Thursday, January 14, 2010

In the online game, “Second Life,” users create virtual alter egos of themselves called avatars. Avatars reside on something called “the grid:” the ever-expanding computer programmed virtual world created by Linden Labs. On the grid, users can change the appearance of their avatars by buying clothes, skins, and accessories. People, through their avatars, can also buy and sell virtual real estate, where they can build and furnish homes with virtual items. The currency of Second Life is the Linden. The exchange rate is 250 Lindens per one U.S, dollars. The more Lindens users have, the more items they can buy, and use to create their fantasies that they might not be able to act upon in the real world. By having an avatars act out the creators desires, it can appear that the avatar takes on the responsibility for the actions, rather than the creator. However, since the creator ultimately has responsibility for the avatar, they are still in control. The creators conscious may not recognize their responsibility because the creator does not identify the avatar as itself. Therefore there becomes a separation between the choices people make for their avatar and choices they make for their own lives. For example, people may direct their avatars to be more sexually violent and generally violent, racist, anti-Semitic, etc. than they themselves would be. The barrier that separates people from being held responsible for their actions as an avatar is autonomy. Autonomy changes the behavior of people because they don’t feel as connected to the consequence of their action. Second Life commodifies freedom by selling people the chance to be autonomous.

10 comments:

  1. Your last sentence confuses me. Are you saying that in general that people in the real world are not autonomous? It sounds like second life gives them is the only way that they can do that. It almost sounds like you were trying to say that their freedom gets commodified, so that people can be whoever they want to be.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really found this paragraph fascinating. Are you saying that it is impossible for people to be autonomous in the real world? Is it good that people get out their pent up sexual violence while participating in "avatar"? How does this affect culture and inter actions between individuals?

    ReplyDelete
  3. First, (I'm gonna play Elise for a second) define autonomous- it seems to be a big part of your introduction. I'm a little bit confused, are you saying it is bad for people to play these games? Wouldn't it be a good thing for people to release their frustrations into the avatar world?
    This is cool topic Bekkah. I've never though about avatar games this way.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting argument. I agree with Sarah, what is your definition of autonomy? When you say that "Second Life commodifies freedom", do you mean just in the game, or also in real life?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Isn't it still possible for the players to act in a generally unpleasant manner without the need for expensive props? If that is the case, is freedom really being commodified, or is the amplification of a pre-existing freedom what is being commodified?
    It's certainly an interesting topic of research, and I particularly like the point about the potential disconnect between a player's in-game persona and his real life personality.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I like your topic, Bekkah, but perhaps the use of the word "anonymity" would be better suited to your argument than autonomy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is an interesting topic but I think that a few points do need to be defined. I also feel as though you don’t need to be quite so specific about this one game and that it somewhat distracts from the point that you’re trying to make.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mention how Second Life can kick people off for illicit behavior. Almost all online games have rules that are frequently broken, and the REAL people are punished as a result, and if sever enough, punished in REAL LIFE and taken to scary real world things like COURT. The fact that a person can be punished in REAL LIFE for something they did as this avatar, breaks down this wall of identity. This is essential to the idea your arguing. This disconnected world has a policing force too, a higher power, THE MAN. Explain that you are not completely disconnected from the world (The cut is not as clean as you describe it.)

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm a little confused what you mean by "autonomy", and since that is a big part of your argument it would be good to define it from the beginning.

    Also, devils advocate:
    Does the online world really affect anyone?
    If not, shouldn't it be the individuals right to throw their money away on something that doesn't matter?

    Really cool topic!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Do you believe the commodification of freedom on the web is positive or negative? This is unclear.

    ReplyDelete