Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ogicse!milton!sobiloff@acc.stolaf.edu
From: sobiloff@acc.stolaf.edu (Chrome Cboy)
Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds
Subject: Re: Question 1: Public Interest--What Does It Signify?
Message-ID: <9960@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 24 Oct 90 22:03:15 GMT
References: <9677@milton.u.washington.edu>
Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Lines: 63
Approved: hitl@hardy.u.washington.edu


In article <9677@milton.u.washington.edu>
cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robe rt Jacobson) writes:
> 1.  What is the societal import of the current public interest surrounding
>virtual interfaces?

Hmmmm... this is a broad question, and I know I'll probably miss some
(obvious) answers, but here's what I could come up with:

1) For the society composed of research professionals, it means that
there is a bit more money for us to do research! :-)

2) Such widespread interest might indicate a general dissatisfaction
with current interface technology. This might be because current
technology is considered "old hat," or it might be because people are
running up against a wall with current technology -- they can "see"
that chaotic airflow over the wing they're designing, all nicely
rendered in 24-bit color, but they don't have the tools to "get inside"
and really see it like they'd like to. (This is just an example; I'm
aware of programs that the NCSA have published... :-)

I wonder how long the public's interest in VR will last, however.
Unfortunately I think the answer is "Not very long" because we aren't
going to be producing a $1500 home VR system in the next six months,
which seems to be the average attention span of the public. I'm just
hoping that VR doesn't get all blown up like artificial intelligence
did twenty years ago. Not that I think it'll take twenty years to get
some kind of marketable, medium-quality VR system...

3) Of course this question kind of begs the question "Once (?) there
*is* a viable VR system, what is the impact going to be on society?"
This has been discussed by folks such as Toffler (1979), and more
concretely, Kraut (1987). Neither of these individuals talked about VR
per se, but they talked about the impact that increased
telecommunications ability might have on society. I think that VR is
going to promote a sort of "global village," much like we have now with
the Internet/Bitnet/Usenet/etc., but with much more realism (more
channels available for the transmission of social context cues, etc.).
Currently, Don Norman's posts look just about the same as mine. Of
course the content varies considerably, but all I have to interpret are
the characters that appear on my screen--which look just like the
characters I'm typing right now.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's effect on society already
has been studied, but that more needs to be done (as usual), especially
in the light of virtual reality. A good place to start, however, if you
want to look for your own answer(s) to this question is to look at the
professional literature that deals with on-line interaction (Sproull,
L. & Kiesler, S. (1986)); telecommuting (the afore mentioned Toffler
and Kraut, R.E.); generally, there's a lot of good stuff already done
on the social psychology side of things.

I hope this helps some folks out, and feel free to mail me for more
info/pointers if you'd like.

                                                -Blake
--
                                                        ______________
_______________________________________________________/ Chrome C'Boy \_________
| "Innovating is easy: you just rub smart people and money together. The thing |
| that we have fallen down completely on is being able to do anything with it. |
| The Japanese are the ones who go out and do the actual technology transfer." |
|                                                    - Alan Kay                |