Second Rant #9 - Scaling Second Life

Does someone have the link to Zero Linden's office hours?

I agree with Prokofy that it's strange that the Lindens have virtual meeting space (private islands, etc) and yet fly people out to San Francisco for their roundtables and discussions.

Kind of reminds me of an uncle of mine who sold computers for DEC, had the best and lightest HiNote laptop available to him, and yet he used a Mac.

I just added the link, forgot earlier, sorry about that!

http://dizzybanjo.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/scaling-second-life-for-riche...

For a good gander at how these folks in the "open group about open architecture" that is "only about the technology, don't worry" are in fact dealing with huge matters of value and economic import, and are just going ahead and deciding this all for you, look at this wiki on currency:

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Brainstorming#Currency

If someone thought *I* was wearing a tinfoil hat for suggesting the Lindens will be forced to close the LindEx when they open source and scale up, read the casualness with which these tekkies write something like this:

"# Will LL still support L$ in future, or will it be phased out? (perhaps a virtual currency should have no special place in the grid at all - just as there is no special currency on the web ?)
# L$ exists as "a limited license right" within Second Life and therefore only makes sense within the official grid(s) owned by LL."

So, people whose only qualifications is that they are computer programmers are ALREADY deciding to destroy the economy; ALREADY planning for how to gut the currency and the value ALREADY dismissing the content, value, and people on this grid.

And you say...but it's a wiki? Add something? Discuss something? But the harsh and idiotic wiki format means that you cannot post a normal comment. You have to "fit in" with the programmatic style of the wiki, to put in jargonistic "use cases" or list what-ifs, instead of presenting philosophically coherent essays.

No economists, land owners, content producers are involved. Oh, sure, you're welcome to try your hand at diving in now, after the early discussions were already set, after the ingroups already met, after the ridiculous "wiki" is set up where you can *try* to wend your way through all the idiocy to get heard -- but good luck.

This is way, way BARKINGLY worse than I could have imagined, because exactly as I feared -- and worse -- under the guise of "technology" they are talking about EVERYTHING about the way the world works, and figuring that major economic and political decisions like "should the LindEx close or not" are going to be theirs to decide.

Really, the question as some have astutely asked in the comments to Zero Linden's post, is whether any of us should keep financing this expedition.

Linden Lab do need to be careful, if your fears are indeed justified Prokofy, there are alot of very talented visionaries waiting to play host to the society that is currently SL. It wouldnt take too much for a mass migration to start. Personally I still have some faith at least in some individuals at LL.

Here is my recent reply from my blog - the discussion is more relevant here really :

Prokofy Neva: “…substituting the ability for somebody to talk on their cell phone to a static frozen avatar who can’t move because it is all so “thin” doesn’t sound appealing” “Second Life should be for depth of worldness.”

Yes I agree that the greatest strength of the existing “world” of SL is the depth of its connectively, community, creativity and its dynamic economy. However I think this is very similar to alot of discussions about change in social environments ( not only virtual ) it isn’t necessarily or shouldnt be a “new or old” situation.. it should be a “new AND old” situation. I hope it will.

For instance, voice brought a new form of communication to the grid, roleplayers went crazy about how it “will destroy their identity”, but as it pans out we find that those communities still exist and thrive along with voice based communities. “Thinner” browsers ( and possibly servers ) could emerge, more directed at communication and lightweight presence, but could exist with in depth architectures such as the existing LL model. Conversely the grid may form highly rich areas experientially with intensive simulator resourcing possibly being more affordable, allowing a far greater degree of sensory and social immersion than we have experienced so far.

Prokofy Neva: “There is an illusion that the Lindens are “consulting with the community” when they hold these precious little hothouse discussions only on the very technical side of their software and servers, and only with a special few.”

I agree with your and nicks excellent podcast, that as the grid expands, reaching out across multiple companies, all with non existant or emergent trust records, there will be alot of turbulence and restructuring of the existing SL social and economic landscape, some of which will be fundamental. I also agree that discussions both behind closed doors and the more “open” office hours, are heavily weighted towards the technical challenges of what they are proposing.

This is very frustrating for me too, as I am a creative trying to bring something in world which the underlaying architecture of the grid does not currently support - and I spend many hours banging my head against a wall of obsessively “pure” scripting comment. These groups of people, and I include many LL employees, are massively talented individuals - but I often wonder WHY they are doing attempting to do alot of the things they become so feverishly excited about. I expect they would find it very difficult to answer that question in any way other than “because its new.. because we can..”

However “playing with knobs” isn’t always just geekiness for the sake of it - in my case it would be playing with the delivering a different type of sensory experience, which would in itself be part of the social and economic landscape.

There is ALOT of “wow thats a cool idea! its bigger than anything before- lets chase that now..” and a lack of overarching creative vision. However - this may be a symptom of a simple desire to become an purely enabling framework “the second life grid” and just let it “run free”.. and let the chips fall where they may..

I think we have to ask ourselves if the alternative - extensive, world wide collaborative discussion and inclusion from democratically elected representatives from all aspects of the existing SL society is a realistic goal for a company of LL’s type and size, considering the amount of flame ridden, power struggle infested politics associated with any form of resident representation within SL - or much of the web. The SL music dev list clearly illustrates how hard this is to do.

Sadly - without it, much of the original ethos of second life, will be lost. But was that glittering vision of “your world, your imagination..” just a hook to generate the first 10M signups ? Did we all really believe it anyway ? Whilst I know they don’t HAVE to uphold that commitment, I would like to believe it, or at least try to hold on to it, and I genuinely believe alot of people within LL feel the same.

http://dizzybanjo.wordpress.com
http://www.dizzybanjo.com

source code is the way for programmers to bring us under their dictatorship.
What do they value ? Democracy ? Money ? Power ? Social Webs ? Creativity ? They think of themselves as ELITE and UEBER-Hackerz.

I have come to the conclusion that the residents, the users, of SL, are considered as random elements of an endless stream of beta testers. In the end, we as individuals simply do not matter. Someone is building a series of sand castles on a beach; we are the grains of sand.

The fact that a community has emerged out of this pile of technology is a side effect. In fact it's not a single community but a collection of communities united only by the fact that we all use the same technology. If we are really a community, we could be able to effect some results. However, we are simply interested bystanders.

I say "pile of technology" quite deliberately. The technological development of SL has been a headlong rush into unknown territory, exciting for some, frustrating for others. The apparent focus by Linden Labs upon technological aspects, with apparent disregard for the sociological aspects of SL, results in a haphazard assemblage of disparate subsystems (some technological, some sociological) that appear to be glaringly inadequate.

But wait.... perhaps we are trying to focus too closely, and not seeing a bigger picture. Perhaps.... this is just a suggestion, mind you.... perhaps the development of SL is not a traditional endeavor performed by human engineering, wherein much planning is done prior to development, and a organized design process is applied; but instead, the development of SL is deliberately patterned after the model of evolution, in which there is a chaotic, competitive, dog-eat-dog environment in which only the fittest survive, and the outcome after generations appears as if it were designed, when in fact it evolved.

If we take this perspective about SL, then individuals simply do not matter. On the evolutionary scale of things, the individual is insignificant, it is the survival of species that is significant.

The question, then, is: if the development of SL is patterned after an evolutionary model, what are the species that comprise the SL ecosystem?