gourdol@imag.imag.fr (Gourdol Arnaud) (12/05/90)
[Although in general "cyber-" debates are encouraged to be sent to the appropriate newsgroups, I found Arnaud's "personal view" useful for two purposes. First, it is in fact a collection of design criteria that may be useful to designers of virtual worlds. Second, it is an interesting contribution from France, one of the sites of incipient research into virtual interface technology, worlds, and reality. Your responses are welcomed by Arnaud and me. -- Bob Jacobson] Hi ! It seems I made a mistake and mis-posted this post to the wrong forum a while ago. If this is not the case and you already read this, please feel free to skip to the next post and sorry for the lost bandwidth. A while ago, several people here (in the vr forum) stated that they wanted to have their own view of the cyberspace. That is, they want to choose if they see net "access" as big circles (red, blue or whatever) or as doors with a label on it, or as building with a big sign... Others have also argued that cyberspace should not always "look like" reality. I'm affraid I must say I disagree with those two opinions. Today, cyberspace (or Internet if you prefer) is using text data only. The message are those characters I am sending you. You are free to choose the font with which you read my message (if your deck (or rather terminal)) allows you to do it. But this is because I can't send you my message with some font information. Let's make a step in the future (not speaking yet of real cyberspace). I got a microphone attached to my terminal. With it I can record voice messages. Let's suppose I choose to send you the message this way. Do you mean you would like to choose the way my voice is altered when you receive it ? I do not want you to alter my message this way. Suppose I send you a graphic or a video sequence. Do you want your system to "translate" it ? I sure do not want. If I send you the message a certain way, I want you to receive it the same way, even if you can alter it after. As you can take the words I am sending today and then put them in any order you wish. But it's not MY message any more. So, let's go back to cyberspace. When the bandwith will be high enough, we will not just send each other ASCII characters, but sound, still pictures, video sequences, and maybe other things as well (comportemental programms). You can not customize this, as this is not just your deck that is making cyberspace alive, but the whole network. In short, the medium we are using today is so poor that it does not allow to give various forms to the messages. When medium will be more sophisticated, we will realize that there are many "ways" to send a message, and we will then give more importance to the form than we do today. As for virtual-worlds mimicking(sp?) reality or real-world, from my above argument you see that we will have to share some common common world/methaphor that everybody linked to the Net will see (or listen or feel). Each of the one linked to the net will be able to customize the way himself looks, not the way others appear to him. The analogy with today is the header of the messages. Everybody agree on them. Same with the character set. This suppose that this virtual world should be "natural" to everybody. We will be able to feel good in it. And what is a very sophisticated environement that is natural and in which we feel good, and of which we have a vast knowledge ? The real-world, of course. But that is not to say that vr must be a carbon copy of the real world (what would be the interest ?). It should add something I call "magic", that is some behaviours that do not exist in real world, but that we can understand, and that we can accept. I call this magic, because counts and fairy tales use this: Once you have defined a set of magic rules, your universe stay coherent and stick to these rules. If I say I can go from one place to another by saying "hocu-pocus", it's OK if everyone does this. Moreover, I think that there is a common set of "acceptable" rules that we could add to vr, and that those rules *are* in the fairy tales, counts and myths today. Everybody knows that we can see "things" in a crystal ord, be it the future, a distant event, or whatever. Everybody knows that garlic can be used against vampires (or pirates ???) Everybody knows that warp drive allows you to jump from one place in the galaxy to another. Now, it's time to give my own view of how cyberspace could look. It's based on many cyberpunk books (Gibson, Sterling, many others). The net is like a big town. There are some big buildings in it (big .com) with their name flashing in very huge neon-letters. When I want to send a message to someone I go to the building he is in. I can go quickly at any place of NetTown. In my pocket I have got a little device I build myself with a set of virtual tools. It looks like a pocket calculator with a few buttons. When I press on one of these buttons, I instantly teleport myself to the location labelled on the button. So, I go at the bulding entry. There is a groom waiting for me. If I can't enter the building, he will tell me so, pointing at the mailboxes outside the building. I then go to the maiboxes and quickly find the one of my friend (I can quickly locate it because there is a big sticker representing a silver wand and stars on a dark blue background). I then go INTO the mailbox. Inside the mailbox (which is a rather big box in fact) is a small room with a sofa, two big comfortable armchairs and a little table. There is an "electronic representation" of my friend waiting for me here. As usual he chose to appear as a magician with a dark blue robe sprinkled with silver stars. He greets me and tells me he is out for now. I tell him about a problem I had with a programm he sent to me. The electronic representation listen carrefuly, frowning, while looking in it's knowledge database where it finds a fact my friend (the human one) has put in it about this problem. The rep (short for electronic representation) tells me "Oh, yes. Here is what should solve your problem". He puts his hand into his robe and pulls out a crystal orb,that I take. This orb is a representation of my friend's program. Carefully looking at it, I see that the version number marked on the glass is different from the one I have. If I want, I can enter into the orb. But as for now, I leave the rep and get out of the mailbox. I now goes to a cafe called "Mona Lisa" where they are used to speak about how to improve virtual realities. Next to the frontdoor is a panel with a paper stating the last discussion in course. I see one about the visual representation of networks. As I enter I see the barman and several other folks here, some talking to others. Near the fireplace, there is a guy talking and showing some drawing on a sheet of paper. I approach and carrefuly listen to him. He is explaining how he would like to see Cyberspace from his deck. On the paper, are some circles of different colors. I ask him "What do colors means ?". He explains me "Green are the host to which I can connect. Blue are the one which contains useful informations". Of course, it's not really him who explains me all this, but a rep. Disagreeing with it's views I decide to post a reply. I then explain to the rep how I see virtual worlds and cyberspace and make various drawings and video-sequences. An AI programm is analysing all what I'm saying and translate it into a knowledge base. Later, a rep will expose my views to everybody in "Mona Lisa" who wants to listen to me. I then get out of "Mona Lisa" and shut down my deck. This is how I would like cyberspace to be. Now, it's pure fiction (today). But there are things we should do today : 1. Imagine what tomorrow could be (even if it appears as "daydreaming"). The crazier, the better. This should give us a goal. 2. Build what we can today. I think the "system database" is a good idea. 3. Improve what we have today. Are there many people out there who are using something more evolved than a vt100 ? I personnaly use a Mac, but I'm sure there are some with Sun, Appolos, NeXT, even PCs. We are all able to do pictures with those machines (and even sound for some of us). Why can't we send these to the net. I mean, as easily as we can send characters. Or even, why are OS so prehistoric, as compared as what we can imagine and most of the time DO today ? Please, if you agree or disagree with my vision of cyberspace let me know. Arnaud. -- /======================//==========================================/ / Arnaud Gourdol. // On the netland : gourdol@imag.fr / /======================//==========================================/
burdick@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bill Burdick) (12/10/90)
I agree with what Arnaud is saying. A friend and I (we are student
reps for NeXT) were talking about making a multimedia 'alt' group.
That would be easy to do for a NeXT-only group -- just tar, compress,
and uuencode the message, then post it.
Are there any multimedia interchange formats out there? I noticed
some files (actually directories that appear to be files) in NeXT
version 2.0 with the extension '.rtfd' -- these are microsoft rich
text format with pictures (drawings? is that what the 'd' is for?).
Does the mac use this format? Maybe we can be doing multimedia news
right now and move a little closer to cyberspace...
-- Bill Burdick
burdick@mentor.cc.purdue.eduszabo@RELAY.CS.NET (Nick Szabo) (12/13/90)
In article <12295@milton.u.washington.edu> gourdol@imag.imag.fr (Gourdol Arnaud) writes: >Let's make a step in the future (not speaking yet of real >cyberspace). I got a microphone attached to my terminal. >With it I can record voice messages. Let's suppose I choose >to send you the message this way. Do you mean you would like >to choose the way my voice is altered when you receive it ? >I do not want you to alter my message this way. Telephones already alter our voices, though user control is crude or nonexistant. Pop stars lip-synch concerts. TV and radio broadcast out-of-context "sound bites". Most folks get their message altered, sometimes trivially and sometimes in a big way. >Suppose I send you a graphic or a video sequence. Do you want >your system to "translate" it ? I sure do not want. Think we can convince Jeff Poskanzer to stop posting "pbmplus" source? We translate graphics all the time in this cyberspace, changing resolution and number of colors, cutting off parts, etc. to fit them to our individualized "decks". Then there are more sophisticated tools to just plain fake pictures, like the one of Reagan, Thatcher, Kaddafi, and Arafat sitting down to dinner in Newsweek. Somewhere in between these we have colorized movies. Where can we draw a line? > If I send >you the message a certain way, I want you to receive it the same >way, even if you can alter it after. If it can be altered after, then the next person may see only the changed message. Is there any significant difference between this and the first receiver getting an altered message? Is there some device-independent security scheme that can prevent any alterations except those specifically needed to display on a device or within a certain environment? > As you can take the words >I am sending today and then put them in any order you wish. But >it's not MY message any more. I can chop up and perhaps delete some lines. It's a long-time favorite Internet tactic. >So, let's go back to cyberspace. When the bandwith will be >high enough, we will not just send each other ASCII characters, >but sound, still pictures, video sequences, and maybe other >things as well (comportemental programms). You can not >customize this, as this is not just your deck that is making >cyberspace alive, but the whole network. If it is like the Internet, we can do just about anything with any media we like, as long is it is "fair use" | public domain. I wonder what happens if, say, the moderator posts a GIF self-photograph, clothed, and, thru modern magic, the unclothed moderator appears in alt.sex.pictures? Can the perpetrator, if found, be sued? Under what laws? Can the perpetrator be kicked off the Internet without recourse to the law? Some of this is being figured out on the Internet right now; news.admin makes for interesting reading sometimes. >[remainder of fine article deleted -- but the original is still back there somewhere, if the moderator didn't alter it :-] -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com "For historical reasons, this feature is unintelligible" The above opinions are my own and not related to those of any organization I may be affiliated with.
gourdol@imag.imag.fr (Gourdol Arnaud) (12/15/90)
In article <12953@milton.u.washington.edu> sequent!szabo@RELAY.CS.NET (Nick Szab o) writes: >Telephones already alter our voices, though user control is >crude or nonexistant. Pop stars lip-synch concerts. TV and >radio broadcast out-of-context "sound bites". Most folks >get their message altered, sometimes trivially and sometimes >in a big way. [ Do you know how lip-synch is said in french ? Play-back. Funny, eh ! ] I never felt that my voice was altered on purpose on a telephone line ! This alteration is only here for technical reasons. If we could have no modification, it would be fine. As for rock-starts, tvs etc. the alteration is made on-purpose by the originator of the message. >Think we can convince Jeff Poskanzer to stop posting "pbmplus" >source? We translate graphics all the time in this cyberspace, >changing resolution and number of colors, cutting off parts, etc. >to fit them to our individualized "decks". That's not what I mean with translating. Here again this translation is made for technical reasons only. If everybody had 2Kx2k screens with 16M colors there would be no translation to do. > Then there are more >sophisticated tools to just plain fake pictures, like the one of >Reagan, Thatcher, Kaddafi, and Arafat sitting down to dinner in >Newsweek. Somewhere in between these we have colorized movies. >Where can we draw a line? I do not want to forbid you to make any use of the picture of myself, of the drawing I can make, the text I can write, the music I can compose (well, actuaaly, I can't compose any music) What I want is that you receive the "first hand" informations 'as is', and that every "first viewer" see it that way. What would "Marylins" or "Mona Lisas" from Warol 'mean' if nobody had seen the originals ? It's difficult to happen in real world. It can easily happen in virtual-worlds. >Is there some device-independent security scheme that can >prevent any alterations except those specifically needed to display >on a device or within a certain environment? Please ! That's not what I was intending. I do not want to have such "security scheme" but merely conventions and savoir vivre. >> As you can take the words >>I am sending today and then put them in any order you wish. But >>it's not MY message any more. > >I can chop up and perhaps delete some lines. It's a long-time >favorite Internet tactic. Yes, but it do not apply to the first hand message, only on a second (or third or...) hand message. This would be the equivalent of an "inteligent" programm that would automagically do spell and grammar checking, then translation to greek for all the messages you recevice (via mail or news). Or still better, that would make a nice summary of those messages. >-- >Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com >"For historical reasons, this feature is unintelligible" >The above opinions are my own and not related to those of any >organization I may be affiliated with. Arnaud. -- /======================//==========================================/ / Arnaud Gourdol. // On the netland : gourdol@imag.fr / /======================//==========================================/
herrickd@uunet.UU.NET (daniel lance herrick) (12/17/90)
In article <12953@milton.u.washington.edu>, sequent!szabo@RELAY.CS.NET (Nick Sza bo) writes: [discussion of people mucking with other people's postings deleted] > > If it is like the Internet, we can do just about anything with any media > we like, as long is it is "fair use" | public domain. > I wonder what happens if, say, the moderator posts a > GIF self-photograph, clothed, and, thru modern magic, the > unclothed moderator appears in alt.sex.pictures? Can the perpetrator, > if found, be sued? Under what laws? Can the perpetrator be kicked off > the Internet without recourse to the law? Some of this is being > figured out on the Internet right now; Well, at least it is being discussed. >news.admin makes for interesting > reading sometimes. Always interesting, sometimes pompous, never seems to make as much progress as the thread on consumer applications already has here. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com