Second Life’s Downside

28 Aug

Posted by Agnes Varnum as Creative Process, Technology

I’ve posted quite a bit about Second Life here, and as my podcast with Philip Mallory Jones (more soon, I promise!) probably makes apparent, I think that there is some very interesting potential in that virtual world. But, I can’t say I log in that much or that I have found it nearly as productive or interesting as Mr. Jones has–his work gives him an access point to the community there which is difficult to find for those of us without such a good reason to be there. Interesting that WIRED’s Chris Anderson is throwing up his hands with SL.

Particularly since SL will feature prominently as NAMAC’s upcoming conference with John Lester as one of the featured guests, I think anyone thinking about this community from an arts standpoint should be familiar with Anderson and WIREDs words of caution, “Why I Gave Up on Second Life.” I’m not convinced that he is right to give up just yet, but it’s a well-reasoned read, as Anderson is wont to be.

Tags: articles, chris-anderson, Creative Process, Second-Life, Technology, wired

2 Responses

anon

August 28th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
1

How is Anderson’s comments well-reasoned, when he admits publicly that he commissioned the negative article in response to his company’s own failure in SL? That’s yellow journalism, through and through. The article should have been titled, “Why Wired had a shitty business plan in Second Life”. He’s trying to move the blame off his company and onto the platform. LAME.
Agnes Varnum

August 29th, 2007 at 2:04 am
2

I disagree that reporting on a venture that didn’t turn out as expected should be considered “yellow journalism” automatically just because it was the magazine’s own venture. To me, this reads as turning inside out their own failure and trying to find out if theirs was a common or uncommon experience compared to other companies, who are also saying they aren’t seeing the returns they expected.

I’m certainly open to differing points of view, but I do think it is very important to consider facets rather than simply assuming that all technology is good technology. If you have suggestions for additional reading, please let us know.