Francois

An interesting insight into the nether regions of the online world. Why not spend all that energy doing charity work rather than killing dragons ;-) But, as McLuhan argues, it is not so much the content (killing dragons) that matters but the new social relations being created by the new technology which, may eventually end up helping solve world hunger, for example? Who knows?

Talking of McLuhan, did you summarize the games chapter?

I think that solving world hunger is probably a matter of people having less babies. In that case maybe it would be better if there were anti-social networks, so people feel more alone and alienated? Cybersex is safer than real Sex? No chance of catching Viruses so to speak.

I wonder how seing people as avatars affects how people see each other in real life. Take for instance Racism or sexism. If how one is seen online is of one's chosing, then maybe when we meet each other in real life we won't be so worried about how other people look, because we realise that they cannot chose their physical selves?

It's interesting that the Avatars in some games are Democratic. (IE everyone must have rather similar avatars.) Whereas in others (From what I have heard) Second life, you can buy clothes and status symbols for yourself. It would be interesting to try to model socialism in Second Life (or a game like Second Life, since SL is based on Property rights), because how could the capitalists object. (Nobody is getting hurt, and the socialists could use their own server power)

As for the Mcluhan reading I read a little of it, but then I lost the reader and was too embarrassed/kept forgetting to ask someone in the class for the reader so that I could read it and do a summary. I would really like to though.

But while people are modeling (or attempting to model) socialism in their virtual world, Africans are starving in Africa.

The trick is to direct the social power of games towards food distribution (for the short term), and money for education and condoms (for the long term.) And maybe in the very long term persuading people to be more interested in helping their brothers out.

I just finished a good book on the world population problem called "How many people can the world support?" It all depends on the choices we make. If the world all lived like America we're already over the limit. If we used resources efficiently the estimates go up to 30 billion, or more. I read a great sci fi book called The Forever War. The world population problem was solved by encouraging homosexuality. Unemployment was solved by encouraging pot smoking.

We'll be playing a game called "A Force More Powerful" which aims to direct games towards social ends.