position and location are entirely virtual, why not let users define who their friends are? Make parcels free floating locations that link and unlink to other places. Live by your friends no matter where your land is.

It's not going to happen sure but artificial restrictions in a virtual world are so dull. Why can't I walk up that wall and across the ceiling? Why can't I swap out the connection to the parcel next door to my friends plot?

I think trying to get LL to abandon their idea of a contiguous world based on a geographic metaphor will be a pretty tough sell, though the introduction of private islands that aren't attached to any other sims is certainly a step in that direction. Where I absolutely agree with you is that I hope whatever solutions LL comes up with to try and make everyone happy are changes in features and technology rather than the introduction of more restrictive rules. I just think the problems that might necessitate big changes are being overstated in order to bolster a case that has more to do with personal desire for which direction SL should go than with the actual cited problems and their seriousness. The issue of "owning the view" has been around as long as SL has and the system hasn't collapsed. On the contrary, it has continued to grow exponentially.