Guest avatars will be hosting in the inworld studio, whilst Robert interviews Philip Rosedale and Tom Hale on a panel in San Jose (RL). Starr Sonic at Treet TV gives some background with Peeling off the onion skin of multi-layered realities in her blog. The event will be on Wednesday at 4pm SLT rather than it’s normal slot and we should have an archive recording up about 24 hours later.

Coincidently, Steve Cropper launches a new series of "Life On-Line" in October in which I will feature. The programme framing will be switching from avatar presentation to live action, with inworld segments from multiple worlds woven into a mixed reality studio setting. My avatar will be reporting from Second Life, although I may be contributing on RL camera to more general discussions also. LOL already has a credible mass of "hits" on the web and the new formatting seems likely to boost that audience further. We feature the show on "Metaverse Week In Review" on Metaworld2 and it will also be on our new news channel at Metaworld3.

All our "Metaworld" stations (and other metaverse livestream channels) are now in one location at Metaworld Broadcasting - a new portal to aggregate video feeds in an easy access format. Let us know you views.

MBC has given us an inworld stream for the best of Metaworld with can be viewed by default at the MetaHub in Chilbo, SL and Metaplace. Metaworld Broadcasting itself can be viewed in the MetaHub in London on the "Twinity" platform.

More news soon. 

You probably know about my channels at Livestream (formerly Mogulus) and the attempt to aggregate metaverse video in a similar way to that with which my twitter feed collects and distributes links to blogs, articles and other text-based items. Sadly, it has suddenly become a victim of it’s own success.

I originally used the Mogulus service back in beta testing days when there were no restrictions and it seems we have been enjoying a period of grace ever since. Metaworld1 (Second World Monitor) has been showcasing the best of Second Life and other virtual platforms, Metaworld2 (Real Virtualities) has been running live shows from both inworld and out together with topical programme imports, whilst Metaworld3 is being built as a virtual news channel. So what’s gone wrong?

It’s a technical issue, but all three channels are owned by me and count as one account, where I have happily been broadcasting, uploading and importing within a 10gb per month limit for storage. I had assumed this "allowance" applied to new material on a per-month basis, to the point where our library ("On Demand") is now approaching 200gb in size.

Livestream have now informed me that 10gb is a constant - ie. a fixed storage limit that I "rent" each month with additional charges for extra space. To maintain this will now cost around $200 per month increasing by around $20 per month each month.

A similar problem applies to bandwidth. It seems we now have too many viewers! Especially those accessing the library rather than the live broadcasts.

So what does this mean?

Well, September 1st is the deadline. This means we have bare days to prune 90% of all the library content, including downloading copies through a very slow (no FTP) interface. In effect, it means the end of the library facility as an archive. Priority is being given to our original programming and the online content will be unlikely to contain anything more than one month old from now on.

We are now hunting for storage space where the video archive can be built as a separate entity. This is done for the love of it with no budget other than time, so the task is not easy. Nor is there any user interface that so far matches to simplicity provided by livestream. The irony is that all this happens when the prospect of getting flash inworld is finally on the horizon.

Meanwhile, keep an eye on our groups - "Metaworld Broadcasting" on Facebook and "MetaHub & Metaworld Broadcasting" on LinkedIn. 

Also join us for "Metaverse Week In Review" on Sunday at Noon SLT where will will obviously be discussing this further along with the latest news.  

The link above leads to my new hub at Netvibes. Slowly building it up to bring you the best inworld material in one place.

Yeterday I was rather distressed to find the "Twit This" button in my browsers had ceased to function. Thre have been glitches before with the service but nothing as long as this. My twitter feed suffered as a result. As backup I now have a new scripting service, but this one does not copy webpage titles, just the urls - so I once more have to paste page titles by hand. It’s slowing things down a touch and also explains why the latest links are less than clear aout where they originate.

A least I am no longer misleading people with the "Reading" prefix when I am often justed "Scanning" LOL.

Don’t forget I am joined by Tara Yeats in the states for the regular TV programme "SL: Week In Review" every Sunday (10am SLT)(6pm UK) on http://operator11.com/shows and expect a forthcoming audio bulletin midweek for the Second Life Podcast Network soon.

Schmilsson Nilsson (above) together with Eureka Dejavu, are passing through London tonight on their way back from the states and have asked me to spread the word about a meetup tonight. As you will see from the link above, Joshua is someone with a highly impressive resume.

The venue is "The Princess" located at 76 Paul Street, London EC2A 4NE, between Old Street and Moorgate underground stations. I’m planning to be there too, so anyone in town should come and join us for what promises to be an interesting Second Life get-together.

There is no such thing as bad publicity - all publicity is good publicity they say! I subscribe to that notion to an extent and the depressing, if cautionary slant, of last night’s BBC report is a case in point. I wonder how many people logged inworld after the programme just to find out more? Maybe we’ll see some statistics that tell - if the then active Linden restarts did not put them off for good.

The documentary certainly raised issues - once again confusing the "augmentation" versus "immersion" debate. At first sight, the perils of online romance could be seen as excessive examples of immersion where escapism from real-life woes is the driving force, but I tend to think it might etter be considered "augmentation" of already existing unhappy lives. Second Life is essentially an extremely powerful evolution in communications mediums and is almost certainly a template for the way of the future. The question may be whether some human beings are emotionally and intellectually stable enough to cope with the implications of that change. Regretfully, I suspect many are not - it will be generations who grow up using virtual space as a natural resource that will define the "norm" for social interaction in such spaces. Today we are simply pioneers - early colonisers of a new plane of existence.

Sad though the programme was, it some ways it was like a documenary on drug addiction. Clearly the problems depicted were those inherant in the personalities of the subjects - not the cause or effect of the the chemistry itself. Second Life is no more responsible for these sorry dramas than any particular drug of choice is responsible for the effects on those who cannot manage their own habits. Addiction is a state of mind - constant immersion is the extreme example, but augmentationists also face the problem too. How much do we "use" what we have at our disposal as opposed to "depend" on it? It is a slippery slope and easy for some to move from one to the other.

Unlike the web, which is an information delivery system, abuse of the grid has the potential to create problems that reach out far beyond the inworld scenarios. People urgently need not so much as to be told about the potential of the metaverse as they need to be educated about the consequences of it. The implications of an international, always available, meeting space are tremendous. Social models, behaviour and relationships will change in a way that will make the like of 60s cultural change seem insignifiant. We will have to adapt - not to the by-product of new social trends, but the reality of a new platform for human expression and interaction.

I woud rather the cautionary tales emerge now than at a point too late to consider them properly. I hope I am aware of the implications of how I now interface with the world today, but dare not assume others are. Metaverse evangelism will, for now, have to remain tainted with a degree of social conscience regarding those ill-equipped to cope with the seriousness of the inter-personal changes it represents.

We have been talking banks. And law. And "Avatar Rights". Prokofy Neva continues on the latter theme today at th above link and it was reading that which put me on a chain of thought.

Once the stuff of science/speculative-fiction, the world (RL) today is increasingly govered by corporate interests, to the extent that major players even buy their way into driving the illusion of democratic process. The effect this has on planetary conditions (both environmental and social) in the RL Sim is another story, but it is a parallel to note in considering the future of the metaverse.

 I have never been to Japan, but have always been intruiged by the notion that corporate "ownership" of people’s lives is exemplified there - a divergant social structure from the traditional models seen elsewhere. Indeed, some decades back I worked temporarily for a major UK utility corporate in their R&D division. Whilst there, the major R&D outposts were all slowly being closed down and moved to a central location that comprised a new "corporate village". Employees had mixed feelings - but it was polarised. Some looked forward to induction to a "corporate enclave" whilst others refused to re-locate and were totally opposed to the concept.  There was little or no ground in-between.

Prokofy, in one paragraph, rightly points out again that Second Life is owned, and thus governed, by a private company. We may be exploring visions of a civic structure for metaversal life, but we continue to do so in a virtual template which can be changed or removed at any point by the "owners". Whilst the surveillance society may be doing its best to thread itself into the worldwide web, it faces the challenges of doing so in a relatively open system. Not so in Second Life. The metaverse is still a closed system merely delivered to us via the internet.

Linden Labs may have made "moves" toward open sourcing the grid technology and "co-operating" with other outside interests, they may even claim to be working toward a nice idealogical vision, but the "lab" is more aptly a "business. It’s not even clear whether they subscribe to the "long tail" theory of modern capitalism, let alone shake off their addiction to US imperialism either by way of policy or attitude. They remain far away form being any kind of metaverse "fit for purpose" and are in danger of losing their lead to other corporates that, at least, take a truely international approach to their affairs.

Like the web before it, the metaverse breaks down communication barriers. Indeed, it almost certainly represents the future evolution of global communication itself. Immersionism, augmentalism and experimentalism aside, it is the combination of avatars and simulations together as a communications medium that is the bedrock of all metaverse development. Winners in any race to pioneer this new space will be those who best facilitate that potential and also do so in the awareness that they are creating a foundation for the future of internationalism.

The web changed the way we access information forever. The "grid" of a future metaverse will do the same for the way we interact and collaborate. It will need the basis of a civic/civil infrastructure that takes into account the residents of the (RL) global village and allows them democratic freedom to decide on governance. The metaverse must not be ruled purely by corporate interest, let alone one prostituted to national interests.

I have no time to wax lyrical myself here on the aforementioned "long tail" approach, but suffice to say modern economics allow for the idea that technology can be "bequeathed" to the people for free on the basis that the instigators can continue to benefit by focusing on the capitalisation of a macroscopic portion of what they have created. It is a lesson the Lindens need to learn and they could start by abdicating governance of the virtual world to democratic process by it’s international residents.

That is a template that would put Second Life further ahead in the race to build an international grid, possibly eclipsing what their increasing range of competitors are working on. The Lindens are already well placed to develop tools, rent virtual propertie and provide inworld services - for the grid itself they should become benefactors. Ultimately, their "market" would then extend beyond the world of their original design.

Of course, democratic governance is a minefield of it’s own - traditionally evolved from experience and consequence. The metaverse needs to transcend real-life models to accomodate a very new space. But better now than later. It’s also somehing that needs to be addressed more at the Internet Governance Forums who frequently seem to think everything is still anchored or built on top of HTML. Big mistake! 

In his newly-fashioned role as online investigator he pointed out that there are a number of other wikis and other sources which tell more about the history of Linden Labs than their public sites care to cover. There’s a lot of food for thought, but these are the main points he raised with me.

It seems a group called "Reality Prime" are more responsible for Second Life technology than Lindens ever publicise. It may also be the case that a number of long-time industry stalewarts have financial holdings that will be influencing Philip Linden’s future decisions more than is realised and that the cross-connections with other major corporations may be substantial. There may also be far more to Corey’s recent departure than meets the eye.

Check out the link below and you will see some indication of what JeanRicard has been looking into. As an industry veteran of some decades standing, one can assume he is onto something. Use the less-than-obvious links to find out more.

Architecture +: Investigative Blog Reporting - Cory Out new CEO 2008 in?:
 

]]> http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/12/18/forgotten-histories/feed/ http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/12/18/embedded-browser/ http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/12/18/embedded-browser/#comments Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:28:33 +0000 Administrator Uncategorized http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/12/18/embedded-browser/

Nice picture, but it has me puzzled. Any ideas?

]]> http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/12/18/embedded-browser/feed/ http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/11/20/toolbox/ http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/11/20/toolbox/#comments Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:50:20 +0000 Administrator Uncategorized http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/11/20/toolbox/ Resources for Second Life

 A great roundup from Mashable on various tools and resources for inworlders. Check it out.

]]> http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/11/20/toolbox/feed/ http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/10/30/scare-stories-telling-tales/ http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/10/30/scare-stories-telling-tales/#comments Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:13:16 +0000 Administrator Uncategorized http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/10/30/scare-stories-telling-tales/ Paedophiles Operating in Second Life

Oh - I hate this stuff. Both ways you care to look at it.

Were that the world be without these brain-warped people, since it is distressing to think they live amongst is - whether in the real or virtual world. Were too that we were not subjected to the likes of Murdock media that will sensationalise the trivial for the sake of market penetration and political favours. This is a story to rightly stir our emotions whilst giving creedence to a highly suspect campaign by government to continue their mass-surveillance agenda under the disguise of public interest. They have done before with the web and clearly don’t want to get left behind again - so they use the same ruse for the metaverse. It strikes a deeper chord than abstract threats like "terrorism" or the business of afterlife propaganda that is the lifeblood of organised religious interests.

But check out the link. "The Business" seem to have grasped the importance of virtual worlds and their commentary in providing their own link to Sky News at least offers some moderation. The fact is it is rare indeed for children to get into the adult grid of Second Life and almost impossible for any adult to get into what they call the "teen grid". For better or worse. The extraordinary coder, 15 year old Katherine berry, has become dejected with her world - one of the main reasons being that this highly intelligent "child" cannot enter the serious realm occupied by what are, to all extents and purposes, her peers. I have reservations about the behaviour of some adults in Second Life - I have little interest in "gaming" anyway, but some of the role-play enters the realm of absurdity. Yet then again, a non-creative person might apply similar criticism to some of the wonderful art installations and pioneering architecture found inworld. Each to their own.

I am all for a little policing - something democratically structured by and for the residents of the metaverse. They are the pioneers of what in effect will be a new kind of society with immensely powerful communication facilities and a non-circumscribed agenda. I believe the majority of people are good and will always see sense, regardless of whatever extent they use this virgin territory to play out their own fantasies. It is electronic life and need not be encumbered with the more nonesensical traditions and regressive bias of the real world. It augments reality and also offers a greater or lesser degree of immersion according to personal taste and circumstance. It is a work environment but also a leisure playground - were it not for the continuing task of supporting our organics it could almost be "another" life.

At the same time it can be sadly reflective of real world life. If the two grids ever merge then addressing the co-existence of adults and children will need to be addressed. So too if we see the linkage of Second Life with other present and future metaverses. But this is hardly an epic notion - they have existed side-by-side since the dawn of the human race and would seem to be the natural order of things. Of more immediate concern should be the realisation among adults that each and every avatar is representative of a real person and as such should be no more abused inworld than out. People will argue and may be forced to "agree to differ" as the saying goes - but that is half the fun and value of what is a highly social space.

I will mention no names, but two inworld personalities I like a lot have recently fallen out. They used to be a good mix - both following different agendas, but meeting and discussing on common ground. But then it all seems to have become uncomfortably serious - instead of "agreeing to differ" their separate agendas have become a barrier to discussion - a wall between them if you will. I don’t like to see it, but maybe it is symptomatic of how powerful this medium has become that it all too eaily reflects the kind of inter-personal conflicts which plague real life. Yet this need not be the case.

One extraordinary facet of Second Life is the general lack of any real predjudice amongst its inhabitants. People express themselves however they want - in both appearance and their articulation of themselves. However bizarre by real life standards, it does not seem to be the perceptual barrier that aspects of oneself create in reality. Even where behaviour seems contary to accepted notions of intelligence and conduct, it is often tolerated (even accepted) on the unstated understanding that we may be missing clues about that person that would in the real world be apparant. Instead we take them at face value and our new society is better for that. The image we create for ourselves means a lot, but most of us know better to assume what we see is the heart and soul behind the avatar. Despite incredibly powerful tools, we are still learning to communicate in any entirely new way and must make allowances for that.

If friends fall out over what is mere trivia in this world, it makes me worry about what is in store as virtuality rapidly expands and embraces the mainstream. The future will see all sorts of new invasions - some welcome and some less so. As the population increases, it will largely because we can demonstrate the metaverse is a compelling evolution of human-to-human interfacing, not just a digital one. It is almost our responsibility as those already living and working inworld that we adopt a fair and equal attitude to others. We will be the example - the foundation on which future online society is based.

It is no time for petty squabbles. It is a time to prove our collective ability to make the metaverse a peaceful and welcoming place in which the scare stories of the technologically-retarded can be buried in the archive of nonesense.

]]> http://malburns.blogsome.com/2007/10/30/scare-stories-telling-tales/feed/