Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!mips!pacbell.com!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!n8emr!bluemoon!bmb
From: bmb@bluemoon.uucp (Bryan Bankhead)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Virtual manipulation
Message-ID: <Xm8X22w164w@bluemoon.uucp>
Date: 14 May 91 17:55:20 GMT
References: <1991May13.174958.10492@kodak.kodak.com>
Sender: bbs@bluemoon.uucp (BBS Login)
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[0][2][4])
Lines: 25

doering@kodak.com (Paul F. Doering) writes:
> 
> We don't do awfully well in compartmentalizing our learning. In jest, someone
> warned during the 3-D movie craze of the fifties that we'd all get so used to
> not having to dodge illusory objects hurled into the audience from the screen
> that someday someone would get conked by a real bottle falling from a real
> medicine cabinet. Raise the ante in the current debate: what will be the
> real-world consequences of training a user that a hand is a suitable agent fo
> "picking up" a hot ingot? My point is that in designing an interface we must 
> as concerned with habits carried away from it as we are about intuition
> brought into it.  (Insert here the standard boilerplate about responsibilty i
> programming.) So the question: can anyone refer us to a study (not a
> hypothesis) in which an investigator quantified the extent to which remote
> control or remote sensing has been unwittingly transplated as behavior back
> into the real world?
A good place to start would be the hobbyist groups involved in RC model 
vehicles.  I have known quite a few suck people and their ability to use 
'real' vehicles was never harmed by the learning of the ' RC mentality'.
I guess it would depend on how similar to reality the interface was ;in 
terms of what was presented to the senses.

 This is from
     bmb@bluemoon.uucp
     bmb%bluemoon@nstar.rn.com
who doesn't have their own obnoxious signature yet