Wondering, can a system of virtual interactions via avatars really win against a world of more "real" video and VOIP interaction. Is the imaginary space that Second Life builds more a distraction than a platform?
The visual Imaginary space of Second Life remains essentially a game. People play at society in Second Life and sometimes the game gets very intense. In South Korea players in a virtual world have been reported to attack each other in RL. This power of identity in imagination gives a space like SL or WoW a meaning and intensity Facebook or Twitter can't match.
And I am starting to think this is a problem. SL is hard to use. All the imaginary space comes with a overhead of poor usuability and performance. You are paying a lot to have a nice imaginary space compared to Facebook or Skype. The trend of mobility is promoting more simple interfaces and designs.
I would look at the trend in Internet community design and argue that it points to more simple and more mobile. Starting with spaces like Flickr, MySpace and Second Life the Web 2.0 user community has elected to use more simple HTML interface solutions like Facebook and Twitter.
Imagine a book that when you read about fire really burns you, would you want to read it? Would you carry it around if it weighed 10 times what a normal book does. Second Life is heavy because the technology of imagination is heavy. I am starting to wonder if it all is not just a waste.
Rober1236 Jua the Cyber Trekker of Second Life