Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!think!ames!amdahl!pacbell!well!bluefire
From: bluefire@well.UUCP (Bob Jacobson)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION:  SCI.VIRTUAL-WORLDS
Message-ID: <14657@well.UUCP>
Date: 21 Nov 89 00:29:58 GMT
References: <14547-repost@well.UUCP> <1989Nov16.161429.12549@talos.uucp>
Reply-To: bluefire@well.UUCP (Bob Jacobson)
Organization: Human Interface Technology Lab, U. of Wash.
Lines: 36


 
Several Usenet members, while endorsing the sci.virtual-worlds
newsgroup proposal in concept, wonder why we do not make this
a comp. newsgroup.  Our reply is based on our perception that
virtual-worlds research and development spans more fields than
conventional computer science (although computers are essential
to the construction of a virtual world):  psychology, medicine,
education, construction/architecture, complex industrial system
engineering, manufacturing engineering, and art/entertainment
are but a few of the areas where serious work can (and is!)
taking place on virtual-worlds science.
 
So, we decided to cast our net broadly, rather than possibly
exclude others who might have a professional or personal
interest in virtual-worlds.  The replies so far have come from
both computer technologists and non-technologists; all have 
been thought-provoking and serious.  This is the model we would
hope to keep for the future, if and when sci.virtual-worlds is
approved.
 
(By the way, in my current projects at UW, I'm working with
designers of heavy transportation vehicles, radiologists, two
architects, and a major rock group.  My boss is out touring
with aerospace firms and people who make diving equipment.  And
we are planning a convocation of philosophers of science and
humanists, late next year, to reflect on the upsides and down-
sides of virtual-world production.  It IS an eclectic field!)
 
Bob Jacobson
HIT Lab
Univ. of Wash.
 
for himself and
for Howard Rheingold,
Author