Je kan informatie over je locatie aan je Tweets toevoegen, bijvoorbeeld je stad of exacte locatie, via het web en applicaties van derden. Je kan altijd de locatiegeschiedenis van je Tweets verwijderen. Meer informatie
It's always a little disheartening to read an article about a "new social #VR application" where the writer, by way of comparison, mentions #SecondLife but almost exclusively in the past tense, making it sound (to those who don't know any better) like SL is no longer around.
This seems to happen a lot. I get that journalists want to "break the story" and be seen as covering the latest and greatest, writing from where the action supposedly is; no one wants to appear irrelevant. But consigning #SecondLife to antiquity is not the way to do it, IMO.
For one thing, AFAIK #SecondLife still has far better numbers than all these social #VR platforms combined: bigger economy, more active users, and so on. Granted, it has been going for 15 years—a slight head start—but that longevity alone is worth more than a casual mention.
And yeah, #SecondLife might not be as "fancy" in some ways as its younger competitors, and it definitely struggles a little sometimes under the weight of long-entrenched limitations, but it's still being actively developed and has a diverse, creative community like no other.
Despite its age and technical idiosyncrasies, #SecondLife is the closest thing we have to the 3D Web, an Internet of places, the metaverse... and I wish more journalists (and scholars too) would acknowledge its success and maybe try to understand why so many of us are still here.
Great thread Mondrian. Thnx for the perspective.
Thank you! I'm just glad someone appreciated my late-night rant :)
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.
