The Best of Both Phone, and Tablet
March 5, 2007 4:00 AM PST
In 'Second Life,' the ring of revolution?
- Related Stories
-
Behind the Anshe Chung DMCA complaint
January 16, 2007 -
The legal rights to your 'Second Life' avatar
January 5, 2007 -
Democrat politico ventures into 'Second Life'
January 4, 2007
(continued from previous page)
"My sense is that (Second Life radicals) tend to be like college students or people who are politically active in real life, and they want to role-play being on-the-fringe activists and radicals," he theorized. "There are people who role-play being humanoid furry squirrels or robots. This is just another extension of that."
Au has a point. But SLLA representatives are quick to note that the majority of their members are involved in leftist causes in the real world--though they often decline to be more specific.
Solidad Sugarbeet said the SLLA is comprised of people "from all across the left in Second Life and real life, as well as people whose primary concern is avatar rights in Second Life." Another SLLA member, with an avatar by the name of Hythlodaeus Uggla, claims to belong to the former group.
"(The) SLLA is a platform (for) the right to elect and have influence on your world," Hythlodaues Uggla said. "If we criticize that people are allowed to own our virtual world, maybe people will get their eyes opened to the absurdity of people owning our real world."
That said, most think it's a serious stretch to think the poseurs will be joined by real-life menaces. In fact, the bigger concern for some is drawing real-life government interest.
"I think it's very plausible that in the next few years, there's going to be at least some limited government presence, if there's not already," Au said. In 2005, after all, he used his blog to highlight a U.S. Department of Homeland Security experiment in Second Life.
The SLLA scoffs at the terrorist talk.
"Honestly, that's such a red herring," Sugarbeet said. "All political organizations use the Internet, both left and right, extremist and mainstream. Further, concealing one's identity is hardly a new thing on the Internet."
Undoubtedly, the future of grassroots politics in Second Life--both mainstream and fringe--depends on the future of Second Life itself. And that's still a question.
While some are optimistic about the future of the virtual world as a new platform for everything from big media to the boardroom, many critics dismiss Second Life as overhyped at best and a scam at worst.
Grassroots political activism, of course, has found a stable home on Web forums and blogs, and if Second Life manages to continue, it will likely stay there as well--provided that participants can deal with the occasional Super Mario griefing.
As for Second Life's terrorists, the best that can be said is that anyone who uses the avatar name Hythlodaeus (which means "knower of nonsense" in Greek and is the name of a character in Renaissance author Thomas More's Utopia) is at least rather well-read.
"Show me the proof," Galloway said. "Where are the terrorists in Second Life? I think at this point, it's basically vaporware."
See more CNET content tagged:
Second Life, avatar, virtual worlds, revolution, attack
22 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
they realize a key difference between real life and this game?
They can quit second life and not suffer any consequences. They
still have their first life to go back to. That's what the SECOND in
Second Life is there for isn't it?
If they really want to vote, they should vote with their wallets
and action and go find a different game that'll serve their
purpouses better. Or go start their own game. They they can
choose whether or not to let people vote in it. MMOGs are not
democracies, they're dictatorships of those who own and run
them, and who are the players to demand the right to vote in
game?
given to Terrorists or Convicts in prisons to probe there minds it would open the minds of our intelligence organizations and Law enforcement to their fantasy's and how they operate.
If it were my server I would be a bit ticked off.
Even if the only payment accepted is a credit card it is still very difficult to ban someone, and not just the account.
Or is it free....
It's a game, where the players are pawns for ad agencies like
GSD&M to profit from.... get over it. YOU HAVE BEEN HAD.
And yeah, if you're into 'Second Life'... how about working on your
first one?
Sick of it. Remember when you covered the entire industry? The big picture?
Are you a shareholder in second life? No.
You own zero assets, therefore you get to make zero rules.
LL created SL, therefore in your model, LL is god.
Would you start an opposition group against god?
No, you wouldn't. I would though - because i'm hardcore and you are not. I'm coming for you God.
FALSE. Simple fact checking would reveal that the so-called campaign site in Second Life was set up by an Edwards fan and has no ties to the campaign. Its no different then if I put up signs in my front yard.
John Edwards did NOT begin using Second Life as a campaign venue.
But someone at LL may want to take notice that SL is, by virtue of this reporting or ad campaign, whatever fast becoming the poster child for bad behavior of a community in a social network. The rising tenor of a backlash here at CNet is the emerging signal that this publicity blitz is beginning to backfire. Too may claims made here for SL have been shown to be historically inaccurate, too many problems with the technology are being outed as showing it to be unsafe for commerce, and the validity of using what is functionally an entertainment site for serious business applications is being questioned.
The danger is that the hype wears away at the front offices of the companies that LL needs to make a go of this as a profit-center and then the company officials begin to question the investments made by the second-tier managers and innovators in the SL-hosted experiments.
Caveat vendor.