Very Interesting

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7920532540725792452


If you've never heard of Richard Dawkins......well........do a little research. The guy is brilliant and fascinating to listen to. I've read some of his books. I wont get involved in any kind of theological debate (for those of you who know who he his) But I was really intrigued to find this video clip of him discussing SL and the implications for the future.

What do you think of his observation? (bit early for a Friday thread I know lol)

I've heard a lot of people insinuate that super intelligent or otherwise worldly people don't bother with 'silly' things like SL. I've seen some rather jaded opinions in here.....and certainly out there in the real world. The stigma seems to stem from people simply not realizing just how dramatically our LIVES are effected and changed by new technologies.
And they don't seem to want to except that we WILL and ARE progressing toward these
types of things being main stream.
My sister was floored when I told her I found this clip.....she's read some of his stuff......she holds people like him in high regard.....and the idea that HE took an interest in SL gave her a whole new appreciation for it.
I happen to agree with this dude on a lot of points......and from a scientific perspective as well.....I think he's got some really amazing points about SL and the idea of virtual worlds.

I think the focus is the wrong way around . . .

Pep ( . . . it's more that a lot of dumb people *do* bother)

That was 10 1/2 minutes I'll never get back.

For those who have paid any attention to VR technology, he says nothing new or interesting or profound. It's a 10 1/2 minute commercial for his book, which has nothing to do with SL (the book, that is--he's found a way to use SL to sell it, though).

I stopped watching when he stopped talking about SL. I'm only out about a minute.

Well, this post ........

Oh, nevermind that;s just too easy.

As a non-religious person, Second Life has demonstrated to me how people might become addicted to religions. I have even heard it said that religions are a form of virtual reality that existed long before computers. Conversely, SL is almost like a religion for a lot of us!

Perhaps you could help me out, Tex. I have noticed (particularly among those who txtspk) a lack of discrimination between apostrophes and semi-colons. Is this intentional and I have to prepare myself for another assault on English usage, along with "u" for "you" . . .

Pep ( . . . or is it just digital incompetence? )

Shouldn't that be 'U' rather then 'u'? I always use a capital when I shorten 'you' to 'U'.

Is that the singular "you" or the plural "you"?

Pep (The French use the singular differentially for friends, animals and as an insult, I understand)

That's the incorrect way of using 'u'. It defeats the purpose of using 'u' if you're having to press the superfluous shift key.

I dunno.. Some people..

Shut your face!

Ta gueule!

Pep (*Never* "Votre gueule"

Richard Dawkins clearly hasn't read anything by Stanislaw Lem, Vernor Vinge, Dan Galouye, Greg Egan, ... oh, dozens of SF writers who have explored this kind of problem to a far greater depth than he has.

This is a problem that a lot of philosophers and futurists have, they don't read enough Science Fiction!

Bonjour citroen renault.

What's richard dawkins got to do with random french words?.

We've moved on already..

A bigger problem is that if they do read it, they then try to write it.

Pep (http://www.carlsagan.com/)

omg- Stanislaw Lem!! Argent- thank you- I have been trying to remember his name for years! I read one of his so long ago- it left a horrible taste in my mouth - but if you look around you right now- you will see The Bridge manifesting -

and as an aside not related to the above- yeah- found another one -

I get the impression the only books Richard Dawkins reads are his own.

Yeah he does deviate....but he comes back around to SL in an interesting way.


I don't see how it's a plug for his book, since he doesn't mention any book titles.......and if one does not know who he is....then one wouldn't draw any conclusion that it was any kind of book plug.

He's a scientist.....so, yeah....he probably doesn't do a lot of Sci-Fi reading...why would he....he's got his head wrapped around actual science. That isn't to say it wouldn't enlighten him. I believe it would. I just found it intriguing that he had any experience at all with SL.....and further intriguing, some of the correlations he draws. I don't think it's necessary to take anything like this as an absolute.....it's just observations and opinions.....which I personally, happened to find interesting. The one bit that really struck me was when he mentioned our own visual perceptions of the 'real world' and how it's really just data being translated in our brains. Sort of a natural virtuality. I found that kind of cool.

The concept he's discussing isn't a novel one, and it's misapplied to SL in this context. The simulation hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis isn't the same thing. SL avatars are necessarily aware of the 'higher world', and bots require much stronger AI before their perceptions would count.

Dawkins says he hasn't spent much time (if any) in SL, and this is painfully clear in this discussion, as he's unaware that a lot of the things he speculates might be possible (such as flying) are commonplace already.

The people I have met and talked to a significant amount of time have proven to be highly intelligent most of the time. At first it came as a surprise, just as the high user age, considering a lot of people... well, consider it a "computer game". Over time, I thought it was only logical though, the way it is logical that people like Stephen Hawking are Star Trek fans.

Now, I still stand by my theory that everyone who spends a significant amount of online time here (not counting the ones who do indeed only are in it for the big money) usually has some pretty fucked up reasons for doing so. And yes, I do include myself here.

Other than mentioning both 'Climbing Mount Improbable' and 'The God Delusion', and having copies of the latter visible on either side of his head.

No, it's non-fiction.

Pep ( "The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution" is available for pre-order now at Amazon UK only; all aboard the Darwin bicentary bandwagon)

PS

LOL I didn't even notice cause I was just listening to his ideas.....not tuned in to any plugs....and I definitely didn't notice the books. LOL

Oh well...yeah, it was obvious he hasn't looked too deeply into SL.....but maybe in simplist terms. I was curious about his thoughts on the concept of virtual realities. As a scientist, he's bound to have an opinion, and he does.

Now....I will wrack my brain as to which effed up reason I have for being involved in SL (as Novis assured me I must! LMAO) I dunno......always had a sort of child-like awe towards computer games/graphics. Always been a sort of closet nerd......used to spend hours in photo edit programs working on my photography. I see it all as just another venue for creativity. Maybe it's those flying dreams I used to have as a kid all the time.....crap....I'm gonna have to se a shrink now I know it!!!

Survey Says..........

Oh, Richard DAWKINS.......never mind.

Sorry, I'm a jaded cynic. I just saw it as an infomercial for the most part. It wouldn't surprise me if his brief reference to SL was just a way to get more eyeballs on it. Nothing wrong with wanting to sell books mind you.

I'm just not one of those people who put much stock in any metaphysical talk regarding SL, it pretty much elicits the same response as hearing the word Metaverse (tm) used in any seriousness.