P. Padmanabhan's "Exploring Human Factors in Virtual Worlds" (Maybe she should have kept on exploring)

Yesterday, I finished reading this article which was published fairly recently in Technical Communication (April 2008, to be exact). In light of the last article which was read by the class, and the reactions which it evoked from almost everyone who wrote about it or commented on it, this reading didn't really set off any alarms. The issues discussed by the author have largely been mentioned already by most of us EG 3773ers, and those concerns which we haven't pointed out by now are not anything really shocking: cybercrime (something we hear about every day), health concerns (the physical ones, such as carpal tunnel syndrome and transmission of disease, which itself seemed a bit contrived - I know it's a possibility but you certainly don't have to be in a virtual world to pick up germs. You just have to be using a CUNY computer lab! Or a gym!), and finally, she mentions cybersickness as related to motion sickness, but doesn't really go into it in any more detail. Maybe it is because we tore up that last article so much, but this one, to me, had a rather shallow aspect and failed to answer any questions I have about what sort of effect these virtual environments will have upon society, or about how the creators of these sites are attempting to resolve the problems inherent in virtual computing. In my opinion, it also failed to really "explore" the "human factors in virtual worlds," and gave them only a quick glazing-over in order to pacify the publisher's demands. Maybe it's the editor who is to blame. Maybe they just didn't have enough space in their magazine. It just seems that a lot more could be said about this.

The author Padmanabhan attempts to call attention to several items which can be addressed when designing a virtual environment. After a rather long and tedious introduction to the fundamental purposes of virtual worlds, including their growth statistics, perceived benefits, and identifiable hazards, the article investigates the actual design of these spaces, and what might be considered as an improvement to existing formats. All of the design areas discussed were previously spotlighted by another research group in 1998, and the author simply expands upon their theoretical findings.

Human performance efficiency is the first area Padmanabhan delves into. She begins with a discussion of what is dubbed "presence" in a virtual world, which is basically the degree of realism and fullness of the experience. The entire section is given over to describing various examples of virtual experience, and really does nothing to explain the details of what is being done to enhance the experience and foster "presence." She mentions the kiosks in a virtual Tokyo, the educational activities of a site called "Ancient Spaces," and even videoconferencing and teleconferencing in Microsoft Office. Yet she goes no further. She does not mention anything being done to augment sound quality, either live or computer-generated. She does not even attempt to address the use of 3-D graphics, giving it only the briefest nod of acknowledgment. I would have liked a discourse on the pros and cons of the 3-D era which arrived with the release of Microsoft Vista. Is it really all it claims to be? Who is using it? Who isn't? How can it be implemented so that more people have access to it without buying a whole new operating system or graphics card? And how much can it enhance a virtual experience when an avatar is still a crude, awkward, cartoonish representation of a human being - and when the graphics take so long to load that the screen must be refreshed and rebuilt with every avatar gesture?

Padmanabhan then goes on to discuss what tasks or activities may benefit from a virtual environment, and what can be done to enhance those experiences. I believe that either she chose poor examples, or that there is really very little advantage to transferring the tried-and-true method of doing things (such as exploration and training) to the virtual method. She gives, as case studies, the field of automobile and aircraft repair, operation, and maintenance. Well, flight simulators have been around for quite some time, and unless the goal is to save space, I don't think that the pilots need any more virtual training. There is no substitute, as they say, for the real thing; personally, I would rather know that my pilot logged actual miles during his/her training over virtual miles any day. If she means that these physical enhancements to simulate a cockpit should be implemented for the casual user, then I would say that should be relegated to the video arcades and game halls. At least, then, the gaming junkies would have to get off of their butts and go somewhere in order to have the experience.

What really amazes me is that she then touts the advantages of virtualizing the process of learning auto mechanics and repair. There is no advantage whatsoever to this, and I can say that with some authority being quite adept at bicycle repair and computer repair, and also having grown up with an expert auto mechanic as my stepfather (City Tech Auto Mechanics lab technician, in fact - they moved the department to Bronx Community College many moons ago). Why bother with a simulation when there are literally thousands of junk cars around to practice on? If you can afford data goggles, why are you trying to be an auto mechanic? If you can't afford tools, why are you buying data goggles? Why are you even running a sophisticated virtual world program on your (supposedly) crummy computer? Are you just trying to avoid getting your hands dirty? Because I can tell you, that's a big part of the game. It's like trying to be a surgeon and avoid the blood (well, maybe that's not a good analogy; the medical field is sort of getting there...).

You get the point. Again, this is a field where you can only learn by doing. You need to feel the tightness of the bolts, the delicate adjustments and precise amounts of pressure to apply. You need to know what it feels like to need an extra hand in there. Obviously the author never repaired anything.

There were many other points in the article which I objected to. I will save these for another blog entry, perhaps. But towards the end, Padmanabhan mentions usability testing of virtual worlds. This, to me, is laughable. Does anyone think there is any validity to a usability test of a world with millions of participants who are constantly creating objects, events, and mini-environments? How can you effectively test a world that is

expanding at the rate of 20 servers per week? How can you test a world where everyone is indulging in their wildest fantasies? It is impossible, even if all they do is test, and test, and test some more. Even then, the unpredictable will be more the rule than the exception.

I hope I haven't bored you too much with this critique, but the article really irked me. I found it redundant, vague, and uninformative. I would have much rather been reading my boring textbook; at least I would have learned something.

Photo credits (in order of appearance):

1. www.eyebeam.org

2. www.dl4all.com

3. www.idealgadget.com

4. www.tinkerservices.com

5. academic.cuesta.edu

“Second Earth” by Wade Roush: Inevitable, Inexplicable, and Inexcusable

The article “Second Earth” by Wade Roush is an in-depth exploration of both the future and present directions of interactive Internet-based worlds. Whether purely imaginary or re-created from satellite imagery, they are becoming increasingly popular web destinations. Before discussing in detail what he feels are the merits of both types of environments, author Wade Roush opens with various speculations and propositions on how the 3D maps which define sites such as Google Earth can, or will, be integrated with virtual/fantasy/social networking scenarios such as Second Life. He illustrates several alternatives as possibilities; among them, bringing avatars into the Google Earth environment or, conversely, overlaying and expanding the Second Life landscape with aerial and satellite images to produce real-world views within a virtual setting. His explanation of a “metaverse,” however, is most convincing when he describes it as something more akin to the World Wide Web in nature – that is, an interlinking of hundreds or thousands of 3D interactive spaces, whether imaginary or actual representations of a world, available (mainly) through the monitor of a PC with the use of something like a web browser. The remainder of the article is spent extolling the virtues and opportunities which both types of environments offer to the user, and how and why connecting the real and the virtual can be made possible.

After reading about the predicted future of 3D interactive “worlds” on the internet, I was left with one and only one nagging question in my mind: what’s the point? Although Roush does attempt to justify the vast amounts of time and energy which are being spent to enhance the user’s experience in these places, I was not wholly convinced that further development of these scenarios (whether based on reality or fantasy) is either desirable or beneficial to society. It is certainly not necessary. Yet, as the author implies, it does seem inevitable. The simple human trait of laziness and our need (and demand) for newer and better forms of entertainment make it so.

Maybe I say this because I am old-fashioned. I don’t believe that it is enlightening, or even very helpful, to fly an avatar through a simulated hurricane in order to learn about weather patterns. My gut feeling is that programs such as this will ultimately contribute to illiteracy and declining reading skills in well-developed nations. The same information and identical pictures can easily be found in underused and underfunded municipal libraries. Going for a virtual swim will certainly do nothing to build one’s muscle mass or cardiovascular strength, although the colorful fish may distract the mind from life’s more imperative demands, such as poor physical conditioning. And I fail to see what the advantage is to having a bunch of avatars socializing and walking around on a 3D map of the world. Users can see what they need to see without the avatars, and confine the imaginary identities to places such as Second Life, where at least some amount of intellectual effort goes into creating the visible landscape and objects. Even the data feeds that the author so enthusiastically describes as a “tactical advantage” (Roche 6) do not impress me as anything so different from what is already available. For example, merchandise tracking is instantaneous now via the use of barcodes and wireless scanners, as well as computer chips implanted in pallets of goods. Climate information is updated constantly on several websites. I don’t see where “augmented reality” gives much of an advantage over what already exists.

There were a few selling points, though. The description of an organization’s use of Google Earth to depict the effects of genocide in Darfur is compelling, and would be hard to duplicate without the integration of satellite imagery and the internet. Perhaps a chat room or forum added to their page would promote further action, if it hasn’t already. But how much further does it need to be taken? Will the presence of avatars in a virtual Darfur be even more effective? If that is what the people want …

Finally, there are several mentions of the possible military uses for 3D simulated worlds. I can’t argue that it won’t give armies a tactical advantage (if it doesn’t already). It may even help with training. But it seems to me that eventually other armies will find ways around this, just as they found ways to avoid radar and other technologies. They will find places to hide their fugitives and prisoners that are beyond the reach of any satellite images. They will always have the advantage on their home turf, with opportunities to ambush and surprise an invader. It just doesn’t add up.

In conclusion, I will say that I know my arguments are in vain. The overwhelming trend in the computer industry is toward the more fantastic, the more graphic, the more multi-dimensional experience. There is really no stopping it. Children and young adults are understandably unimpressed with television, movies, or even video games. The interactive virtual world is speaking to them. It is colorful, it is painless, it can be informative. It can even be profitable. But it doesn’t come cheap, and I hope Linden Labs and others keep this in mind as they expand their horizons, adding their 120 servers a week (Roush 9). There are better places to spend that money, and serious problems which could be alleviated with all the thought and time that goes into creating Second Life. A linking of virtual worlds (via a browser of some kind) into a “metaverse” is almost understandable. Anything more is not.

Work Cited:
Roush, Wade. "Second Earth." Technology Review, July 2007(Print Edition). Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Reprinted for New York City College of Technology.





Photos:
1) http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/technology/2008/01

2) http://www.ada.untergrund.net/

For All You Monk (Thelonious) Fans and Jazz Ranters

Just a heads up - starting at midnight, October 10 2008 and going for 24 hours straight - that's all day Friday - WKCR FM (89.9 FM) will be broadcasting nothing but the music of the great pianist and composer, Thelonious Sphere Monk, in honor of his birthday. Try to catch some of this as they play a lot of rare recordings that you won't hear anywhere else, interviews, etc. If you've never heard Monk's music, now is your chance to get with it. And the best part is, it's all commercial-free!
Check out:
http://www.wkcr.org/

In the same vein, they do a Coleman Hawkins broadcast on October 30th. Great saxophone playing from one of the true innovators of music. All day!

Photos: www.monkzone.com/silent/photo_album.htm

In Defiance of the Spambot

Darn. Just when I had my template set up nice, got all of the glitches out, started posting stuff, even got a couple of comments - the electronic mechanized powers that be at Blogspot.com have determined that I might be a spamblogger (blogspammer?) and locked me out, flagged my blog, and have all kinds of not nice messages popping up whenever someone tries to view my published musings. I'm hoping they correct the problem soon; they have threatened me with blog extermination if I don't respond to their nonsense. So I requested a review by a human; just don't have a clue as to how long that's gonna take. Right now I'm testing the truth of all this. I'm not supposed to be able to post anything until someone reprimands the naughty spambot. So here goes, y'all, if you see this post, it means I win!! Fry Mr. Spambot! Get some real code in there! Yer programs look like dead spaghetti!

Discussion - "Una Laptop por Nino" by David Talbot

In the article, “Una Laptop por Nino,” author David Talbot examines the current state of the non-profit program One Laptop Per Child. He makes no secret of its disappointing past performance; their original goal of distributing millions of computers to the world’s poorest children, he says, is still far from realized, and not likely to be met in the near future. However, the article focuses on a recent decision made by Peru’s Ministry of Education to invest heavily in the program, and goes on to discuss in detail the merits of this action, as well as its significance for the OLPC program and the poor student communities of the Peruvian countryside. Talbot reiterates the implications of the success of the laptop program in Peru; because they are the first country to invest in the machines on a large scale, the outcome of the experiment there can have a tremendous impact on how the rest of the world views the effectiveness and practicality of the OLPC mission. He provides graphic examples of the positive results of a preliminary “test run” of the program, where prototypes of the computers were distributed to grade school students in a remote village in Peru to gauge their reactions and evaluate their experience. He goes on to list the many obstacles and challenges which make implementation of the program difficult at best; among these are the lack of reliable electricity in the targeted areas, the need to train teachers in the use and maintenance of the machines, and the absence of Internet service in the rural villages which are slated to receive the laptops. The proposed solutions to these issues are described briefly, along with a few criticisms of the program which have been presented as time progresses. Overall, Talbot seems confident and optimistic that any minor barriers to the implementation of OLPC in Peru can be overcome. He also conveys a sense of enthusiasm that the end result of the philanthropic effort cannot be anything but beneficial to the students it reaches. It is only a question of to what degree it will improve their lives.





The author has presented many opinions of the program in a multi faceted view which does not attempt to hide the weaknesses inherent in the nature of the effort. For example, he clearly states that while the children in rural areas may be the poorest in the country, they have limited or no access to electricity to charge the laptops, and in most cases have no Internet service to take advantage of. By opening the article with a description of an impoverished inner city child, he offers a contrasting view of the two lifestyles which are being judged as more or less needy by the Peruvian government. It seems, from his vivid imagery and from his listing of the problems faced by the rural schools in incorporating computer use into their curriculum, that the inner city children could probably benefit more from the laptops than those in the countryside. After all, they have easier access to electricity, the Internet, and to job opportunities. However, the children of the farming villages were deemed poorer by the Peruvian government than the city children based on the theoretical availability of certain amenities in urban areas such as Lima. Yet a child growing up on a farm, it seems, would be less likely to relocate to an uncertain future in a strange city, with or without computer training and a better education. He implies this when he quotes Oscar Becerra, Peru’s general director of education technologies, in saying that the laptops represented the possibility of a choice between the same or a different future. This quote was referring to a future as a farmer versus a more skilled job. Earlier in the article, Talbot had described an old inner city woman as she “picked through a pile of smoldering refuse” (Talbot 1). Which is the more demeaning future?

One question which the author left unanswered was whether there was any opposition to bringing this technology into undeveloped areas from those seeking to preserve native cultures and ancient customs. He briefly mentions the intent of the Peruvian Ministry of Education to distribute laptops to children in the Amazon region. Is this really a wise or practical decision? The author does not delve into this any further, yet it left me wondering. After watching countless documentaries on the fragile ecosystem of the Amazon, and the indigenous tribal cultures which exist there untouched by the technologies of the 21st century, it seems unlikely that the country of Peru would benefit much from this intrusion into a unique and irreplaceable culture. Once these communities have been exposed to modern lifestyles, they will be altered forever. Talbot does not specifically state whether there would be any special emphasis on using the laptops to promote environmental awareness and put an end to slash-and-burn farming practices. I hope that this is the intention. I assume that the computers would be distributed to those in the farming communities; however, there is no mention of any effort to shield the nearby tribal groups from awareness or use of the machines. He does state later that the middle aged father of one of the program’s beneficiaries in Arahuay speaks mainly an indigenous language, Quechua. There is no question that this language will be forgotten as the children choose to leave their village for the grander opportunities available to them as Internet-savvy computer users.

In spite of these inconsistencies which left me questioning not the value of the OLPC program but rather the wisdom of the Peruvian Ministry of Education in choosing their target population, the author clearly illustrates those benefits of the program which are undeniable. The digital textbooks which will now be available to the students are of the utmost importance, as illiteracy benefits no one. Even if they choose to live as farmers, the people need to read about methods to increase fertility of the soil, raise crop yields, and deal with unfavorable weather conditions. An improvement in math skills is also essential, and many of the games available on the laptops will train the children in this area, painlessly and almost effortlessly. Doubtless the student’s lackadaisical attitudes towards school will change, too, as Talbot predicts (and indeed demonstrates in the effects of the “test run”).

“Una Laptop por Nino” packs a tremendous amount of information and a wide range of opinions into a few short pages. Having known nothing about the OLPC program before, I now feel as though I have a fairly good grasp on what they are trying to do, and what has prevented them from doing it. I can also see the point that Talbot illuminates when he states, in his conclusion, that “The success of OLPC can no longer be judged against … early predictions and plans, nor by the technical merits of the laptop itself. Peru is what matters now.” (Talbot 7).


Works Cited:
Talbot, David. "Una Laptop por Nino." Technology Review: May/June 2008. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Reprinted for New York City College of Technology, Oct. 2008.

Photos (in order of appearance):

1.sohu.com: 2005. http://www.english.sohu.com/

2. University of Calgary. http://www.ucalgary.ca/

3. Editorial 20 Jahre Geselleschaftlich Verantwortung. http://www.hilfswerk-z.de/

4. Welt Hunger Hilfe. http://www.welthungerhilfe.de/

5. dreamstime: 2008. http://www.dreamstime.com/