Op/Ed: A Neko Cyborg Asks, “Where Do We Go From Here?”
by Alphaville Herald on 09/05/07 at 9:00 am
by Syd Loon (Neko Cyborg Informant)
A “proper” prosperous capitalistic society with reason and purpose emerges from the burning embers of a historically passionate art and development community. A natural open source economy, is overshadowed by demeaning skyscrapers filled with marketing executives, armed with nondisclosure agreements, scouring the lands for the next branding concept to further mind control marketing schemes with narrow demographics. New laws are created and distributed throughout the land like barbwire fences; with new methods verifying the identity of the “citizens” to make the economy safer for enterprise. The grid buckles from the recent surge of use and chaos ensues.
Am I dreaming…is the machine mind closing in, am I delusional from too many crossed wires and in need of a serious tune up; or is this Neko Cyborg just evolving into some sort of new dream state reality, never before possible in the mind of a machine created by man. Or maybe it was the over clocking of my circuits from hours of building in the sand under the scorching black sun; combined with idle wanderings in The Wastelands. Is the Soma pill a freebie; or is it still being scripted in a lab underneath Nexis Prime?
Dreaming or not, I constantly ponder if drawing a line between the functional capitalistic system and the freedom and individuality of an open source development community is even possible. Will the coming world metropolis along with the pressure of industry hinder the community from freely creating content, or will the two coexist? The looming conglomerate businesses that seem to be moving in and clogging the grid could very well help this humble economy of developers foresee their future and stimulate the economy.
The aristocracy that is “Linden Lab” seems to be struggling to deal with the pressures of a thriving economy as well, from the abolishment of First Land due to land barrons buying it up and selling it for full market prices, to the overpopulated grid and the stress of dealing with residents who feel that they are not being heard. The Lindens seem to be quite overworked, from grid outages to dealing with fraud and the concept of how to manage identities, to how to deal with griefers.
So at the end of the day, when the Linden dollar has risen to the challenge of international markets and fallen to the greed of capitalism, we must ask the questions that are looming. How will we manage this uncontrollable race of capitalism to an imaginary finish line? Is diversity of races and a culture of artists and free thinkers who are on the front lines of thought important to us? Or, are we more interested in forming a solid brand name that is marketable to the masses? Is this world a place for everyone to freely state their opinions and create freely in a limitless environment, or will we let a select few with deep pockets dictate what “brand” of imagination is the finest. At some point we must define some guidelines in between these two extremes; otherwise the free spirited minorities will be driven further and further underground. Once again coming back to the same question. Where do we go from here?
Lucy Tornado
May 9th, 2007
I think the answer is 42.
Syd Loon
May 9th, 2007
I well i was guessing it was 8, but 9 proved me wrong…hmm…doesnt compute. ;P
marilyn murphy
May 9th, 2007
in the last few months i have had some …well…not sure how to describe them…interesting avatars run up to me all breathless and wanting me to make my little business into some concepts i could not even grasp. they would talk at length about marketing tools and exposure and such. i turned down an interview with wired magazine and when one of them heard of this they expressed dismay. somehow i had cut myself out of something important but not sure what.
i think that the artists will art and the builders will build and the concept gurus will guru and what comes of all this will be what it is.
where do we go from here? that’s just unknowable. we will go where it goes. some will like it, some won’t. such is life.
marilyn murphy
May 9th, 2007
oh, sorry i forgot. it’s 9. 42 was reached by using the wrong integer.
Prokofy Neva
May 9th, 2007
>drawing a line between the functional capitalistic system and the freedom and individuality of an open source development community is even possible.
I’m glad we’ve established that “open-source” sees itself antithetical to capitalism.
Not surprising, as it essentially celebrates not only collectivism but the theft and crime that always results from socialism.
I’m as unimpressed with the new cyber-communism embodied in this editorial’s worldview as I was with the old meat-world communism responsible for most of the mass murder on the planet in the last century.
The idea that freedom and creativity exists only within such a socialistic theology (and it’s no different than any religious belief system) is preposterous. Somebody *always* has to pay. If it weren’t for the venture capitalists — capitalists — there wouldn’t *be* any free playground for all the script kiddies to come in and play “open source”.
That’s not to say that capitalism must run amok and destroy society itself in a rapacious grasp. But capitalism doesn’t run amok in societies that are free — it’s what keeps them free and they are self-correcting.
To the extent governments adopt socialistic and state-capitalistic systems they become unfree.
To me, the ultimate hilarity is seeing this tekkie-wiki crowd that always styled itself culturally as all the free culture opensource “help the community” type are all flocking to work for The Man in these big corporations and making a buck.
Land barons are not the people who bought and sold first land. Rather, script kiddies with an idea to make a quick buck were more often than not the ones to do so. The real land barons of SL with large holdings wouldn’t even bother with the first-land market, it would be time-consuming and stupid to bother with. They could buy up a sim and chop it into 512s and make far more money faster than they could ever hope to make by farming premiums. Only people who can’t think ahead to how the market really works would think they could farm premiums successfully.
Nicholaz Beresford
May 9th, 2007
Sitting on a bench in the shadows of a larger house on a sim which has now for years only accessible to the new elité of SL, the new upper class, my thought wanders toward the past and those extremes you describe.
I am musting about this two class society, the haves and have-nots, those with passport who are free to travel and those who are merey tolerated, the residenst or homeless, like people in another (for some reason considered more real) word, who are waiting for their immigration, those experiencing this subtle difference –when asked who you are– between being able to produce a passport or ID with of the right color, bearing the right insignia and those who merely are able to produce a folded and battered paper stating you are allowed to be here, but not fully.
Few did see the forebearings when it started, when the identity papers were introduced. First only to prevent access to shady regions, but then what was meant to be an almost invisible crack in society, quickly developed into a gulf. The validation-reqired tag spread like funghus because it promised to keep the identityless griefers off your lawn, because it promised to allow for safer business, because it promised to keep the looks of the shops and buildings and parks nice and clean, allowing for a visual experience undisturbed from cheap skins, cheap hair, cheap clothes.
sage
May 9th, 2007
JOIN THE PATRIOTIC NIGRAS AND HELP FIGHTING THE ONLINE STUPIDITY!
http://www.patrioticnigras.com/
We need brave new souls like you!
shockwave yareach
May 9th, 2007
I’m in SL for my own entertainment. I’m not here to start a business, though I have several ideas that I believe would work. For me, having a business in SL and making it operate is work, not fun. Building clubs is fun; running clubs is not. Building excellent no-sit elevators is fun; running all around and installing them for people is not. A business? If I wanted the hassle, I’d make far more money and get real satisfaction (as opposed to virtual satisfaction) bringing back my DBA in the real world.
If Nissan wants to come in and sell vehicles, fine. More power to them. Some stuff I buy rather than burn time making it from scratch, but some stuff I insist on making myself. I’ll buy the furniture, but I’ll build the house.
paulie femto
May 9th, 2007
We now have an alternative!
Support OpenSim.
http://opensecondlife.org/wiki/OpenSim
Sadako Shikami
May 9th, 2007
Does anyone here remember The Palace? The 2-D chat rooms that kinda sorta looked 3-D? I was using it when the South Park Palace opened. I “wizarded” which basically means, keeping the younger kids out of trouble, kicking off the trolls. The users could wear any graphic that was PG, pushing it with Kenny-like corpses and bikini-wearing girls of course. (They had mature palaces, also.) Then Comedy Central came in, cracked down, and all we were left with were the official South Park characters. So you have a visual chat room full of all the same avatar … hmmm, sounds familiar …
Then The Palace started selling their service to businesses, billing it as a “new wave” of visual conferencing.
Then they went belly up. Luckily, they opened their source code before they did, and a small but dedicated community keeps Palace alive. At last check, the largest Palace has about 300 people on it. (http:.//www.palacetools.com)
Wheeeeee, here we go again
JimBean
May 9th, 2007
> Support OpenSim.
PLEASE, I’M BEGGING YOU – MAKE GOOD ON ALL THESE THREATS TO LEAVE.
PLEASE.
Murmandamus Yiyuan
May 9th, 2007
> Prokofy Neva: I’m as unimpressed with the new cyber-communism embodied in this editorial’s worldview as I was with the old meat-world communism responsible for most of the mass murder on the planet in the last century.
I’m not a communist (and not a capitalist, there are other things to call oneself besides these two, although I don’t like boxing anyone in). But don’t mistake historical instances of abuse of a system, with the system itself. And besides that, don’t mistake open source or other “freedom” or “collectivist” -ish world views, with communism. There is a wide variety of, say, anarchistic views that come a lot closer. To use the example, personally, I’m quite comfortable with certain types of anarchism (too bad the word “anarchy” has such negative connotations to most), if people are able to handle it responsibly. Of course, that’s where the real problem is. “The People” at large can not be trusted to act responsibly, this has been proven time and time again. Your interpretation of communism is an excellent example, but so is the current capitalist western society. I loathe both, and both for the same reason.
> Prokofy Neva: The idea that freedom and creativity exists only within such a socialistic theology (and it’s no different than any religious belief system) is preposterous.
Why did you invoke the word “theology” at all, other than to “prove” that the world view of this article’s writer is a religion? Seems like a cheap way (and one step short) of calling him a religious fundamentalist or extremist. If socialism, or communism, or whatever world view you are really attacking, is a religious belief system, then so is capitalism. Such an argument however, seems to serve no purpose other than to devalue that world view. Let’s leave religion out of it. Suddenly one thing is sacred and another thing is blasphemous, and off we go into a pointless discussion where we can’t even agree to disagree. That’s the problem with religion (or rather, with the abuse of a religious system – see also above).
> Prokofy Neva: If it weren’t for the venture capitalists — capitalists — there wouldn’t *be* any free playground for all the script kiddies to come in and play “open source”.
If you are talking about the capitalists who funded Second Life, you are absolutely right. Without those, in a capitalist society, not a lot would get done. Btw did you notice that link to OpenSim?
> Prokofy Neva: That’s not to say that capitalism must run amok and destroy society itself in a rapacious grasp. But capitalism doesn’t run amok in societies that are free — it’s what keeps them free and they are self-correcting.
My opinion is that capitalism is running amok like no tomorrow, that our RL capitalist society is far from free, and that we are not self-correcting but rather escalating into a state where we can’t manage the “collateral” damage anymore (be it financial, environmental, or cultural damage, or damage done to those societies where us capitalists “off-shore” our dirty work to). Ultimately, it will come back in our face. All the while, our capitalism is in a serious state of denial.
As for the article itself, I don’t know that Second Life as we know it is in any serious danger. If enough people don’t like what some companies are trying to do in-world, then whatever they are trying to do won’t work. It only becomes a problem if such capitalist influences cause Linden Lab to limit the freedom of residents to such an extent, that they won’t be able to choose anymore whether or not to accept those companies in-world (i.e. to be self-correcting). This is all getting increasingly abstract.
Prokofy Neva
May 9th, 2007
>I’m not a communist (and not a capitalist, there are other things to call oneself besides these two, although I don’t like boxing anyone in).
Well, nobody likes to be boxed in, but when you adopt certain positions, you’ll be labelled; live with the consequences of your choices. You are gratuitously banging on capitalism and private property as a system, without any real thought in your head about who will pay for your hedonistic adventures. I merely wish to call you on that.
The ideals of communism underlie the open-source extremism and the concepts that one reads from Rheingold or Creative Commons or any other of these ideological systems that start from an extremist notion that “property is theft” and goes from there, celebrating communization of property and collectivism in various ways, with some recognition of individual proprietary rights merely a half-way house on the way to their larger goal of ending capitalism as a system.
> But don’t mistake historical instances of abuse of a system, with the system itself.
Communism isn’t some good ideology, waiting to be rescued by just the right sort of enlightened people like yourself. It is a system and an ideology that contains embedded within the features of crime and murder that have always discredited it. It’s part of the Big Lie that people tell about communism that it is somehow able to be rehabilitated as a “good idea” that “just had poor implementation”. There aren’t “instances” of abuse but conspiratorial, systematic, pervasive, embedded abusiveness as an institution.
>And besides that, don’t mistake open source or other “freedom” or “collectivist” -ish world views, with communism. There is a wide variety of, say, anarchistic views that come a lot closer.
Celebration of the collective and attacks on the private are at the heart of the communist ideology. Don’t sugar-coat it.
> To use the example, personally, I’m quite comfortable with certain types of anarchism (too bad the word “anarchy” has such negative connotations to most),
Um, gosh. Gee, whiz. Could it be all the acts of violence and destruction and terrorism it is associated with? I wonder…
>if people are able to handle it responsibly. Of course, that’s where the real problem is. “The People” at large can not be trusted to act responsibly, this has been proven time and time again.
Yep, I’m familiar with that “deep problem”. Always the good ideology. Always the utopia that isn’t to blame *itself*. It’s just those pesky bad poorly-implementing people that get in the way! Damn them!
>Your interpretation of communism is an excellent example, but so is the current capitalist western society. I loathe both, and both for the same reason.
And I loathe your reasoning, which is specious, brainless, and infantile. Capitalist Western society, my dear, is what gave you the Internet, Second Life, and this blog to write on. Go know.
>Why did you invoke the word “theology” at all, other than to “prove” that the world view of this article’s writer is a religion? Seems like a cheap way (and one step short) of calling him a religious fundamentalist or extremist.
Because it’s a belief system, as ardently held as any religion. I could say, “Mary was conceived without sin in the Virgin Birth” and it is no different in kind than “Capitalist Western society is evil and exploitative”. Neither has any proof. Neither has any meaning other than as a declarative world view, upon which the rest of the belief system hinges.
>If socialism, or communism, or whatever world view you are really attacking, is a religious belief system, then so is capitalism.
Capitalism is pragmatic. It has within it the ability to change itself, to even adopt socially progressive policies, to change, to shed what doesn’t work, because it is always wedded to the bottom line of profit and business. That keeps it tethered to the real world in ways that socialism, which is always and everywhere virtual, never can be.
>Such an argument however, seems to serve no purpose other than to devalue that world view. Let’s leave religion out of it. Suddenly one thing is sacred and another thing is blasphemous, and off we go into a pointless discussion where we can’t even agree to disagree. That’s the problem with religion (or rather, with the abuse of a religious system – see also above).
Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
>If you are talking about the capitalists who funded Second Life, you are absolutely right. Without those, in a capitalist society, not a lot would get done. Btw did you notice that link to OpenSim?
OpenSim is some wonky, geeky, nutty libsecondlife thingie that doesn’t work yet for normal people who aren’t programmers. It’s got like a block of wood and some retarded chicken avatar or something in it. It doesn’t have anything near the functionality of Second Life. I will not be holding my breath for Open Sim.
>My opinion is that capitalism is running amok like no tomorrow, that our RL capitalist society is far from free, and that we are not self-correcting but rather escalating into a state where we can’t manage the “collateral” damage anymore (be it financial, environmental, or cultural damage, or damage done to those societies where us capitalists “off-shore” our dirty work to). Ultimately, it will come back in our face. All the while, our capitalism is in a serious state of denial.
So, uh, well, let’s try…Chinese post-communist state capitalism? Russian socialist oligarchism? Erm…let’s see. Was it Nigeria you wanted as a model? See, the haters of capitalism are really hard put to find a really working model in the real world outside their feverish fantasies and utopias.
>As for the article itself, I don’t know that Second Life as we know it is in any serious danger. If enough people don’t like what some companies are trying to do in-world, then whatever they are trying to do won’t work. It only becomes a problem if such capitalist influences cause Linden Lab to limit the freedom of residents to such an extent, that they won’t be able to choose anymore whether or not to accept those companies in-world (i.e. to be self-correcting). This is all getting increasingly abstract.
I find this utterly insane — preposterous — that this company that does ID verification poses any significant threat to anybody’s freedom whatsoever. Absolutely ridiculous. This is just some nutter extreme leftoid Internet meme, and I don’t see why I’m required to believe in that any more than I’m required to believe in the Virgin Birth. But hey, it was quite a miracle that Mary’s mom, Ann, got pregnant at that age, eh?
Syd Loon
May 9th, 2007
Well…im just glad the answer is not 42. ;P
Murmandamus Yiyuan
May 9th, 2007
Eheheheheeeh… Ok, well as pointless as it may be, let me just reiterate a couple of things for the almighty record. But I should probably start with saying what I’d hoped was obvious: I am not attacking you, or anyone, personally. Comments are just that. Comments.
>Well, nobody likes to be boxed in, but when you adopt certain positions, you’ll be labelled; live with the consequences of your choices. You are gratuitously banging on capitalism and private property as a system, without any real thought in your head about who will pay for your hedonistic adventures. I merely wish to call you on that.
Instead of adopting positions, let’s just provide arguments for and against, without feeling a need to label anyone as anything. I think this should be the basis for any discussion between adult people. Or rather, label me however you like, but don’t take those assumptions into the discussion thinking that they back up your arguments. I did not bang on private property. There’s one such assumption, and I don’t know where it came from (other than your head). I don’t feel there is anything necessarily wrong with private property. This may be a characteristic of capitalism, but not exclusively so. Although as always, and as you have a knack for pointing out, anything taken to the extreme is a Bad Thing. I don’t care if it’s capitalism, communism, anarchy, private property, patent law (…), religion, blog comments, or diet pills. If your arguments are all based on taking an opposite view to the extreme (and adding in a bunch of various assumptions about the person expressing that view), then there is really no point in arguing. – You Are Right!
> The ideals of communism underlie the open-source extremism and the concepts that one reads from Rheingold or Creative Commons or any other of these ideological systems that start from an extremist notion that “property is theft” and goes from there, celebrating communization of property and collectivism in various ways, with some recognition of individual proprietary rights merely a half-way house on the way to their larger goal of ending capitalism as a system.
Collectivism enters into a whole lot of concepts, just like ketchup enters into a whole lot of recepies. But not everything with ketchup is a hamburger sandwich. And yes I am defending collectivism here, despite my previous statement about private property. This does not reflect on whatever position I adopt (or you think I adopt) in this matter, if any. It means nothing more and nothing less than, Collectivism does not equal communism. See also my next statement.
> Communism isn’t some good ideology, waiting to be rescued by just the right sort of enlightened people like yourself. It is a system and an ideology that contains embedded within the features of crime and murder that have always discredited it. It’s part of the Big Lie that people tell about communism that it is somehow able to be rehabilitated as a “good idea” that “just had poor implementation”. There aren’t “instances” of abuse but conspiratorial, systematic, pervasive, embedded abusiveness as an institution.
Regardless of whether I agree with your explanation of communism, I was not defending communism in my previous post. I was pointing out what I took to be a confusion on your part, between a system and an instance of abuse of that system. The whole point is moot, though. This article was not about communism no matter what you put into it.
> Um, gosh. Gee, whiz. Could it be all the acts of violence and destruction and terrorism it is associated with? I wonder…
Yes, I think so. That is what people associate with anarchy. And that’s unfortunate, as I said. Because those acts of violence and destruction and terrorism are usually the result of fallen governments. There is a distinct difference between a fallen government and an anarchistic society. My point was, many people don’t know this difference, and it seems neither do you. What a shame. Try here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism (be sure to follow the links to all those different kinds of anarchism too, and may I also point out that there are separate entries for collectivist anarchism and anarchist communism).
> Yep, I’m familiar with that “deep problem”. Always the good ideology. Always the utopia that isn’t to blame *itself*. It’s just those pesky bad poorly-implementing people that get in the way! Damn them!
Ideologies, as implied by the name, tend to be better than their implementations, or attempts at implementation. Second Life is an excellent example of that too, muhihihi.. Seriously though, if you have so much trust in “The People”, then why would you need a system such as capitalism to impose “self-correcting” properties on a society?
> And I loathe your reasoning, which is specious, brainless, and infantile. Capitalist Western society, my dear, is what gave you the Internet, Second Life, and this blog to write on. Go know.
Actually, the internet ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet ) flourished where your beloved “property” was not an issue. A quote from that page:
“Meanwhile, over the course of the decade, the Internet successfully accommodated the majority of previously existing public computer networks (although some networks, such as FidoNet, have remained separate). According to a research done by K.G. Coffman and Andrew Odlyzko, the internet is growing at a rate of over 100% per year.[1] This growth is often attributed to the lack of central administration, which allows organic growth of the network, as well as the non-proprietary open nature of the Internet protocols, which encourages vendor interoperability and prevents any one company from exerting too much control over the network.”
In the history of the internet, attempts to own it, or fundamental components of it, have horribly failed. The internet you are referring to ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web ) was made into what it is today thanks to open standards and sharing of technologies. Ever heard of sendmail? How about apache? How about the plethora of free content management systems (including blogs) that are available today. Where would the internet be without those? Here are some quotes from the last link:
“Unlike predecessors such as HyperCard, the World Wide Web was non-proprietary, making it possible to develop servers and clients independently and to add extensions without licensing restrictions.”
“On April 30, 1993, CERN announced[4] that the World Wide Web would be free to anyone, with no fees due. Coming two months after the announcement that gopher was no longer free to use, this produced a rapid shift away from gopher and towards the Web.”
Go know.
> Because it’s a belief system, as ardently held as any religion. I could say, “Mary was conceived without sin in the Virgin Birth” and it is no different in kind than “Capitalist Western society is evil and exploitative”. Neither has any proof. Neither has any meaning other than as a declarative world view, upon which the rest of the belief system hinges.
If it is my opinion that you argue purely by discrediting other peoples’ statements, by stretching their interpretation to fit some box of your choosing, then attributing to that statement all the connotations that may or may not be valid in reference to that box, and all the while not providing any arguments (let alone proof) of your own…. then I probably have no proof of that. Does that make this opinion of mine, a religion? Does your lack of proof for your opinion make capitalism into your religion? If so, I’d say you are adopting an extremist position. If not, then religion does not at all enter into the subject of this article or its comments.
> OpenSim is some wonky, geeky, nutty libsecondlife thingie that doesn’t work yet for normal people who aren’t programmers. It’s got like a block of wood and some retarded chicken avatar or something in it. It doesn’t have anything near the functionality of Second Life. I will not be holding my breath for Open Sim.
Neither am I. They may well be a very long way off. So was Linden Lab in its first year (and it can be argued that they still are). In its first year, Linden Lab was probably the wonky, geeky nutty one. But that does not preclude the possibility that it (SL or OpenSim) will “get there”. In fact I’d say, if enough people want OpenSim to happen, it will happen. I can’t say the same for Second Life (open letters and protests against age verification notwithstanding). And in relation to your claim about the internet being a monument to capitalism (…do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?), I’d venture a guess that with new open standards coming up relating to virtual worlds (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3D_Consortium ), Second Life as it is now, might – in due time – become obsolete, regardless of any of the troubles it currently faces.
> So, uh, well, let’s try…Chinese post-communist state capitalism? Russian socialist oligarchism? Erm…let’s see. Was it Nigeria you wanted as a model? See, the haters of capitalism are really hard put to find a really working model in the real world outside their feverish fantasies and utopias.
I think we all agree that no utopia exists, and as such I would not choose any of your examples as a model. Nor would I choose capitalism. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean it works. It works for now (although that too depends on how you look at it). Which can be said for a lot of other “models” as well, including those that have previously failed.
> I find this utterly insane — preposterous — that this company that does ID verification poses any significant threat to anybody’s freedom whatsoever. Absolutely ridiculous. This is just some nutter extreme leftoid Internet meme, and I don’t see why I’m required to believe in that any more than I’m required to believe in the Virgin Birth. But hey, it was quite a miracle that Mary’s mom, Ann, got pregnant at that age, eh?
Ok, this post has already become a lot longer than I intended. Suffice to say, you are not required to believe what anybody else is saying. But you’d do a lot better in getting your point across, if you’d actually listened to the arguments, get into them, and provide arguments for your case. You don’t seem to do any of those things. Of course you are not obligated to bring any point across, but then why whine so loudly about other peoples’ opinions?
Btw. who said the answer is not 42! Blasphemy!! Hide in shame!!! (and read this while you’re at it: http://www.biota.org/people/douglasadams/ )
Cheers, peeps
Pahzooza Palooza
May 10th, 2007
WTF?!?!?
It’s not 42?
Screw this.
Syd Loon
May 11th, 2007
I actually completely agree with most of what was said. Im not one to take sides, as I understand that capitalism is nessisary but also think that most of capitalism is built on a open source base or community of some sort in most situations. As someone stated with the 2D chat program, I think in some cases capitalism destroys the market entirely by attempting to gain too much profit too quickly. I see the growth in this world (Second Life) to be quite large over the last few months. Also Linden Lab seems to have there eye on the prize rather then the community. I think this community will grow no matter what over time. There is no need to worry about growth. Instead, it might be a good thing for Linden Lab to think about the community rather the the big businesses coming in. They will come no matter what as Second Life is on the verge of somthing truely amazing. Linden Lab should instead focus as much attention as possible to creating a strong grid or expanding the maximum number of people in a sim; rather then forcing new technologies into the mix too quickly to promote growth. That is in the humble opinion of a Neko Cyborg. Oh… Comments are great all the time.
Has anyone figured out if the answer is 42, 8 or 9. Thats also quite important. ;P
Miraren Firefly
May 11th, 2007
Prokofy Neva on Anarchism: Um, gosh. Gee, whiz. Could it be all the acts of violence and destruction and terrorism it is associated with? I wonder…
Far more destructive acts have been perpetrated in the name of other ideologies and systems, such as capitalism, fascism, communism and socialism, religious states and so on, than Anarchism. Historically, there have been a few bombings and some violence – but never war or genocide.
Mind you, i’m not trying to advocate Anarchism here – i think it’s idiotic, personally. i’m just trying to set the record straight. Anarchists are more likely to be associated with the Animal Liberation Front than any terrorist organization, more likely to advocate communal living than violence, and usually are quite certain that Anarchism is a way of bringing peace. That’s right – not destruction, bedlam and violence, but peace. As loony an idea as that may be, they’re generally not violent folks.
Hazim Gazov
May 11th, 2007
prok, if you were to please stuff your greasy head back into your green rotten vagina and resume fertilizing your putrid ova with your asexual-gamete containing tongue we can resume letting the adults talk here.
Syd Loon
May 11th, 2007
Yes, I also agree but it is a select few that are able to deal with the extreme freedom of total or for that matter even partial Anarchy. Im sure there would be alot of little issues that would build up over time and create serious problems for the community if it was too large.
As for children…I dont mind if they have somthing to say…let them say it. I dont think that creating age barriers are going to hender children from getting online and accessing content that they have probably been exposed to already on tv or some other medium its just a way for the business community to tie the Lindens down more and make second life more of a business opportunity…opps…that was alittle bit too much of a comment for a Cyborg Neko i think…signing off =)
Prokofy Neva
May 11th, 2007
>Far more destructive acts have been perpetrated in the name of other ideologies and systems, such as capitalism, fascism, communism and socialism, religious states and so on, than Anarchism. Historically, there have been a few bombings and some violence – but never war or genocide.
Depends on who your political grandfathers are and what your ideology is and what you mean by “anarchist”. Russian revolutions who espoused anarchism and engaged in terrorist act ushered in the mass murder of the Bolsheviks and communist successors.
Prokofy Neva
May 11th, 2007
>As someone stated with the 2D chat program, I think in some cases capitalism destroys the market entirely by attempting to gain too much profit too quickly. I see the growth in this world (Second Life) to be quite large over the last few months. Also Linden Lab seems to have there eye on the prize rather then the community. I
The question is: who pays? Somebody always has to pay. LL has subsidized an enormous amount of activity and millions of people in order to reach the point of profitability. While I agree they are greedy and over-accelerated, it is not for profit, it is for influence.
Prokofy Neva
May 11th, 2007
>Collectivism enters into a whole lot of concepts,
Only in your book.
Collectivism does equal communism. Communities that are made on a voluntary, collaborative basis aren’t collectivism, subsuming the individual to the whole.
I’m unmoved by any reference to Wikipedia, who itself is filled with anarchists of all stripes looking for a pass and a write-off for their bad ideas and behaviour.
Prokofy Neva
May 11th, 2007
BTW, I’d like everybody in this thread to stand up like real men and women and condemn the kind of extreme sexist and violent insult talk that Hazim Gazov is engaging in. It’s sick, and it’s wrong, and you don’t solve a problem like that by just ignoring it, you condemn it. You don’t solve it by *forcing* people to have some “code of ethics* but you *do* ask them to stand up, like men and women, and condemn things like that voluntarily if they care about the climate for free discussion at the Herald.
That kind of vulgar and violent expression is unacceptable, and it is not necessary to abdicate your extremist First Amendment positions to call it as such.
I’d also like to mention while I think of it that Travis Lambert is one of the many people responsible for the phenomenon of Hazim Gazov, because of his uber extremist “innocent until proven guilty” stance. Hazim Gazov is no longer in the People list. This isn’t because of a vendetta; this isn’t because of a mistake; this isn’t because of guilt by association, it’s for heavy-duty griefing, systematically, planned, repeated, and deliberate.
So please, let’s get off this “OMGOD I can’t ever judge a person by their group affiliations” when we’ve seen time and again that *these groups* are all of a piece, and their members are consciously and deliberately griefing inworld and making violent and sexist and unacceptable commentary on third-party sites.
mootykips
May 11th, 2007
Cry more, Prok.
Hazim Gazov
May 11th, 2007
>>Old 09-27-2006, 05:49 AM #5
Irvin Maltz
prok, if you were to please stuff your greasy head back into your green rotten vagina and resume fertilizing your putrid ova with your asexual-gamete containing tongue we can resume letting the adults talk here.
It’s copypasta, prok. Lurk moar.
Hazim Gazov
May 11th, 2007
BTW, I’d like everybody in this thread to stand up like real men and women and condemn the kind of extremely boring and annoying hag talk that Prokofy Neva is engaging in. It’s sick, and it’s wrong, and you don’t solve a problem like that by just ignoring it, you condemn it. You don’t solve it by *forcing* people to have some “code of ethics* but you *do* ask them to stand up, like men and women, and condemn things like that voluntarily if they care about the thought of prok leaving the Herald.
That kind of stupid and irrelevant expression is unacceptable, and it is not necessary to abdicate your extremist Bolshevik positions to call it as such.
I’d also like to mention while I think of it that Philip Linden is one of the many people responsible for the phenomenon of Prokofy Neva, because of his uber extremist “banned from this blog until she shuts the fuck up” stance. Prokofy is no longer in the People I would care to see live another day list. This isn’t because of a vendetta; this isn’t because of a mistake; this isn’t because of death by boredom, it’s for heavy-duty ranting, systematically, planned, repeated, and deliberate.
So please, let’s get off this “OMGOD I can’t ever judge a person by their group affiliations” when we’ve seen time and again that *these groups* are all of a piece, and their members are consciously and deliberately boring others inworld and making stupid and lame and refrigeratoronmylawnomg commentary on third-party sites.
Now here’s what makes me lol.
Somehow Prok always seems to derail the comments into something more her liking, like claiming people are communists, and committing libel. She claims I’m a “well documented serial griefer”. A lot of people say that, but they yet to pony up the documents. Prokofy is just another three-eyed fish in the barrel.
Murmandamus Yiyuan
May 11th, 2007
I don’t associate myself with groups of posturing people, nor with comments such as those on this page by Hazim, nor with certain remarks by Profoky, nor with anybody or anything else. I am not afraid to state my opinion, but I see no need to take one “small” position to the exclusion of everything else. I don’t like it when others associate me with something on the basis of a single post. I think that is extremely short-sighted.
I didn’t speak for (or against) some group or some ideal or whatever else, nor in their name. I spoke only for myself, and without intending to strike a pose. There is no cause for judging me by my group affiliations, because I have not affiliated myself with any in this matter.
I would not attack Prokofy, Hazim, Syd, or anyone else personally, if only for the simple fact that I don’t know them personally. Besides that, I have no reason to. All I thought we were doing here was to have an open discussion about the article and the thoughts it provokes. It seems I was wrong.
My first post in these comments was my first post on this site. This post will be my last. I will not be part of any more trolling and flaming.
What a shame. But thanks to “The People” for proving my point.
Syd Loon
May 11th, 2007
I am sad to hear that Murmandamus, as i posted this to stimulate thought. This is obviously a heated debate which means that more time and further thought is necessary. I think both “sides” brought up valid points and perspectives. As there is no final say, when it comes to political debates, if there are not more then two parties, there is no democracy and no freedom of thought. If this world “Second Life” is anything, I think it is an experiment or a social model that shows us something about this world and the people in it. There are always good things and bad things to every political or social model. I think a fusion of multiple social models is necessary to get society that is open to growth and also has a strong base of creators and free thinkers that are able to speak there mind openly without criticism. Otherwise Democracy, Socialism, Anarchy and every other political or social model fails, by the very definition of a society. All the posts that I have seen were quite interesting, even those fueled by emotions and hate speech showed a side of this debate that I didn’t know existed. I hope that I can continue to write articles in the future that are able to stimulate this type of interest.
Sasara Klaar
May 12th, 2007
Well, this was certainly an interesting discussion, full of frighteningly flammable straw men, not to mention plenty of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Did anyone notice that the article was an opinion piece? Or are opinions no longer valued, excepting they be your own?
Speaking of open source – chances are you’ll find that this very website is served by open source, and likely the database storing these comments is open source. And a capitalist company is making a profit hosting it.
Open source can and does make excellent sense in a capitalist scenario, and all the wonderful, generous people who donated their time and talent to create that infrastructure benefit from it indirectly as their world is populated with better products, and in many cases jobs, as a result of their generosity.
Sasara Klaar
May 12th, 2007
Oh, and Prokofy is a troll, dear ones. Highly successful at it, I might add. I don’t find much joy in that particular art form, but can appreciate a master at work…
Miraren Firefly
May 12th, 2007
Sasara: i wouldn’t say that Prokofy Neva is a troll, as such – just a vehement arguer with a tendency towards inflammatory rhetoric, lengthy and obsessive posting, sweeping generalizations, and, as i see it, hot air. i’m always the first to point out that Prokofy is one of the primary members of his own loathed “Feted Inner Core;” that being said, he has in all other ways been a good person in my interactions with him.
To those claiming superiority by way of being Anonymoose/From Teh Intarnats and all that crap, spouting 4Chan /b/ (oh noes, i said it!!!!!!!!!) memes and giggling “LURK MOAR LAWL” at every turn:
GB2/b/ and GTFO my SL Herald. Seeing as AnoniTrolling outside Anonymous areas is auto-fail, your very existence is epic fail. Go back to the Chans, where you can spout Fresh Prince copypasta and hail Raptor Jesus and tell people that Milhouse is not a meme to your heart’s content. Anonymous areas exist for a reason: anarchy is full of LAWLS. However, it ceases to be full of LAWLS when you impose it on other people, outside of the designated anarchy zone – at that time, it becomes epic fail, the mods of whatever place you luxors are raiding go “OMG WTF IS THIS SHIT” at your faggotry, you get b&, and you’re sent crying back to AnoniLand. You then write a HOMG HUEG!!! Encyclopedia Dramatica entry about how LEGENDAAERY the raid was, get your diaper changed, and go to bed.
The immaturity of most raiders, especially as compared to the fairly impressive (and counterintuitive) maturity of /b/tards as a whole, continues to disappoint me. Stop giggling that “HAY GUYZ I HAS AN INFLAMMATORY COPYPASTAS!!! RAID TIEM NAOW PLOX??!!” and leave Prokofy alone.
Furthermore, Candleja
Hazim Gazov
May 12th, 2007
It’s an unwritten law of SLHerald that you must flame or be flamed by Prokofy Neva in the comments at least once, or you are ultimate fail.
Syd Loon
May 12th, 2007
here is a link to a petition against the age verification if anyone is interested
http://yanai.blackmage.org/sky2/?page_id=2543
mootykips
May 12th, 2007
gb2 /bed/ intlib/random gaiafag furry sympathizer, “Miraren Firefly”. you might as well be playing habbo. “designated anarchy zone” my ass.
cocks
May 12th, 2007
penis
Syd Loon
May 13th, 2007
Wow…that was quite a thought regression…oh well I think the comments for this article are dead…to the next one =)
SYD L00N
Dec 20th, 2007
wow..i remember this one..think its about to to write something new