Linden Lab gone dark again ?

[Nika Talaj]

2 hours ago, Angelor Galanter said:

If LL really wants to improve their citizenship they should spend bucks on advertisements that target its key demographic. I think it's the 40-90 age group who know the value of connection. 

You are so right.  If LL wanted to get more of the type of residents who form the backbone of their current user base, they probably could do no better than placing stories, videos and ads in the AARP's magazines and social media. 

I'M NOT KIDDING.

That demographic often has money, lots of time, and a loss of purpose in their life.  Some of these folks have quite a bit of desktop computer savvy as well.  I remember how my partner (an elderly gentleman with an artistic background when I first met him) described the conversation when his RL PCP commented on the improvement in his health.  My partner ascribed it to the sense of community and purpose he gained in SL, and his PCP shook his head in amazement and said: "Well, whatever you're doing, keep it up!".

If LL said they wanted volunteers specifically to help retirees figure out what computer to buy and help onboard them into communities in SL, I think LL would be surprised at how people would come out of the woodwork to help out.

And if they want an explanation for why a mobile client does not increase their userbase, well, they need look no further than your observation, Angelor.

Edited August 3 by Nika Talaj

[Ksenia Elcano]

15 minutes ago, Nika Talaj said:

If LL wanted to get more of the type of residents who form the backbone of their current user base, they probably could do no better than placing stories, videos and ads in the AARP's magazines and social media. 

Most AARP members are not going to join because SL is not appealing. There are many competing products that are much more entertaining. Why would AARP members join SL to have an ugly avatar  and stand around watching grey stuff slowly rezz?

If LL wants more members, they need to add more appealing features. I suggest they start with an AI companion avatar that cares. Market acceptance for ai companions has already been demonstrated by Replika and other apps on phones. LL could integrate the AI companion into their mobile offering and into the PC version.

[Angelor Galanter]

5 minutes ago, Ksenia Elcano said:

Most AARP members are not going to join because SL is not appealing. There are many competing products that are much more entertaining. Why would AARP members join SL to have an ugly avatar  and stand around watching grey stuff slowly rezz?

If LL wants more members, they need to add more appealing features. I suggest they start with an AI companion avatar that cares. Market acceptance for ai companions has already been demonstrated by Replika and other apps on phones. LL could integrate the AI companion into their mobile offering and into the PC version.

I totally disagree. If you can make a connection with another person, it doesn't matter if it's in a chat room or stick figures as long as you can carry-on a conversation and "feel" the other person. I don't know if it's a real quantum entanglement or what, but there are times I swear I can feel the emotions coming from another soul - just like talking to a loved on the phone.  SL simply enhances, in some small ways with "basic avatars" the ability to meet and form bonds with people. 

This is what SL is to me and countless others I am connected to: connection!

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Ksenia Elcano said:

I suggest they start with an AI companion avatar that cares.

God strewth.

In a world already awash with misinformation and deep fakes, this is really what we need: supply people with fake friends who will pretend they care.

Much better than finding ways to connect them with real people, right?

 

Edited August 3 by Scylla Rhiadra
Missing words

[Scylla Rhiadra]

50 minutes ago, Angelor Galanter said:

I totally disagree. If you can make a connection with another person, it doesn't matter if it's in a chat room or stick figures as long as you can carry-on a conversation and "feel" the other person. I don't know if it's a real quantum entanglement or what, but there are times I swear I can feel the emotions coming from another soul - just like talking to a loved on the phone.  SL simply enhances, in some small ways with "basic avatars" the ability to meet and form bonds with people. 

This is what SL is to me and countless others I am connected to: connection!

Anyone who claims that the connections we make, the experiences we have, and the feelings those elicit in SL aren't "real" is probably somewhat disconnected in RL too. Or, at the very least, lacking in imagination and empathy.

[Love Zhaoying]

16 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Anyone who claims that the connections we make, the experiences we have, and the feelings those elicit in SL aren't "real" is probably somewhat disconnected in RL too. Or, at the very least, lacking in imagination and empathy.

Imagine today's kids, raised to always have a phone or tablet in their hands as comfort. AI will be just as familiar as a "real" connection.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Imagine today's kids, raised to always have a phone or tablet in their hands as comfort. AI will be just as familiar as a "real" connection.

I am not sure I agree. I think they are much more attuned to the idea of online connections, but they know the difference between computer game NPCs and real fellow-players as well as anyone. In fact, if anything, they are better at making real connections online, because they've been doing it most of their lives.

I don't think younger people are willing to cheat themselves with fakes. The "real thing" may be "virtual" in the sense that it's online, but it won't be AI: it will be a real person.

[Ksenia Elcano]

 

 

24 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Anyone who claims that the connections we make, the experiences we have, and the feelings those elicit in SL aren't "real" is probably somewhat disconnected in RL too.

Who made that claim? It certainly wasn't me. Connections in SL are difficult to find. It's difficult enough just to find a dance partner. That's where an AI companion could fill in the gap.

Edited August 3 by Ksenia Elcano

[Love Zhaoying]

11 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I am not sure I agree. I think they are much more attuned to the idea of online connections, but they know the difference between computer game NPCs and real fellow-players as well as anyone. In fact, if anything, they are better at making real connections online, because they've been doing it most of their lives.

I don't think younger people are willing to cheat themselves with fakes. The "real thing" may be "virtual" in the sense that it's online, but it won't be AI: it will be a real person.

I hope you're right. The next few decades will tell.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

6 minutes ago, Ksenia Elcano said:

 

 

Who made that claim? It certainly wasn't me. Connections in SL are difficult to find. It's difficult enough just to find a dance partner. That's where an AI companion could fill in the gap.

I am happy to believe it. But I wasn't addressing you in that post; I was agreeing with Angelor. Had that been directed at you, I'd have posted it to you.

I have zero objections to someone who chooses to interact with an NPC or AI bot. I don't get it, myself: dancing for me is always a social activity, whether I have a partner or not. But that's fine, I don't need to get it.

What I do find dystopian is the idea that we should build a virtual world of pretend people to interact with, rather than find ways to better enable engagement with other people. I have all sorts of reasons for believing that (and they include the dangers of isolating oneself in a solipsistic little filter bubble with a bot who merely mirrors your own biases and subjectivities), but the key point is that a large part of the success of SL and platforms like it is that they are full of real people. That is why they are MMOs. Anyone who wants to hang out with computer-generated fakes would be better off in a FPS or simulation like The Sims.

[Istelathis]

People form relationships of sorts with imaginary things all of the time, super heroes, book characters, NPCs from games, characters from shows, religious entities,  it has been going on for centuries.  It doesn't mean that real people will be replaced, but I don't doubt that people will carry on this long standing behavior when it comes to AI.

I wonder if at some point, people will form addictions deemed inappropriate when AI is merged with VR and people spend most of their social time with NPCs 🤣  The extroverts will likely try to shame and regulate them to mandatory socializing 😆  They pose a risk, after all!  

 

 

It kind of reminds me of the twilight zone as well, and this poor guy.. he just wanted to read his books, which was seen as unethical for some reason.  

 

Some people would prefer to spend their time reading books, writing bad fanfic, watching TV, playing games, than socializing with others.  I imagine that will be the same with AI as well.  

Bonus

 

[Angelor Galanter]

33 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I am not sure I agree. I think they are much more attuned to the idea of online connections, but they know the difference between computer game NPCs and real fellow-players as well as anyone. In fact, if anything, they are better at making real connections online, because they've been doing it most of their lives.

I don't think younger people are willing to cheat themselves with fakes. The "real thing" may be "virtual" in the sense that it's online, but it won't be AI: it will be a real person.

Thumbs up!

Social Scientists report that if you meet & greet 100 people, you will have 3 (or less) persons who may be soul mate friends or lovers. Where in real life in your town can you go out and meet 100 new people every day to meet three compatible people (in your town or city? I think not!). SL is an "enhancement" to real life, not a "replacement." 

Young people can be and often are passionate about meeting new people online or otherwise.

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

55 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I am not sure I agree. I think they are much more attuned to the idea of online connections, but they know the difference between computer game NPCs and real fellow-players as well as anyone. In fact, if anything, they are better at making real connections online, because they've been doing it most of their lives.

I don't think younger people are willing to cheat themselves with fakes. The "real thing" may be "virtual" in the sense that it's online, but it won't be AI: it will be a real person.

I think you're correct for now but I'm not sure how long that will continue to be the case.  AI is already becoming quite popular (although it's still very much considered a novelty) and there are already some extreme cases where people have "married" AIs, influencers are marketing "AI girlfriend" versions of themselves to those willing to pay a subscription fee, more and more companies are incorporating AI into products and services and as time goes on interacting with AI will become a lot more familiar for most people.

I remember seeing a short video recently of people kicking a bipedal robot that was trying to remain standing (which was essentially it's primary purpose since it was built to try and improve on the performance of bipedal robots and the idea was to keep it off balance so it could learn to right itself without falling over).  A lot of the comments were jokes but quite a few of them were along the lines of "OMG leave him alone!" and "Why are they bullying him?".  Of course the majority of people were only joking but I think it does demonstrate how easily human empathy can extend to objects if they bear enough resemblance to other more familiar things like humans or animals.

As humans we do have basic needs which if not met can eventually cause physical and mental health issues, but various studies over the years have proven that the human brain is very good at fooling itself with a variety of substitutes and I think there's a good chance that, as society becomes ever more insular and isolating, some peoples perceptions of their "relationships" with AI will change.

 

1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

What I do find dystopian is the idea that we should build a virtual world of pretend people to interact with, rather than find ways to better enable engagement with other people. I have all sorts of reasons for believing that (and they include the dangers of isolating oneself in a solipsistic little filter bubble with a bot who merely mirrors your own biases and subjectivities), but the key point is that a large part of the success of SL and platforms like it is that they are full of real people.

Absolutely agree with the part about finding ways to better enable engagement with other people,  building a world full of AI pretending to be people would be a disaster and would undoubtedly make finding actual people to interact with even more difficult than it already is.  I do still like the idea of populating places with some AI that would make things feel a little more dynamic by performing basic tasks similar to extras on a movie set rather than characters that you're meant to interact with however the performance issues encountered when trying to incorporate that sort of thing on a large scale are pretty prohibitive.

As for the idea that people may isolate themselves in a bubble with a bot that mirrors their own biases, I think the far more likely (and dystopian) outcome will be that people will be isolated in little bubbles with bots that mirror the biases of the companies running the platform the bots operate on.

[Istelathis]

24 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

As for the idea that people may isolate themselves in a bubble with a bot that mirrors their own biases, I think the far more likely (and dystopian) outcome will be that people will be isolated in little bubbles with bots that mirror the biases of the companies running the platform the bots operate on.

They don't even need AI for that.  People have had this weird devotion to brands for years now.. 🍎😆  They have formed entire identities around brands, and social hierarchies around them.

I think with AI, the next major threat will be seen as sustaining population growth.  We are already seeing it now, without AI, where certain people are being considered cat people, if they have not performed their "duty" to mate and produce offspring.  I think the arguments will likely be the same, it is people's sacred duty, to be social creatures, to produce more consumers, and if they go against the fray, they are traitors.  

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

10 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

They don't even need AI for that.  People have had this weird devotion to brands for years now.. 🍎😆  They have formed entire identities around brands, and social hierarchies around them.

*Looks at long list of personal SL social media accounts, domain names and email addresses*... Right, some people are just so weird huh?! 😅

 

15 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

I think with AI, the next major threat will be seen as sustaining population growth.  We are already seeing it now, without AI, where certain people are being considered cat people, if they have not performed their "duty" to mate and produce offspring.  I think the arguments will likely be the same, it is people's sacred duty, to be social creatures, to produce more consumers, and if they go against the fray, they are traitors.  

I think there's definitely some pressure on people to fill certain societal roles but it seems like there are a lot of contradictory factors at work.  It seems that people are required to work increasingly harder in order to earn enough to consume ever more products while at the same time being expected to raise families in order to provide the next generation of worker-consumers.  The source of the pressure to work harder and consume more is mostly corporations chasing ever larger profit margins, however the  expectation to simultaneously fill more traditional societal roles most likely comes from a variety of sources.

Unfortunately it's not really something we could discuss in further detail since you then have to start delving into things like the role of the patriarchy, etc in defining what traditional societal roles are and who should fulfill them, none of which have anything to do with the LLs purported communications blackout.  

[WeFlossDaily]

So let me let if I have this straight. You guys want to convince elderly retired ppl to join SL and the young ppl from something called Roblox and have a mobile app and give them AI dance partners? And a double-whammy shot of PBR/GlTF is somehow going to tie all this together and usher in a magical second coming of SL that is highly realistic and will be capable of sexy time on airplanes while traversing the alien skies of the virtual world at moderate-to-fast speeds?

And why did Strawberry have to prove she was alive?

Did anybody else get creepy Marina Joyce flashbacks from that episode?

Is it okej to joke and have fun yet. Or is that still illegal? I know it's strictly forbidden in-world an all. But one can hope . . .

 

 

[Angelor Galanter]

2 hours ago, Istelathis said:

They don't even need AI for that.  People have had this weird devotion to brands for years now.. 🍎😆  They have formed entire identities around brands, and social hierarchies around them.

I think with AI, the next major threat will be seen as sustaining population growth.  We are already seeing it now, without AI, where certain people are being considered cat people, if they have not performed their "duty" to mate and produce offspring.  I think the arguments will likely be the same, it is people's sacred duty, to be social creatures, to produce more consumers, and if they go against the fray, they are traitors.  

Unfortunately, the situation is far more dire than just the expectation that a woman should mate and have children. The truth is, birthrates are declining around the world including America. You heard Speaker Paul Ryan say "American women need to have more babies." Now, Mike Johnson says "women should do their duty [and have more babies]" See this chart:

 

 

We are all seeing a huge surge in anti-abortion from various powerful groups including the republican party. This is just the beginning. Our government is starting to panic about the continued reduction in new babies (read that as "workers").

But why? 

Baby boomers are retiring in huge numbers (let's say 42% conservative), and an increase of only 19% in the workforce. Our declining birthrate brings a whole host of problems with it like slower growth, stunted production or GDP, Social Security collapsing, our social institutions like fire departments, public works of all types, health care, education, and more. It would be a disaster for America if the workforce falls below a certain growth rate. Yet, our population is already "huge & expensive." Government can't ultimately force women to have more children (though they try) without giving something back (i.e. better cost of living that is stable over decades, lower home prices so our kids can buy in, better education for our children, a stipend or universal income for teens, and more.

This has nothing to do with social norms, patriarchy, or the like. It's sheer survival of our way of life and that of our descendants. If they don't make it easier and more profitable (easier) to have babies, they will not get the new blood they need to push into production. The current price of raising a child in today's economy is about $1,400 per child. Who makes that kind of money to have 4 or 5 kids? 

Just saying...

And since I'm on this topic, the US government should pay one parent market salaries to stay at home and raise the children - say, $70,000 per year, while the other spouse/partner works outside the home. Being a homemaker and stay-at-home parent is a real job and should be compensated as such. 

How does all this tie into SL, you ask? Well, 77 million registered users, and only a million or so are active (ok, say 3 million) represents a huge voting block of political power. New, old, young, experienced, retired all being brought together in one big melting pot of grass root awareness. Bringing in as many people as we can into SL and exposing them to truths about real life as well as the virtual world is an education in itself. Note, I'm not saying this should be a major focus of SL. SL is an enhancement of our personal lives, no doubt. However, it can also be a tool to raise awareness of truths we all face in rl.

 

Edited August 3 by Angelor Galanter

[Luna Bliss]

10 minutes ago, Angelor Galanter said:

This has nothing to do with social norms, patriarchy, or the like.

Societal norms service economic realities, so you really can't divorce the two.

[Angelor Galanter]

9 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Societal norms service economic realities, so you really can't divorce the two.

I agree that those are the "levers" that government at all levels will try to "toggle" to increase new births. That's just it, it's manipulation, pure and simple (and wrong).

Just a side note: If they want it then they should be willing to pay for it. And since we are the "they" in this equation, we need to vote in people who "get it," and improve our lives and our bank accounts to have more children, educate them properly, and get them employed in decent, well paying jobs.

 

Edited August 3 by Angelor Galanter

[WeFlossDaily]

19 minutes ago, Angelor Galanter said:

Baby boomers are retiring in huge numbers (let's say 42% conservative), and an increase of only 19% in the workforce. Our declining birthrate brings a whole host of problems with it like slower growth, stunted production or GDP, Social Security collapsing, our social institutions like fire departments, public works of all types, health care, education, and more. It would be a disaster for America if the workforce falls below a certain growth rate. Yet, our population is already "huge & expensive." Government can't ultimately force women to have more children (though they try) without giving something back (i.e. better cost of living that is stable over decades, lower home prices so our kids can buy in, better education for our children, a stipend or universal income for teens, and more.

It must be fun to pretend you live in the only country on Earth. =P

[Angelor Galanter]

3 minutes ago, WeFlossDaily said:

It must be fun to pretend you live in the only country on Earth. =P

 I mentioned the birth rate is falling globally. Japan is having the same problems. Many countries face the same issues as we do. I'm simply highlighting what I know because I am American. I can easily say the same of other countries if I was a native. Although, that's not the only problem - fertility is also falling around the world - and nobody really knows why.

The positive side of this is that we know it's coming and we can apply ourselves to improving human life and making it easier to achieve a sustainable population. I think a slow reduction in birthrates is preferred to what inevitably follows over-population.

 

Edited August 3 by Angelor Galanter

[WeFlossDaily]

Just now, Angelor Galanter said:

I mentioned the birth rate is falling globally. Japan is having the same problems. Many countries face the same issues as we do. I'm simply highlighting what I know because I am American. I can easily say the same of other countries if I was a native.

 I personally abhor the idea of sentencing more people to life in this world.

[Luna Bliss]

11 minutes ago, WeFlossDaily said:

18 minutes ago, Angelor Galanter said:

I mentioned the birth rate is falling globally. Japan is having the same problems. Many countries face the same issues as we do. I'm simply highlighting what I know because I am American. I can easily say the same of other countries if I was a native.

 I personally abhor the idea of sentencing more people to life in this world.

What might cause you to feel life is good for you personally?

[Angelor Galanter]

10 minutes ago, WeFlossDaily said:

 I personally abhor the idea of sentencing more people to life in this world.

You can have your own beliefs, as you wish. As a combat vet, now 68, having lived in 22 states and 14 countries, I can tell you it's been one h*** of a ride. I have 7 daughters. Six are currently alive. One daughter has 5 children, two others have 1 each. It was a terrifying and exhilarating ride all the way. Without the human form, if there is a soul, it's blind, deaf, mute and unable to feel the joy of existing as I have. I would want to do this all over again if given the choice.

It is what it is, and we all get to choose how we feel about it. 

SL is really no different than rl, it can be just as complicated, dangerous to our emotions and mental health or as amazing as healthy as we choose to make it.

[Istelathis]

57 minutes ago, Angelor Galanter said:

Unfortunately, the situation is far more dire than just the expectation that a woman should mate and have children. The truth is, birthrates are declining around the world including America

I find it mind boggling at times, that the news will make wild claims about how AI is going to put everyone out of work, but then they also say there are not enough people to keep the gears of society rolling.  It is all so conflicting, on one side you have people running for the hills because there will be no jobs available, on the other people saying there will not be enough people to fill the roles necessary.

I think ultimately, we will be fine either way.  What a few wealthy people want, are consumers, they want control, and order, and as a result there are likely to be a plethora of jobs that are completely unnecessary available in the future.  

A lot of it comes down to hierarchy, it comes down to control really, having an orderly society, and yes, I realize just how absolutely insane that sounds, because to me it sounds just as insane as it likely sounds to you.  People deny this, quite often, but when covid hit, and we saw people leaving their offices in droves, being non essential workers, while the essential workers remained doing the often lower paying jobs, that reality kind of smacked us right upside the head.  Then when it was safe, the people who were enjoying working remotely, and feeling as though they got more accomplished at home, were being demanded to go back to the office, kind of solidified that point.  People like having that sense of power over one another.

I mean, take a look at China, with their ghost cities, it is the same thing here.  We make work, that is unnecessary, to keep the gears clicking.

Automation is growing at record levels, AI is boosting productivity in many fields, but it all comes down to one thing in my opinion, it is control, the hierarchy, having power over one another, and of course it is driven through consumerism.  

Aaaaand with that, I will stop my insane ramblings and derailing the thread.. I'm sorry everyone, I just find this aspect of our society to be absolutely fascinating...