I guess coincidence can be pretty coincidental at times*

Posted on by Inara Pey

Trends are interesting things to observe. Sometimes you can learn a lot from them – other times, you can end up looking a complete twit for ever getting involved.

I’m really not sure which way this will go, but I’ll mention it anyway, given I’ve already posted on the SL blogrum.

There has been a lot going on around the subject of SL and RL identities of late – almost all of it initiated by Linden Lab. Vis:

  • Drawing ever closer to Facebook
  • Wallace Linden’s utterly mishandled posting on the subject of aligning rl and online identities
  • Running a Valentine’s day “scavenger hunt” in which the main prize can only be won by those prepared to “out” themselves on Facebook
  • The arrival of Viewer 2.0 with the Profile section rearranged to place rl information right below SL information
  • Running an advertising competition that encourages residents to reveal their rl selves in return for some unspecified prize…

And now, to add to the list, we get Lexie Linden initiating a conversation on residents meeting up in RL (which, at the end of the day, is the most intimate means of linking one’s rl and SL identities).

Leaving aside my astonishment at Lexie initiating a discussion, rather than stomping on one (oh, me bad!), as far as I’m aware, she’s not come anywhere near starting a discussion on anything up until now.

So I can’t help but feel that her choice of subject is not entirely…random, shall we say?

Given the trend demonstrated to date, I cannot help but put “ulterior” and “motive” in the margin alongside Lexie’s thread. After all, if people indicate that, under the right circumstances (such as at events like SLCC, etc.), they’d be prepared to reveal their rl identities, might this not be seen by some in LL as a sign that closer in-world linking of rl and SL selves would be acceptable…?

Or should I simply lay off the cheese late at night?

Unknown's avatar

Published by Inara Pey

Eclectic virtual world blogger with a focus on Second Life, VR, virtual environments and technology.

6 thoughts on “I guess coincidence can be pretty coincidental at times*”

  1. I don’t know what LL thinks they are doing to SL. FB people are not interested in SL. I know, because my little niece is one of them. When I showed her SL she yawned.

    She, like the rest of the kiddies, love some of that Farmville. Its easy and doesn’t require learning a crazy interface in order to look at virtual plants.

    So what happens to all of us when this latest marketing push fails?

    Like

    1. I’m not so sure age is a major factor when comparing FB and SL – I know an awful lot of people in the age range that brackets me (say mid-twenties through mid-forties) who are all FB-ites. However, like your niece, they all tend to yawn where SL is concerned, because – and this is what LL don’t appear ot be grasping – the message doesn’t fit the medium. There is simply nothing within SL that is compelling to the average FBer that they cannot achieve through the tools they already have at their disposal – and wandering around a 3D “immersive” (or not, given Viewer 2.0) world I think begs a single question from the vast majority of FBers: “why?”

      It’s the same story with the SLE product (beta take-up of which I understand has been far less than…ummm…expected) – it is a “product” without a market. All the yap about it offering a “green” solution to cut down the need for business travel is balderdash. And the idea that “SLE will be the go-to solution for easily sharing this secure data in private workspaces. This includes things like company Intranet pages, internal wikis, SharePoint pages, project planning output, and any number of common web-based workgroup mediums”, as promoted by William Linden is so deserving of ridicule.

      So what happens when all these disparate (desparate?) drives for an audience fail?

      I have no idea – but I do like Prok’s prediction from the start of the year that perhaps there will be a buy-out of LL from within. I doubt Philip R has lost sight of either the potential of SL and the potential of its current user base. I also suspect that given his pivotal role within LL and in creating SL, I doubt he’ll stand silently by and watch it die.

      Like

      1. Philip wants us to be his singularity brain.

        I don’t think that is the best case scenario either. Whatever happens, it was a fun ride while it lasted.

        Like

        1. Oh, don’t get me wrong – the whole transhumanism element to PR’s thinking is a “yetch”. I’m aware that he sometimes points to SL as being a possible nascent form of it – but I think he’s also rational enough to realise that SL, by its very nature, will remain divorced from those more fantastical / worrying trends in his thinking.

          Given a choice between the total collapse of SL – which (and I really hate to stand under Ann’s umbrella) at times does seem to be somewhat inevitable – and some form of internal buy-out that at least sees some of the pre-08 “status quo” (warts understood and caveated), I’d rather swing for the latter.

          Like

        1. I think that the idea of LL being bought-out “from within” so to speak makes a lot more sense than all the yabbering about IPOs, etc. From a business perspective, it is hard to see either the platform (inasmuch as the way LL have marketed it) or LL’s own track record as being particularly attractive to a mainstream buyer. It may be hard for some of us to take, but yes – Prok could be pretty accurate in that particular prediction!

          Like

Comments are closed.