The Tradeoffs of Second Life

The reading assignment about Second Life is unusual because of the views expressed in the reading. The first time through the reading I started to think that Second Life was great because of all the opportunities presented to the players. I then quickly realized this was because the article did not discuss any of the negatives or drawbacks. The article was very biased in this sense, because it did not even bother to employ the “they say, I say” form of argument. I can think of many scenarios when this game can be good for a person, but I can also imagine many more that the person becomes worse off as a result. An example of how this game can be used for benefit would be someone that deals with discrimination or cruelty on an everyday basis. They may be disabled and unable to do the things that others take for granted. When they log into Second Life they are free to do all those things and are just the same as everyone else, which is what they want. They can achieve a sense of acceptance in this game when in real life they do not always have that opportunity because of their physical or mental disability. That good example can be outweighed by many negative examples; specifically how a person basically destroys the potential they have by obsessing with this game. They lose control of their ability to improve themselves, by choice, and this is unfortunate because this causes them to disconnect from reality. This game can be good for certain individuals, but it is much worse for a larger group of individuals because of all they lose by becoming overwhelmed with this game.

Alter Ego

The character that I will be writing on is the one created by Lui Da that exists in World of Warcraft. This is because I find this person very interesting, in terms of his entire outlook in life. It may not be fair to judge him based off of only two paragraphs in this book, but his statements are strong and very telling of the impact that virtual worlds have on a person in their real life. He basically says that this virtual reality is his life because it takes up most of his time and he has no other hobbies. His only care in life is this game, so much so that he does not even bother to think about the future or care about it. This relates to the concept of freedom as growth because he is unable to grow as a person in this situation. He is trapped in this virtual way of thinking, by choice, and cannot improve himself as a person in this scenario. He does not make much money and will not if he continues this trend. This is why I think that people obsessed with this mindset are pathetic to a certain extent; because they waste any actual talents they have. This person may be really smart or talented at something that could be actually useful, but he does not care because this computer game takes precedence to everything. He is not free to grow as an individual by choice and this is an unfortunate situation. There may be benefits to playing a game like this, but the negatives are so severe that they outweigh any possible positives. Enjoyment with a computer game or virtual reality is one thing, but obsession is another that destroys any actual potential that a person can offer to society. He realizes the fact that thinking is not necessary in this game or actual lifestyle, but he chooses to accept and embrace this mindset, which is sad.

Privacy in Advertising

The article describing the ideas behind RealAge is interesting, but not unique because many companies are doing the same thing in order to create money. Money drives all of these decisions and often times this crosses over into a person’s desire for privacy. The idea is that a person’s confidential information is being exploited by companies that want to sell them products that should appeal to them. They would be appealing because the confidential information is analyzed to determine an appropriate marketing technique. I have a personal interest in this idea of advertising and marketing because I know how a television company views this scenario. They have the idea of using information about a customer’s preference of channels and convert that information into advertisements that they would most likely respond favorably to. This initially seems like a good idea, but the concept of privacy is infringed upon because the television company is using their potentially sensitive information as a means to generate more money from them. The company recognizes this dilemma and that is why they are still determining the appropriate course of action, but there is little doubt that this form of advertising will appear in the near future in some capacity. There is too much money to make for these companies not to explore these opportunities, not to mention the fact that competition will drive companies to out perform the other. If one company is content with resting on their morals and ethics they are going to miss out on profit margins and may be forced to shutdown as a result. This dog eat dog mentality explains almost every business decision and explains why all of them tend to test the limits of what is acceptable and appropriate.

Alter Ego

I have been reading Alter Ego for a while now.  As mentioned in the assignment turned in, I have read a little at a time throughout the semester.  There are a few things that come to mind when I am reading these individually unique situation.  When someone is handicapped physically but not mentally, I really think that this is a perfect escape for them.  I hate that our society is like this, but is a guy really going to like it if a girl in a wheelchair comes up to them at bar and wants to buy him a drink?  Or is a girl really going to like it if a disabled guy does this?  The brutal truth is, probably not.  This is extremely unfortunate and, to be honest, it is very unfair and makes me upset that this is how humans work in this world.  Moreover, it is what it is.  If a physically handicapped person wants to live his or her life almost completely online, then I have no problem with it at all.  One the other hand, if someone who is a very normal physical human being, being addicted to these games could really hinder them from other experiences that the world has to offer.   Human interaction is a huge part of life, and the more comfortable you are with it, the easier life becomes.  If one of these gamers doesn’t open themselves up to the life that the offline world has for them, then many opportunities could be missed.

Cyber relationships

I was very intrigued by the conversation we had in class the other day that broached the question, "If you walked in on our significant other having "avatar sex" with another avatar, would you consider that cheating?" My first reaction was no, that would not constitute as cheating because it's not a real sexual interaction - a sexual encounter between two virtual characters in a virtual world would be virtual sex, thus not real. With more thought, though, I began to think differently. If my significant other was having a relationship with another avatar in second life, that would signify to me that they were unsatisfied with the relationship they were currently in and thus turning elsewhere to satisfy a desire. Though it is in a virtual world, it is the same as if they were to turn to another person and have a real affair with them. Whether or not there is an actual physical connection, the intent of turning to someone else to fulfill a desire that is not being satiated in the real world relationship constitutes as cheating. Consequently, I also believe that "dating," someone in second life is also a form of cheating because again, it is forming a relationship with someone else. Even though it may seem removed because the avatar creatures do not look like real humans, there is always a person behind every avatar. Some equate virtual sex with watching pornography, believing that both are not forms of cheating, but I also disagree with this statement because of the fact that there is a person behind the other avatar, whereas pornography is just a film. This leads me to believe that people playing second life need to be very careful not to blur the lines of what is real and what is virtual, because your actions in second life can impact your real life.

Avaitars and self-determination

Reading "Alter Ego" was an eye-opening experience for me, and ultimately contradicted some of the preconceived notions that I had about avatars and virtual worlds. While I still think that people need to remember that it is a game and not reality, I found that creating an avatar and playing second life can create a sense of freedom and self-determination in those who do not, and possibly can not, experience such freedom in the "real" world. For Jason Rowe, a man with severe physical disabilities that renders him unable to live an active life, the creation of an avatar allows him to do outrageous things like “ride an Imperial speeder bike [or] fight monsters,” but also to do the things that many take for granted, like “hang out with friends at a bar” (Cooper). His avatar not only gives him physical freedom and independence from his disability, but also gives him the freedom to get to know people, and for them to get to know him, without his looks dictating the direction of the relationship. As Rurouni Kenshin, he has control and does not have to let the judgments of others, nor his disability, determine his life. Similarly, Young Ki-Jang has greater freedom in his life as his avatar, Knight Lummis. When he assumes the life of his online character, he is in control of his destiny – “the path forward is up to [him]” (Cooper). He is not held back by his socioeconomic background or his education or the status of his parents, but rather is at the steering wheel of a life he created. The freedom that Young Ki-Jang experiences when playing with his avatar truly embodies that of self-determination – if he works hard and plays well, he will undoubtedly succeed, something that is not guaranteed in the “real world.” Online living grants him complete freedom from constraints that hold him back in the real world.

Thou Shall Not Cheat

This has a very different meaning in our society where the lines between virtual and reality are screwed. The article “Is a virtual affair real-world infidelity?” brought about an intriguing class debate about cyber sex. I agree with most of the class that this kinky virtual sex is weird. I personally can not understand how a person would consider this entertainment but this isn’t a debate about hobbies. The issue involves the reaction to cyber sex. If your spouse was engaging in cyber sex, how would that make you feel? First, I would think my significant other was very strange and I would probably have to reconsider the relationship. Regarding the issue of cheating, I would say yes. It is cheating if this cyber sex enthusiast is engaging in real intimate, sexual, personal, and emotional feelings with someone else. Engaging in any exchange of intimate and romantic feelings with someone other than your significant other is cheating. You are betraying the trust of your loved one. If anything, this type of engagement should show they cyber sex enthusiast that the person they are with is not fulfilling their needs thus they should terminate the relationship. I would normally agree that the virtual world is not a real place but if these interactions are actually producing real emotions then one must consider the effects of the virtual relationships in the real world. In conclusion, I do not consider the virtual world as reality. Those who do engage in the virtual in ways that induce intense emotions are, I hope, in a rare bred. When cyber sex is inducing romantic emotions it is cheating, plain and simple. An individual must decide whether this characteristic in a person is something they can tolerate.

The Fear of False Identity

One aspect that I have noticed about society is the fear of false identity. In the 19th century, there existed a fear of false identity (I am taking a English course called 19th Century Crime Literature). This was due to the fact that there was not a way to identify a person unless you knew them. Identification cards and social security numbers did not exist. This also had economic issues. Checks were written on the basis of the notoriety of the person or the person’s name. Now, we have identification cards, social security numbers, passports, authorizations, background checks etc. to differentiate people from each other. We have secured many ways of our lives from locks on our doors to bank accounts. Identity theft is a crime that many have been prosecuted for. I find that people are uncomfortable for virtual world interactions because the identity of a person can be altered. I, Kristina Griffin, 22 year old female from San Diego, CA can easily become Jerry Mathias 64 year old male from Columbus, OH. As in the 19th Century, people are uncomfortable with the unknown identities of people. This is why I believe people are afraid of virtual tools like SecondLife but not afraid of Facebook. In SecondLife, profiles can be completely fabricated. Facebook profiles are supposed to an accurate representation of the users. In class discussions, many have assumed those participating in virtual worlds such as SecondLife are freaks. In some instances, I would agree but definitely not in all. I believe the root cause for this resistance is society’s fear of false identities.

Freedom in the Virtual World

The discussions regarding the avatars in Alter Ego had a common thread of freedom. Remember, however, that positive freedom and negative freedom do exist. Freedom, as means of freedom of constraints, is understood in these situations. Online characters and avatars allow the owners to pursue anything that is possible in the virtual world. These actions include cyber sex, flying, interacting, and creating. These actions may not be possible for people in the real world. As it was said in class, the virtual would is makes things possible for the disabled in the real world. Those who are physically disabled in the real world are able to fly in the virtual. Those who have social disability can achieve equality in the virtual world. Does the virtual world provide a freedom as growth? The video shown about how many hours a day can be spent playing these games online may disprove freedom as growth. If this interaction with these games hinders this person’s interactions in the real world then freedom as growth is not achieved. However, some gamers are using these games in a way that can be freedom as growth. Lucy Winkett, a precentor, uses her avatar to spread the word of God. This is means, in a free culture, of distribution. Does freedom exist in the virtual world? Yes, its does and gamers have reaped the benefits of the freedom. Too much of a good thing can become a problem. Extreme cases should not generalize for the group. Freedom in the virtual world is possible and should be seen as positive for those who engage in it safely.

Freedom in the Virtual World

The discussions regarding the avatars in Alter Ego had a common thread of freedom. Remember, however, that positive freedom and negative freedom do exist. Freedom, as means of freedom of constraints, is understood in these situations. Online characters and avatars allow the owners to pursue anything that is possible in the virtual world. These actions include cyber sex, flying, interacting, and creating. These actions may not be possible for people in the real world. As it was said in class, the virtual would is makes things possible for the disabled in the real world. Those who are physically disabled in the real world are able to fly in the virtual. Those who have social disability can achieve equality in the virtual world. Does the virtual world provide a freedom as growth? The video shown about how many hours a day can be spent playing these games online may disprove freedom as growth. If this interaction with these games hinders this person’s interactions in the real world then freedom as growth is not achieved. However, some gamers are using these games in a way that can be freedom as growth. Lucy Winkett, a precentor, uses her avatar to spread the word of God. This is means, in a free culture, of distribution. Does freedom exist in the virtual world? Yes, its does and gamers have reaped the benefits of the freedom. Too much of a good thing can become a problem. Extreme cases should not generalize for the group. Freedom in the virtual world is possible and should be seen as positive for those who engage in it safely.

Freedom in the Virtual World

The discussions regarding the avatars in Alter Ego had a common thread of freedom. Remember, however, that positive freedom and negative freedom do exist. Freedom, as means of freedom of constraints, is understood in these situations. Online characters and avatars allow the owners to pursue anything that is possible in the virtual world. These actions include cyber sex, flying, interacting, and creating. These actions may not be possible for people in the real world. As it was said in class, the virtual would is makes things possible for the disabled in the real world. Those who are physically disabled in the real world are able to fly in the virtual. Those who have social disability can achieve equality in the virtual world. Does the virtual world provide a freedom as growth? The video shown about how many hours a day can be spent playing these games online may disprove freedom as growth. If this interaction with these games hinders this person’s interactions in the real world then freedom as growth is not achieved. However, some gamers are using these games in a way that can be freedom as growth. Lucy Winkett, a precentor, uses her avatar to spread the word of God. This is means, in a free culture, of distribution. Does freedom exist in the virtual world? Yes, its does and gamers have reaped the benefits of the freedom. Too much of a good thing can become a problem. Extreme cases should not generalize for the group. Freedom in the virtual world is possible and should be seen as positive for those who engage in it safely.

Consumer Panopticon

In one of the readings we did for Hull, he talked about this idea of target advertising. The idea is that companies could watch what you buy and target you by sending you mail and advertisements for upcoming sales. This idea seems great but it has its disadvantages. First off I like the idea of a company getting involved with an interested costumer. Through this companies could see who is interested in their products and target those individuals. Everyone knows how annoying it can become when you get mail and junk from companies and stores that you have no interest in. So here the main customers would have the advantage in what the store or company was trying to sell. The disadvantage is the main idea of privacy. I myself wouldn’t want someone looking over my back looking at everything I buy, not that I have anything to hide with my purchases. But it’s just this idea of having privacy and buying what you want, when you want. If I buy a couple of things from one company, it doesn’t mean that I want to be on their most frequent shoppers list. People just want the freedom to buy what they want when they want or need it. If this idea of target advertising could be revised I would much rather consider it, but it just seems like all the privacy that exists is thrown out and companies are choosing what to buy for you.

LARP vs. Virtual World

Today we talked about two different ideas of becoming other than yourself. The first kind we talked was called LARP. This stands for live action role play. The other idea was the virtual world which includes computer games such as World of World craft and Second Life. The many difference between the two ideas of becoming somebody else is physical interaction. In Larping people get together and create clans and kingdoms that they defend against another group. They get together on weekdays and weekends to practice and assign roles for the battle that is ahead in the future. But not only do they concentrate on the game but they built friendships and relationships that are real. In the virtual world you don’t get this interaction. You get a virtual character and you can battle or meet other people’s virtual characters. And most people create a character that is nothing like themselves, so are you really “meeting” people in the virtual world? Or are you meeting this person that really doesn’t exist? It seems like from our readings that people use this to make up a fantasy and to escape the reality of life. On the other side, yes, people are becoming something else, but you’re getting to interact in the real world which makes the situation so much more different. It seems so much healthier to be outside meeting others through a common interest, instead of sitting inside and meeting fake and virtual people 50 hours out of the week.

Jason Rowe

One of the saddest stories to me is the creator of the avatar Rurouni Kenshin. Jason Rowe is a disabled, and feels that he has to socialize through a virtual world called Star Wars Galaxies. One of the reasons he enjoys playing is because people see him for who he is and not what he looks like, “The internet eliminates how you look in real life, so you get to know a person by their mind and personality.” He has this idea that people wouldn’t like him for who he is if he were out in the real world trying to make friends. He spends an average of 80 hours a week playing as his avatar in this virtual world. Some people might find his disability an excuse for him to play, but for some reason I just don’t see the point. I understand that a lot of people would judge him for what he looks like, but why not give it a shot and try to meet someone face to face. I find it unhealthy that he keeps himself locked up inside playing in this fantasy world. Yes, he is getting to live a life that he wouldn’t get to live, but it’s not real. So the question is what is the reward? I feel that the virtual has no meaning and is a meaningless black hole that sucks people’s life away. The virtual world just seems to be a place for people to escape to, because they can’t deal with the reality of life.

Privacy and Advertisements

I would like to discuss the way in which I believe that some forms of technology have so completely invaded our privacy that in the process, they have taken away our freedom. The type of technology that I am mostly referring to is the billboards that can determine what kinds of products you are interested in and then advertise them to you by speaking in your head. As crazy as it seems, technology has allowed a billboard, a seemingly inanimate object, to read someone's mind and then speak to them in a way that no one else can hear. Though this can be viewed by some as the "next generation of advertising," to me it is just a horrible invasion of privacy and one that threatens our freedom. There are so many ways these days in which our freedom is limited in the name of national security or protection in some form, all of which I completely support - but to invade someone's personal thoughts in the name of advertising is the Consumer Panopticon gone too far. There are times where our privacy has to be invaded in the name of a bigger good, but this is not one of those situations. Our minds are the only place in which we have ultimate privacy and the ability to think whatever we want without the opinions or judgments of others, and these thoughts should not be invaded and then used to the advantage of someone else. While talking about Lessig in class, we discussed the question, "Are we free only insofar as the technology that exists is imperfect enough that we don't have to worry about people observing us all the time?" If this is what freedom is, then not only has our privacy been taken from us, but also our freedom.

The topic of freedom in the workplace could be argued fairly easily when considering solely the United States.  The topic and discussion gets more heated when other countries are brought into the equation. As Gretchen mention in one of her blogs, some of the practices that we witnessed during the video in class are shocking.  Realistically, work in the United States is also monitored fairly closely by managers so that the output is what is expected and output meets the initial plan that is drawn out.  On the other hand, there isn’t much comparison to the level of monitoring between the United States workplace and the Jamaica workplace that was discussed in a video that was shown during class.  The work practices that were being exercised in Jamaica were much worse than anything I’ve ever experienced or witnessed here in the United States.  Not being able to take a break for a second after doing excessive repetitive work would almost be similar to torture.  You have a set of eyes on you at all times, and if you were to mess up, there are consequences.  This is extremely unfortunate that companies such as Tommy Hilfiger and Brooks Brothers have dropped to this level of inhumanity in order to produce cheap goods for the American consume and make as much profit off of the shirts as possible.

I really wanted to take this blogging opportunity to agree with Kristina Griffin on one of her posting.  Is is remarkable how much I agree with her on this subject, considering that Kristina and I usually have disagreements are many political topics.  What Kristina is essentially saying is that inequality is a necessary evil.  Obviously, no one like to be on the short end of the stick, but that is just how the business world works.  There is a need for a separation of power in the workplace.  There are many people that are great workers, but really need that extra motivation of a boss giving them pressure for them to produce the appropriate quantity and quality that is expected of them.  If there wasn’t inequality in the workplace, there wouldn’t be any incentive for one to work hard and stand out from the rest of the crowd.  When there is inequality, the workers that have a great work ethic that represents a good example for the peers around them could eventually lead to them getting promoted.  This is the approach to business that makes the world go around.  This is why business are efficient and why they make profit.  Kristina also asks why should a CEO get paid just as much as a low skilled worker?  Believe it or not, CEO have a lot to sacrifice to get the large pay that they usually bring in every year.  Many times they have to neglect their family and concentrate on business problems during non-working hours.  Take for example an NBA player.  NBA players make a great deal of money every year, but there are also many things they have to give that many normal workers don’t have to.  One of those if family time.  For a large portion of the year they are on the road.  The children that they have with their wives have to be raised ultimately by a single mother for over half of the year.  This is a large price to pay, hence the large salaries that they are rewarded with.  In conclusion, inequality in the workplace is very necessary for the business (sports is a business also!)world.

I wanted to actually post two documents concerning the topic of freedom.  As mentioned in the other posting, many people continue to question the freedom of the workers in the fast food industry.  I wanted to approach the discussion from a different angle and further explain my side of the argument.   Over the summer in between my sophomore and junior year at Vanderbilt, I worked construction for a marble and granite company that had a job locally here in Nashville.  Most of this company is composed of people without much of an education but are given the opportunity to improve their pay over the years.  I worked throughout the whole summer and was paid twelve dollars an hour.  This was the starting pay.  In other words, right off the bad, I was making more than most of the people that work at McDonalds.  After working for many weeks, I became aware of the entire process and lifestyle of a construction worker.  First of all, people who are working construction take a great deal of pride in their work.  When a job takes a lot of hard work and eventually becomes complete, the sense of accomplishment is very noticeable with every worker.  Even though the job gets tiring, the older guys never complain and legitimately enjoy what they are doing.  Moreover, the pay doesn’t stay at twelve dollars an hour for very long.  After years of work and a good deal of experience that is gained, the pay rate eventually moves up to twenty dollars and hour.  When the pay rate is twenty dollars and hour, they have to opportunity to work many overtime hours which pay thirty dollars an hour.  This is a respectable pay rate that can provide oneself much easier than the pay rate of a fast food restaurant employee.   Moreover, if one proves themselves and stands out as a hard worker, they could eventually become a foreman, making even more money.  All in all, this is an easy career path to approach so that you wouldn’t have to work in the fast food business.  There is a choice, and, in my opinion, it is ignorant to say that they don’t have freedom.

There are many things that I consider when I think about the people at fast food restaurants.  One must obviously consider if they had choices earlier in their life to set themselves apart from others so that the fast food business didn’t turn into the only way to feed and shelter.  To be honest, I have a hard time believing that these people cannot separate themselves if they really wanted to.  Let’s take the state of Texas for example.  If one graduates in the top ten percent from their graduating class, they are automatically accepted into any Texas school of their choice.  What this mean is that you essentially don’t even have to take the SAT or ACT, you just have to excel in your classes during high school.  Everyone in Texas has this opportunity.  It doesn’t matter if you are absolutely awful at standardized testing such as the SAT or ACT, as long as you did what you need to do during the high school years to stand out (graduate in the top ten percent of the class).   Moreover, let’s take the state of Georgia for example.  Georgia has a program called HOPE of which you qualify for if your high school average is a B.  If you get into a public college in Georgia, they will pay for your entire undergraduate education as long as you keep a 3.0 GPA.  This is an incredible deal.  Georgia Tech is a top 3 engineering program in the nation, and one could get this for free if they put in enough hard work.  Who is this system leaving out?  Truth is, virtually no one.  Many have approached me after I have informed them of my opinion on this matter, and the first thing that is usually brought up is the fact that many young kids are forced to drop out of school and support their family.  Once this person is old enough, he or she could could simply realize that they can leave and get a GED.  Once the GED is obtained, it is now possible to go to a community college, of which one can take out loans.  If the student does well enough in the community college, then transferring to a larger and more well known college is very possible.  This is a feasible route for essentially all Americans.

Free choice

One of the most confusing questions to think about is do people really have free choice? According to the discussion raised in class it seems that people have very limited choice when it comes to this idea of freedom. After the discussion on Thursday I find that choice is more based on the situation. For example, if someone asks someone to pick between different ideas they present then in a sense this is forced choice. To person picking between these ideas has what I like to call limited choice. They can only choose between what the other person presents to them, so, in a sense, they are being forced to choose what they want. But with if the person likes the majority or all the choices presented. Some people would find this to be free choice because they are choosing what they want, but in the same sense they are still being limited on what they choose so I find all of this to be forced choice. The only way someone has free choice is if they actually pick out what they want. No outside interference can influence their decision, or then it directly becomes forced choice. So going back to my last post, The System of Freedom, I find all the workers in the third world countries to be in the situation of forced choice. Yes they have the free choice of whether or not to work, but life controls their choice because if they choose not to work then they will starve and not be able to support their families. But the idea of free choice almost seems very vague because it seems that most of the choices we make in life are influenced by something in life, whether it is money, status, convenience, or even happiness.