Forbes Associated Press: Peeping Tom Linden is Watching You

by Urizenus Sklar on 09/04/06 at 3:11 pm

There is an interesting article in Forbes online from the Associated Press about the new crop of sex games, reported ages ago here in the Herald. But what is really truly interesting is what the article has to say about the “relatively successful” platform Second Life:

“The game is not designed to be sexual in nature, but about a third of the activity in its world, which has about 100,000 users, centers around adult encounters, according to its developers.”

Wait! Rewind! We’ve heard Reuben Linden say that 1/3 of the economy is naughty – but 1/3 of the *activity in world*? Is this a mistake by Forbes the AP or are the Lindens really classifying, recording, and quantifying the number of encounters in game that are sexual? One thing for sure, they are certainly *capable* of recording every last thing we do. Watch your backs. Someone might be watching.

6 Responses to “Forbes Associated Press: Peeping Tom Linden is Watching You”

  1. Prokofy Neva

    Apr 9th, 2006

    I think the Lindens probably wouldn’t actually have to do any real-time human peeping. They could probably just load up their server-statistic scrapers to have the names of the most famous pose-ball makers and to fire off any time one of those creators’ scripts executed, something simple like that. I think what’s more likely tho is that the estimate that there’s 1/3 of the economy as “the naughty economy” has merely been garbled. I’d have to disagree that 1/3 of the economy is that, though, but they’d know better. It appears to me that clothing sales are the lion’s share; then land; then other content.

  2. Matthias

    Apr 9th, 2006

    Yet another innacuracy:

    “which has about 100,000 users”

    Hmm, if you consider 176,280 to be 100,000, then I guess they’re correct, but otherwise, they’re quite a bit off, and have been for ages.

  3. Tony Walsh

    Apr 9th, 2006

    I’d love to know where Forbes got that percentage. Probably the reporter just wasn’t paying attention to the context of the statistic. Based on the population number cited, at least part of the facts were collected late last year.

    On a side-note, it seems fewer mainstream media outlets are doing their fact-checking duty these days. I’m guessing Forbes didn’t cross-check this story with LL for accuracy before it was published.

  4. ren reynolds

    Apr 11th, 2006

    Dibbs. And thanks for the original link.

    “centers around adult encounters” it’s ‘centered on’ not ‘around’.

    >”which has about 100,000 users”
    >>Hmm, if you consider 176,280 to be 100,000, then I guess they’re correct, but otherwise, they’re quite a bit off, and have been for ages.

    The article says ‘users’. 176,whatever is ‘residents’ which I take to be accounts, which I take to include alt’s, one person with several alt’s is one user – if those assumptions are correct then ‘about 100,000’ seems a fair guess – did LL publish some actual user figures and I missed it?

  5. Urizenus

    Apr 11th, 2006

    Yeah, 100K users seems optimistic if anything, in spite of the gazzillion accounts. I changed this from a Forbes story to an Associated Press story, since I’m not sure if the story originated with Forbes — it just happens to be where I found it first. Since then it has appeared in…well.. a gazzillion places.

    Regarding the 30% naughty transactions figure that the Lindens are giving out, it seems low. All they can really keep track of are the things they *know* are used for sexual purposes (and then probably only for the well known toymakers)and they have no idea about the money changing hands outside of the game. You know, for those 1337 webcammers that get $50 a pop, or for the out of game trists that are organized in game. Then too, how much would people spend on skins and tats and fancy duds if they weren’t using those accessories to improve their online sex lives. If you include transactions that are not for sex toys but rather for stuff that wires your cyberlife, well it wouldn’t shock me to hear that 80% of the economy is about that.

  6. Matthias

    Apr 11th, 2006

    Only 80%, Uri? That still seems low to me when you make it that inclusive. You could also easily by that logic pull in any clothing – it’s to make your avatar sexier. Same with skins, hair, etc. If you look at it that way, it would be very near 100% (normal furniture and some scripts being the only exceptions).

Leave a Reply