Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!andersen!tsarver@uunet.UU.NET
From: andersen!tsarver@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Sarver)
Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds
Subject: Re: More on Classifying VR
Message-ID: <17215@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 26 Feb 91 19:15:20 GMT
Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu
Lines: 29
Approved: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu



In article <1991Feb25.114611.29204@santra.uucp> jmunkki@hila.hut.fi
(Juri Munkki) writes:

        IMHO, the human mind is flexible enough to compensate for the defects
        in virtual reality. All we need is something that will feel real 
        enough, if the user wants to think that it is real.

                [Other stuff deleted]

        Our minds are the most powerful part of the virtual reality
        interface and will probably remain so for the next 10-30 years.

I believe the essence of what he is saying that we need to use technology to
allow users to suspend disbelief.  We can use "tricks" which people will have
to make an effort to evade (ie, discern the underlying technology).

I don't believe any external set of equipment can fully deceive a mind looking
for the technology artifacts.  The only form of input which is fully invisible
would be direct neural impulses.  Even then, we would have to work at making
the synthesis realistic.  But the new technology would have "nothing under the
covers," so to speak, unlike present technology.  Any clue that one wasn't 
actually experiencing the material would be based purely on the content (eg,
"The trees aren't moving, but I feel the wind").


Tom Sarver: tsarver@andersen.com | "Only Amiga makes it possible!"    //\
"A real computer has a linear address space. NO 386's!!"          \\ //--\ 


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com