CTO Blog

Hi Andy, why not have one writer of the CTO-blog react to the other? Besides that, given the impressive number of comments on any 'SL-related' item, I just wanted to make sure I'm the first one, this time.

Toyota's SCION approach actually is a good example of what I called 'the long snout' in my previous post: it might take quite some time (years?) before the actual sell takes place. Not sure though if the community that is interesting for this typically will be on SL. People that love to drive cars probably like First Life much more...

I.M.H.O. SL lacks one thing crucial for any economy, limits to recources. Limits, define value. Therefor SL lacks value on the long run. And consider this Linden Lab should be considered the federal bank. Do they value the same morality?

I feel it is important not to confuse the "micro-economy" of SL with the "macro-economy" or RL companies in SL.

The latter are not there to make L$, but for a whole raft of other reasons.

SL has huge value - even if the L$ doesn't!

Is Capgemini going to consider maintaining a presence within Second Life? My client GM also has a presence - a Pontiac car dealership, plus runs meetings, presentations and even training for their systems development methodology via SL. What's the Capgemini use of SL value proposition?

i have had some off blog discussions with my colleague Ron Tolido about the areas where we don't share the same opinions. we have decided that we will make some of the comments public and that in the best traditions of Blogging the differences in our opinions will be of interest.

In answer to the question on Capgemini presence on SL, well its in hand and we have been looking at what would we do and for what purpose for some months. we are reluctant to just be there for the sake of it so have been working on what we can do that is different and adds value.

expect to see this move mid summer!!

I think your examples show how SL is being used in a number of different ways by different communities. There is what I would call "hobbyist" use - the people who use SL as a fantasy world, who trade in artefacts and scripts and play with the SL Currency of L$
Then there are "commercial" users - organisations who are experimenting with SL to see what can be achieved with a 3D environment. Examples include IBM, PA, & Toyota.
Finally there are the "educational and not-for-profit" organisations who are making innovative use of SL to spread information and ideas.
The "hobbyist" community is the biggest block to organisations like Capgemini having a presence in SL (after all, why should the company fund an MMOG - where the key letter is G for GAME). On the other hand, forward thinking companies need to have a presence in environments like SL to learn from the innovation of the "educators and nfp's" and not to be left behind by companies such as PA and IBM who are making good use of SL to understand the capabilities (and limitations) of a 3D environment.

Dave and Martijn,

Companies have a huge incentive in using SL as (if not a market then) an interface for achieving their ends and cutting on costs. A large amount of money is spent by all companies on advertising (especially TV ads as well as the rising prices of internet ads) and SL can provide a relatively cheap alternative. Furthermore, companies like IBM (perhaps not Toyota), can augment their internet sites by establishing product-specific marketplaces. Imagine, for example, an HP building where you can go in, look at a series of products (computers, laptops, printers etc.) in 3D (to scale, and rotatable), read about them and order them from within SL. Likewise, someone could create an ebay type of building where virtual characters can purchase real world goods (either in L$ or in $). Although I believe it would be to the advantage of SL to allow these transactions, alternatively the companies can create in-world links that minimize SL and pull up a window that has the product and checkout already selected. SL's incentive to introduce $ could come in the form of a percentage taken off of all sales (like amazon, ebay etc.) or advertising being done by real-world companies: on their websites, HP could, for example, create a link to SL saying that someone could purchase their products from within SL.

Basically, the idea here is that SL would receive a huge economic boost if it introduced intraSL internet access: the ability to surf the web, essentially in 3D... At least with respect to internet vendors. This could easily be extended to other industries i.e. clothing: can have an actual picture of the item, a 3D model and a model of what it looks like on a person; something that I feel would be a vast improvement to current online clothing vendors.

I think that introduction of real-world(RW) products solves Martijn's limitation problem. However, it could be solved in another way without appealing to RW: the idea is that since all products in SL are virtual, an unlimited amount of resources and therefore products exists (unlimited supply). However, "code" can be treated as a raw material. In that sense, it allows for the formation of "code-artisan" class: a group of coders/artists that create products that are difficult to reproduce.(Perhaps some sort of painting that can be hung in a house that is a graphic representation of a fractal (can be very pretty).)

It is essential to remember that these "hobbyists" are still people who function in a real-world economy. Their demands can therefore be manipulated by affected virtual supply or else bringing RW demand into SL.

In response to George's observations: I agree that it would be good to be able to model an RL object in SL, and have a link through to a web page (or whatever) to affect a purchase. There is quite a bit of pressure on Linden Labs to create a web interface within SL. Other companies are developing interfaces to RL systems (e.g. Amazon). The development of 3D concepts is exactly that the likes of IBM and PA are working on and prototyping within SL.

It is worth recognising, though, that RL companies are still "playing" with the concepts of 3D, and are learning its capabilities. SL is currently providing an off the shelf prototyping environment. There is a feeling that "whilst 3D environments will be pervasive within a few years, the predominant environment is not necessarily going to be Second Life".

When considering currency (L$), SL is still something of a "Wild West". Section 1.4 of the terms of service for Second Life has Linden Labs disclaiming any value assoicated with the L$:

(http://secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php)
---
Regardless of terminology used, Linden Dollars represent a limited license right governed solely under the terms of this Agreement, and are not redeemable for any sum of money or monetary value from Linden Lab at any time
---

The control structures just aren't there to allow L$ transactions to be taken completely seriously. A good example of this is the way that a "World Stock Exchange" was set up recently within SL, specifically to deal in stocks and shares of virtual companies, trading within SL. Unfortunately, the software behind WSE did not appear to have been tested & did not work. Within days (if not hours) the exchange was off-line and undergoing a major rewrite, as accounts were corrected manually. Anyone setting up an organisation like this in the Real World is likely to be arrested for fraud! Within SL, however, it is seen as an entrepreneur experimenting with the environment. It is for reasons like this that I have categorised the group of "artisans" (who trade for L$) as "hobbyists" (with apologies to the people who are currently making a living by selling their wares in SL!). These people don't have to convice accountants that their L$ transactions are properly audited.

some really good comments coming out here and would like to return to Dave's post on the pressure to create a web interface. this to me is a key issue in how SL developes, make this happen and it becomes a part of the mainstream people driven development of new forms of interaction. without this then it will remain a closed and proprietory environment these are not in tune with the new world order of Web 2.0 and Open Source

I wonder how long it will take before this will become mainstream? Correct me if I'm wrong, but at the moment a lot of people that are member of SL are people with some business interest, early technology adopters, IT people, etc.

Every technology that made a big impact on our society like cellphones and internet also started with a very small group of users and it took some years before it became mainstream.

My point is, that I don't know how long companies want to invest money in SL and experiment with it, if it will take a couple of years before the mainstream public will use SL as we are using now internet? (and thus make it very profitable)

Or do you think that the adoption of SL is different than that of adopting cellphones and therefore will be achived much quicker?

Based on some previous comments, I also start to wonder at what point the tax administration for instance will take things like SL serious and the whole thing with the stock exchange, will there be soon "laws" and "rules" to prevent this?

So, will there be some kind of tax administration, laws, etc in SL and thus become more and more a copy of our first life and thus become less interesting for people to join? Because one of the appealing things of SL is that it's a world without much laws and everyday's concerns, but if it's growing and growing like this...

at the rate this debate is attracting good posts i feel that the interest level in the possibilities is clearly high, but that SL and Linden needs to start a business structured version to really make the necessary focus

Lee raises some interesting questions, some of which Linden have actually addressed in the past.

One of the most contentious areas is governance and law in SL. LL's take on this is that they provide an environment - and nothing more. It is up to the residents to determine how to run themselves. LL will act against people breaching their TOS, often in a rather high-handed (benevolent dictator) style. However, the fundamentals of law are outside their remit. Rather like an ISP saying it is not responsible for content or what flows through its network, to use an internet metaphor.

There are well-meaning, high-minded groups in SL who are implementing and abiding by laws. I would cite Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova here (Google them to find out more). And there are inworld companies that comply with the laws these groups have defined for their own plots of the SL virtual world.

The Linden aim is for an open 3d internet, not a closed gameworld that is ever more like first life. They want to be the leaders into this brave new world.

That may actually entail them jettisoning some of the social framework on which its success is built, in favour of a more hands-off ISP model.

As it stands now, businesses will use SL to get a feel for how to operate in a future 3d internet environment. Later, they can take advantage of licensed server code or open source server code (depends which way LL jump) at some point in the future, when they can wrap more governance and security around their own sites.

There is a risk that if LL go too far to create a business-friendly world, it will be an empty husk, devoid of the people needed to animate it and make it worth the effort in the first place.

Regarding taxes, the USA and Australia are looking at this, as are other countries. However, I don't yet know how this is panning out.

Adoption of SL may yet have to be balanced with businesses blocking access to SL, amongst other sites: Second Life added to business 'banned' list (silicon.com - http://snipurl.com/SL_banned). Or could such companies find themselves falling behind their early adopter rivals?

An interesting point raised by Tom, on one hand many companies feel compelled to manage at least bandwidth use, if not actual employee use, where as on the other hand in some industries such as media the alternative view would be that employees do need to develop exposure and awareness of the new forms of interactions.

Selecting who can and who can't have access on the basis of busienss type and role will perhaps deepen the so called 'digital divide' issue between the 'haves' and 'have nots'

andy

Reposting link to the silicon.com story - the snipped url appears to have broken: http://networks.silicon.com/webwatch/0,39024667,39166459,00.htm

Reposting link to the silicon.com story the snipped url appears to have broken: http://networks.silicon.com/webwatch/0,39024667,39166459,00.htm

very good