Second Life

I just finished reading the article entitled ‘Revealed: ABC chief's virtual alter ego’, which introduced me to the Second Life website. This site is a virtual reality existing on the internet, and currently maintains 4.6 million registered users. The ‘game’ is played by human users, who create avatars – virtual characters, which can be representative of their users or of what their users desire to be like – and participate in the online community. This concept raises a number of questions, not asked entirely in terms media, but also in terms of social frameworks and interaction. Although I have not yet been involved directly in Second Life (I am planning on creating an account as soon as I finish this report), the general concept of the website seems quite similar to the popular computer game The Sims. In this game the user would create their own family of one to eight members, who participated in various aspects of life, including school, work, dating, recreation, physical requirements, house maintenance and so on. I myself admit to an addiction to this game, which lasted about six months. The end to my addiction came at the same time as the realisation that I was ignoring the aforementioned aspects in my own life. The Sims, despite its lifelike structure, will always be a computer game, and not a realistic simulation of life. There are certain essential elements that are lacking, such as interaction with other human beings, and so in a way provide the final frontier that prevents total obsession with the game. What we have in the case of Second Life is an entirely accurate virtual reality, simulating life to a high degree, in which users can be themselves, or someone else if they so desire. Users can create their ideals, can improve their own flaws, or can create an entirely new persona with which to interact on the website. My fear is that some users will become possessed by the game, and will live out their lives as their avatars on Second Life.

Another possibility is that phoney accounts may be set up to parody or to put down others. We have already seen this occur on the Myspace website, as prominent public figures, such as George Bush, Osama Bin Laden and Jesus are both hailed and jeered in profiles created for them by Myspace users. This can sometimes provide an avenue for witty criticism, but is mostly used for mindless rants. I see no major contention with such public displays of critique for public figures, even when they are singled out in this way; however I have also seen Myspace profiles created in order to single out not-so-public figures, made by haters who feel an urge to mock and humiliate them. Sometimes this is done in jest, but other times it is done out of spite and hatred. Phoney profiles, in which their subjects announce warped sexualities or admit to small genitals, have sprouted up all over the Myspace universe. It is likely that Second Life will result in a number of similar abuses. This should not deter users, however, and by no means should Second Life be removed. At the same time, strict regulation by administrators (which could potentially be easier than the regulation of Myspace) would allow for the maintenance of a safe and friendly environment for all users.

I believe that Second Life is a very intriguing concept, and that anybody even mildly interested should visit the site, whilst remaining cautious of its possible addictiveness. Hopefully there will be no need for a virtual Second Life rehab centre.