The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
An article about what we were discussing a couple of weeks ago with Baudrillard "Simulation and Simulacra" and the notions of reality and alternate realities:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3135247.stm
A bloke making a living selling items for a non-existent, online world.
Does this count as an "alternate reality"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3135247.stm
A bloke making a living selling items for a non-existent, online world.
Does this count as an "alternate reality"
Page:
What has philosophy got to do with that statement? We're not living in some cross-wired multiverse here.
If something happens, it happens. People may or may not witness it. People may or may not ever hear of it. If people want to put some post-event slant on what happened and why afterwards, fine. But it doesn't change the fact that it happened.
If something happens, it happens. People may or may not witness it. People may or may not ever hear of it. If people want to put some post-event slant on what happened and why afterwards, fine. But it doesn't change the fact that it happened.
I agree with IB here.
It was the final paragraph of the story that summed up our discussion about this issue:
"With his livelihood gone, Mr Dibbell would have no doubt that a crime had been committed but he realises that he might have a hard time convincing the police to investigate the theft of goods that have a tangible value but negligible reality."
"With his livelihood gone, Mr Dibbell would have no doubt that a crime had been committed but he realises that he might have a hard time convincing the police to investigate the theft of goods that have a tangible value but negligible reality."
Insane Bartender wrote:
> There is only one actuality. It's the same for everyone. If something
> exists, it exists to everyone, regardless of whether or not people
> know about it, or choose to believe it.
---
My mistake, I didn't realise you had it all sorted. If you could explain that to the Buddhists, Taoists, philosophers and theorists then we can all move on.
> There is only one actuality. It's the same for everyone. If something
> exists, it exists to everyone, regardless of whether or not people
> know about it, or choose to believe it.
---
My mistake, I didn't realise you had it all sorted. If you could explain that to the Buddhists, Taoists, philosophers and theorists then we can all move on.
There is only one actuality. It's the same for everyone. If something exists, it exists to everyone, regardless of whether or not people know about it, or choose to believe it.
You can jump up and down and say items made of code entered by real people onto real servers bought and sold for real money don't exist if you like, and I'm sure, to you, in some sense you believe them to be "virtual". But they do exist. They're right there on the game servers. For them to not exist, they would simply have been made up by someone to fool you.
But they weren't made up. They're not lies. They're there if you want them, for a price, of course.
You can jump up and down and say items made of code entered by real people onto real servers bought and sold for real money don't exist if you like, and I'm sure, to you, in some sense you believe them to be "virtual". But they do exist. They're right there on the game servers. For them to not exist, they would simply have been made up by someone to fool you.
But they weren't made up. They're not lies. They're there if you want them, for a price, of course.
Insane Bartender wrote:
I'm not wrong in that those items are real.
> They exist and while opinions may differ as to the sense and extent
> to which they exist, the fact that they exist cannot sensibly be
> disputed.
---
Sorry but that is absolute balls.
Saying "I'm right and therefore that is that" is the domain of irritating, "LA LA LA NOT LISTENING" person.
You say they exist. And for you, by your logic that is true.
But that does not hold true for everyone, and to suggest that your version, because you have decided so, is laughable.
I understand you believe they exist, I believe something different.
But if someone approaches a topic of absolute "This is the only possible outcome and you are stupid for disagreeing" is the reason I take issue with Bell so often.
I'm not wrong in that those items are real.
> They exist and while opinions may differ as to the sense and extent
> to which they exist, the fact that they exist cannot sensibly be
> disputed.
---
Sorry but that is absolute balls.
Saying "I'm right and therefore that is that" is the domain of irritating, "LA LA LA NOT LISTENING" person.
You say they exist. And for you, by your logic that is true.
But that does not hold true for everyone, and to suggest that your version, because you have decided so, is laughable.
I understand you believe they exist, I believe something different.
But if someone approaches a topic of absolute "This is the only possible outcome and you are stupid for disagreeing" is the reason I take issue with Bell so often.
OK, Ill admit fault here. I initially believed the point was to say that there was something strange with people buying iems for an online game because the items in question weren't 'real', when in fact they very much are. I'm not wrong in that those items are real. They exist and while opinions may differ as to the sense and extent to which they exist, the fact that they exist cannot sensibly be disputed.
The idea of an individuals perception of what is "real" (this seems to move more towards "what is true") is a completely different argument.
Obviously, what we see as the truth depends very much on what we already know, how easily we can be manipulated and what it is we actually see/sense.
The idea of an individuals perception of what is "real" (this seems to move more towards "what is true") is a completely different argument.
Obviously, what we see as the truth depends very much on what we already know, how easily we can be manipulated and what it is we actually see/sense.
It's like what Grissom says in CSI, "you want the truth, then don't ask anyone who saw the crime"
This will make little sense to people going, "what's CSI ???"....oh well :)
This will make little sense to people going, "what's CSI ???"....oh well :)
...and, sods law, I find Goat has already posted something along much the same lines.
Dammit!
Dammit!
Just to butt in again, but my personal opinion is that reality is subjective. We each have our own views on what is real/true, and what is not. There is no such thing as a Universal Truth in my opinion; the only time anything has claimed to be as such, proponents of it then spend most of their time trying to eradicate anyone or anything that disagree's with it (and yes, I'm thinking of religion here).
Basically IB, it looks to me (and apologies if I've got it wrong) like you're trying to say that your opinion, logical though it is, is a universal truth. But it's not. It's clearly not so to Goat or to Bell (me personally, I neither know nor care when it comes to VR), and they've both come up with reasons for why it isn't.
THAT in essence is why these discussions go on for so long...
Basically IB, it looks to me (and apologies if I've got it wrong) like you're trying to say that your opinion, logical though it is, is a universal truth. But it's not. It's clearly not so to Goat or to Bell (me personally, I neither know nor care when it comes to VR), and they've both come up with reasons for why it isn't.
THAT in essence is why these discussions go on for so long...
Page: