Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!zap@lage.lysator.liu.se From: zap@lage.lysator.liu.se (H}kan Andersson) Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds Subject: Cyberspace, VR, a summary of what I've seen so far... Message-ID: <7511@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 13 Sep 90 19:02:49 GMT Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu Organization: Lysator Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden Lines: 149 Approved: hitl@hardy.u.washington.edu Some Comments on Virtual Realities, computers networking and related topics. by Haakan 'Zap' Andersson References: Lot's a chat going on in sci.virtual-worlds. I have been reading sci.virtual-worlds for quite some time without saying a lot about it. A lot if things pop into my mind, though, and I think that I should share my ideas. First, let me get som definitions right (The way I use them, not nessesarily the way YOU use them): A virtual-REALITY is a computer simulation of things in the real world, desks, lamps, documents to read, sounds to be heard, e.t.c. e.t.c, whereas CYBERSPACE in my mind is a 'place' where 'data is depicted in it's "Raw" form', i.e. a space where you navigate in, around, with and about data. Of course, a VR could be (and is, in a sense) one piece of data in cyber- space. Some important distinctions: A VR is three-dimensional, you can first of all see and hear it (that we have for sure with todays technology, even if the images might be crude), touch (this exists today in a limited way), smell, taste, and perhaps feel via ESP, i.e. neural signals fed into the brain with no relation to any of the five senses. (Forgive me for calling it ESP, but isn't it just that?)) VR is populated with objects that have spatial extents, that you can interact with in a way similar to the RW (Real World). It may, of course, have abstract things in it, like people with three legs or talking applepies, but then we are approaching a virtual-WORLD instead of a virtual-REALITY. A game, f'rinstance, where you slay dragons, seduce beautiful talking applepies, and eat lovely young princesses, is a virtual-WORLD, and not a virtual REALITY. (At least I have never seduced a talking applepie) CYBERSPACE, on the other hand, is not limited to a finite number of dimensions, must not nessesarily be populated with objects that have any meaningful extents in any given directions, it is simply a novel way (and hopefully useful) of representing data, interacting with it and navigating through it. Of course, to our mind, and todays technology, a three-dimensional cyberspace with data represented as objects similar to VR above is easier to implement. But as the direct hardware connection to the brain evolves (if it will ever) then these limits can, and will be, lifted. Bearing these 'definitions' in mind for VR vs. CYBERSPACE, we may continue with this tiny thread of unsorted thoughts.... ** The 'protocol' that has been mentioned and partially designed in this newsgroup is interesting, but I see some limitations.... (Yes yes, it's a pre-pre-pre-before-I-though-t-at-all-draft, I know) and want to throw in my $0.02. F'rinstance, why limit the placement of an object to three dimensions? Who said cyberspace isn't 7-dimensioned? Or 37.3 dimensions? Supply a coordinate count and a number of coordinates. For now, and in the forseeable future, the count will be 3 and the coordinates will be X, Y and Z, but you wanted extensibility..... As for the appearance description of an object, i.e. how-the-darn-thing-looks, then why reinvent the wheel (this is done too often in computer science) when this already exists: RenderMan. The only drawback in using renderman is the little line in the RenderMan spec that says that you must respecify the entire scene for each frame. To reduce load on the net, we need an extended version of renderman, where you only respecify those objects you really need to. But since this is into the domain of fiddling-with-renderman, then it's really up to PIXAR to do this, since it's 'their' standard. (Hi Steve Upstill@pixar.com :-) ** When you think of it, cyberspace is only way of integrating everything we ever knew about computer inte something within one single (cyber)inter- face. Someone pointed out the similarity between navigating in cyberspace and navigation in a hypertext system. But have anyone thought of the simi- larity between cyberspace and the GUI's of modern computers? In a sense, cyberspace is already invented, but today it's only two- dimensional, it sits on the screen in front of you. Isn't the mouse just a forerunner of the dataglove? Arn't we already manipulating objects in a virtual world, when we drag the 'Graphic Examples' drawer in to the 'Trashcan', close the 'Graphics Disc' window, dragging the 'Graphics Disc' icon over the 'Blank Disc' icon, thus producing a copy? In a GUI, the programs (tools) and data (projects) are displayed as objects, and they are in a limited sense objectoriented, i.e. double-clicking on a data-object (perhaps a DeluxePaint image) will trigger the action associated with that type of object (Running DeluxePaint). But in a GUI it is rather limited today. How many times have I not been irritadet when I simply wanted to LOOK on a DeluxePaint image, and doubleclicking the durn thing loads the entire 700k worth of program, wasting my time and memory. The problem with the GUI is that there is only ONE 'default action' for an object. In cyberspace we will need to have any number of 'actions', but we need some that are 'standard'. F'rinstance, we may want to EXAMINE the object (scan it just to see what it is), READ the object (actually plunge into the data it represents), OPERATE the object (similar to what the GUI does, kick the objects 'default action' to life), and EDIT the object (start som kind of process that can modify the selected object). Many more are concievable, but a cyberspace object must at least have these basic capabilites. ** Another factor is the 'level-of-detail' dimension. In computer gfx, a constant problem is at what level of detail you should represent an object. Renderman (mentioned earlier) has some slick solutions to this problem. But in cyberspace, level-of-detail must be under user control. Perhaps his eyephones react to slowly because he has a low-end cyber-workstation or the net is hung with four others having cybersex with a talking applepie, or whatever. He may want to pull down the level of detail in his surround- ings, removing the details he do not need right now. Another use for this 'level-of-detail' is like an extra 'dimension', especially useful when examining data, Fr'instance, at the 'lowest resolution', some chunk of data might just be a blob, a pixel, a tone, a smell of burnt rubber or an image of a talking applepie. At a higher 'resolution', higher level-of-detail, the same object might have a 'shape' (or smell, flavor or spice) revealing it's type, and perhaps it's name. This is the level that most GUI's work at. Next level down is where the contents of the data is shown in a summary format, so you 'get the hang of' what it's all about. Next step is when all of the data is readable. Next step down is when not only the data, but technical info, like sources, references, storage media info and such are shown. Further steps may exist, and intermediate steps between the ones listed may also exist. The user must also be able to 'enlarge' a piece of the world with a 'cyber-looking-glass', i.e. when he get's to the word 'Hydrogen' in a text, he may use the 'looking-glass' to 'magnify' that word into higher levels of detail, where you may find things like the inventor of Hydrogen, it's atomic wheight, the price on the Hydrogen stock-exchange and other interesting facts about Hydrogen. This is really where hypertext and cyberspace get to interact. ** It's getting late, and I have to pay me some bills. I hope this little chat has triggered some thoughts in this nowsgroup. Thank you for your time! (P.S. I just thought i saw something on the screen....it looked like.... an applepie???) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + My signature is + + smaller than yours! + + - zap@lysator.liu.se + + + + + + + + + + + + + +