Avoiding The Spiral Of Death

Fast, Easy and Fun. How has it come to this?

Fast, Easy and Fun is the new direction of Linden Lab for their product, Second Life. It’s a reaction to the troubles they’ve gotten themselves into in the past year or so. Here’s how I see the sequence of events:
 

• A company discovers and builds a service around an amazing concept
• The concept, while breathtaking, is so new it’s not fully understood by anyone yet, even its makers
• The service is implemented in the only way possible, given everyone's limited experience with the concept: it’s difficult to use
• Reasonably large numbers of early adopter users, who are tolerant of difficulties, begin using the new service
• Beyond the early adopters, few people use the service because its difficult interfaces are forever past their capabilities and tolerance
• Company notices growth stalling as the pool of early adopters is exhausted 
• Company seeks ways to break into the mainstream market by simplifying the system
• The simplification attempt fails because the system is still not fully understood
• A few early adopters begin to leave for alternative services
• Management panics and makes big changes. New approach: Fast, Easy & Fun.

When I say “not fully understood”, I mean that while we may fully understand the use of the existing tools and interface, we really don’t understand the *right* way to do the interface. For example, the permissions system is simply unable to deal with many day-to-day situations. How should someone be introduced to the service such that they don’t immediately give up? No one really knows the true answers to these any many other key questions yet. This is a system still figuring itself out. It’s still an experiment.

Experiments are for early adopters.

I’ve written of this before, but it is a phase all companies must endure: the transition from initial “early adopter” mode to a more mainstream “easy to use” mode. Some tech companies don’t survive, others are utterly transformed and some are overtaken by alternatives that have a better approach.

But that doesn’t answer the question of the panic. Why panic so much? Why layoff huge numbers of people? I suspect it has to do with what I call “the Spiral of Death”.

Consider the situation myself and many SL shopkeepers find themselves in: we spend huge amounts of time setting up a shop in SL, making products, doing promotions, etc. and just barely make a living. Suddenly, some users panic and move away to other grids. They say “it’s wonderful, please join us over here!” It may be wonderful if you are, for example, an educator or business person who simply needs to build some type of installation. But if you’re a seller, it’s quite a different situation.

A seller needs a market, and right now SL is still by far the biggest grid with the largest number of potential buyers on it. Yes, there are OpenSim grids all over, but all of them are tiny compared to SL. It’s hard enough to make a living in SL even with its giant user base, let alone grids one one-thousandth the size. It’s even worse because in order to gain any significant amount of OpenSim market, you’d have to set up separate shops in multiple grids (thus spending time building multiple shops and paying multiple tiers. OpenSim grids may be cheaper per square meter compared to SL, but when you need several parcels on several grids, it probably costs more). It just doesn’t make economic sense to move virtual businesses to other grids.

But it would make sense if large numbers of users begin to bail from SL and move to a single popular alternative grid. If that happened, then SL would lose something very critical: its size. When the market moves, so will the sellers. And with them will go even more buyers. And so on, developing into “The Spiral of Death”. Once the user base starts shrinking, it will inevitably go down, faster and faster.

I suspect this is what Linden Lab fears the most. And it’s certainly worth a panic, because they risk their entire business. It could happen: more and more OpenSim grids are appearing, each with some type of innovation or another, but none with massive market share. Yet. Eventually, one of these grids will accidentally or on purpose hit on the right combination of services and interface and they’ll begin to win users over. Linden Lab, if they are to survive, must prevent the Spiral of Death at all costs.

That’s why there’s an “all hands on deck” mode and a focus on the basics. Fast, Easy and Fun are indeed the basic keys to success. If these are achievable, then existing early adopters will stay and newcomers will not abandon the service nearly as much as now. That should result in a growing service once again.

But only if it works. I’m terribly interested to hear how “Fast, Easy and Fun” will be achieved. Perhaps Philip will enlighten us at SLCC 2010?

Digital Suicide

Editor's note: This is a guest post from Noelyci Ingmann of Ingmann Design Group, and is part of the first annual SL Blogger's Mix'n Match event. He's writing on a topic suggested by Alphonsus Peck of Alphonsus's Random Drivel

 

One of several hanging tools you can find on SLX

“I’m leaving Second Life!”  “That’s IT, this character is dead!” “I can’t take it anymore, I don’t know if I’ll ever be back!” Live long enough with a significant portion of your creative juices flowing through digital play and you’ll hear something similar. From pen and paper roleplaying through the UNIX Bulletin Board Systems of my youth to the AOL and Compuserve chatrooms, into worlds like Ultima, SWG, WOW and Second Life there’s always been a reason to commit suicide of a character, now it’s digital rather then analog, but what drives a person to do this? The other question is, is it still a character if you don’t think it is? If you’re just ‘yourself’ in Second Life, does that mean you’re killing the digital you when you ‘suicide’?

The fact of the mattter is that we all play roles, in every aspect of our lives, and when we decide we aren’t going to associate with those people anymore, we may find that we can stop playing that role, in fact it’s often why we stop hanging out with them, because we don’t like ourselves when we’re around them. This is a common reason for leaving Second Life. Because we lose balance, and lose part of ourselves in something ‘too deep’ that ‘isn’t real’ or detracts from our responsibilities and commitments outside of the digital realm. Most commonly the people I know who’ve left Second Life do so for this reason. They may have had a broken heart and been surprised by the strength of the feelings that the ‘unreal’ caused. They may have just lost track of time once too often and disrupted their sleep schedule, they may have not liked the fact that their avatar and fantasy fufillment didn’t fufill them the way they thought it would. But they leave because they don’t like the part of themselves that Second Life brings out, they excise that part of themselves, hoping that they can be different without. They have to commit digital suicide to maintain what they want or have to be. Does this work? I am not qualified to answer that and I am sure it depends on who you ask. The characters who ‘died’ in the course of my roleplaying are still very much a part of my Psyche, their stories just ended…. So even the ones that were destructive to play, and there were a few… don’t completely disappear from who we are as holistic people. Hence, the idea that “It’s all real!”

So why else would we commit digital suicide? The idea that the character is done with their story, or it’s just too painful to play leads to Alts most of the time, unless it’s a balance issue brought on by real life concerns. But the other major reason I see people committing digital ‘suicide’ is because they disagree or protest the decisions made by the company. In this instance it would be Linden Labs, but this has happened before, Star Wars Galaxies is a fairly big example, when they completely changed the game and experience while people were playing, they lost at least half their user base. So, are open space pricing issues enough to make you commit suicide from Second Life, to never go back? The people I find who do this the most are people who don’t have ‘real’ friends in Second Life, but use it as a tool, they get upset that their tool dosen’t function properly so they leave. If you have a social group in the game then it’s unlikely that it matters as much to you, you’ll adapt to hang out with those people. Neither is wrong, just observations on my part.

Could we truly commit digital suicide? I’m not sure I could. Think about it… could you stop signing on to a computer to have anything to do with our ‘second life’? I’m not talking about not signing onto the grid. I’m talking about deleting the email that has your avatar name… Never contacting anyone who you met in Second Life… Never posting another blog post under that name… Being dead. I know that for certain people this is the step they have to take, but I suspect some of the friendships they have made continue, in forms outside Second Life. This leads me back to the assertion that it’s all ‘real’. Could you kill off part of yourself completely? Sure, we all do it when we grow, it’s how we transform and become what we ultimately are, but it’s not as easy as you think. The more I reflect on the term ‘digital sucide’ the more I like it. You may not be actually killing anything other than pixels but you’re certainly putting yourself through agonizing transformative pain if you do it right.

As always, written by ‘a random collection of pixels’ ~Noel.

http://www.ingmanndesign.com

Score Your Avatar's Name

Last week I posted an analysis of the important characteristics of avatar names. The post proved so popular that I decided to build a tool with which you can calculate a score for your name's coolness!

After some experimentation with scripts, I believe I now have an easy-to-use tool ready for use here. It's quite straightforward: just answer the questions below, hit the "Score Me!" button at the bottom and your name's rating will be automatically calculated. The maximum score is 100.

How does the scoring system work, you ask? I devised scores for all the characteristics based on how I feel about them. Again, like the characteristics, it's my own opinion; yours may differ.

I've added a category for Gender, as correctly pointed out by Vint Falken's comment on the previous post.

Please give the scoring system a try and add your score to the comments; I'd like to see how your name ranks. Mine is only 56.

Length of first name:
--Specify length of name-- 1-6 characters 7-10 characters 10+ characters

Spelling:
--Rate the spelling of name-- Can spell correctly after hearing name only Can spell correctly after seeing name in text once Can spell correctly only after multiple attempts Nearly impossible to remember correct spelling

Pronounciation:
--Rate pronounciation of name-- Can pronounce correctly after seeing name only Can pronounce correctly after hearing name spoken by others Can pronounce correctly after multiple attempts Can pronounce correctly only occasionally, even after hearing it spoken Impossible to pronounce correctly

Memorability:
--Rate memorability of name-- Can easily remember name the next day after first hearing it Can remember name if prompted with a clue Have to write down the name to remember it Cannot even write it down

Uniqueness:
--Rank uniqueness of name-- Only one hit in search for name Less than 10 hits in search for name Less than 100 hits in search for name More than 100 hits in search for name

Case:
--Specify character case in name-- CamelCase (embedded words capitalized) Sentence case (first letter capitalized) lower case (no capitalization) FULL CAPS (all letters capitalized) mIxeD cAPs ()

Gender:
--Classify name's gender-- Both avatar and name have ambiguous gender Name's gender matches avatar's genderGender is ambiguous and shouldn't be for avatar Gender is wrong for avatar


Does name include any digits?


Does first name "flow" into last name?


Can name be easily abbreviated to 2-4 characters?


Does meaning of first name match or complement last name?



Your name scores:
out of 100 possible points

Thanks for participating! (and you answer honestly, right?)

How Cool Is Your Avatar's Name?

Mine isn’t. Let’s get that straight right from the top. But yours might be, and let’s find out.

I’ve done a lot of thinking about names, having subjected myself to such a terrible name. If I could do it all over, I’d consider the following characteristics when selecting a new name.

Length
No matter how beautiful a name might be, if it’s too long it is difficult for others to type. Names should be no more than ten characters, and preferably less.

• Good Examples: Amy Stork, Moto Gaffer
• Not So Good Examples: Hibbabalibba McMahon, morenoandaluz Hax

Spellability
Some names are simply difficult to spell, regardless of length. I’m not sure why, but I suspect it must have something to do with the similarity of the name to common words or whether the spelling matches the pronunciation.

• Good Examples: Carm Benigni, Jimbo Goalpost
• Not So Good Examples: Mtmike Cao, vincenzobrescia79 May and those two lengthy ones above

Pronunciation
You can spell it, you can type it. But can you say it? Is the correct pronunciation obvious, or are there multiple possible pronunciations?

• Good Examples: Chase Bade, Farley Runo, Vint Falken
• Not So Good Examples: Eibhleann McMillan, Arminasx (sigh)

Memorability
Will you remember the avatar’s name tomorrow? Was it something that caught your attention, or was it a generic name that is easily lost in your memory?

• Good Examples: Imnotgoing Sideways, Washu Zebrastripe, Ancient Roar
• Not So Good Examples: Buddy Aaron, Doc Baker

Digits
Look, if you have digits hanging from the tail-end of your name you obviously just moved over from AOL, right? A definite no-no.

• Good Examples: too numerous to mention
• Not So Good Example: Burdin7658 Daniels, m4D McMillan

Case
Unfortunately you cannot adjust the case of your name after its registered. Some have capitalized the first letter, some have not. Some used mixed case, and a few use caps ALL THE WAY THROUGH. I prefer first-letter capitalization or mixed case. However, I must say one friend who uses an ALL CAPS name is very easy to locate in busy chat logs.

• Good Examples: , LordRingsMottoEatMore Food (but fails on a few other counts)
• Not So Good Examples: DOLLY Descenna, mAlice Mauvaise, MANDALANDA Allen

Rhythm
The rhythm is the audible fit of the first name and the last name. One theory of naming says you should combine single syllable names with multiple syllable names. They just sound better when you say them. Often this means ending the first name with a vowel and beginning the last name with a consonant, or vice versa.

• Good Examples: Zoe Connolly, Lovely Person
• Not So Good Examples: Manicexpression Beebe, Nardok Corrimal

Abbreviation
Can the name be quickly abbreviated for use in chats in a way that it is still unique? What 3-5 characters can be readily identified as the avatar’s name?

• Good Example: Tym (Tymmerie Thorne)
• Not So Good Example: Nathalie Defiant (Nat could mean Natalie, Nathan, Natasha, Natassia, Nathaniel, Natu, etc.)

Match
Linden Lab has done a paramount job selecting unusual and interesting last names. Our job is to select a first name that somehow matches the semantic qualities of the last name.

• Good Examples: White Noel, Dakota Blackmountain, TreeSong Moonbeam, mannafest Destiny
• Not So Good Examples: HannahLeigh Hotshot, Kenny Tempura, RAFTWET Jewell

Uniqueness:
Did you know there are 1546 people with the name "Aaron"? It can be confusing if your circle of friends have people with identical first names: "AaronB", "AaronP", etc. A good name would be completely unique, with no possibility of confusion with others.

• Good Example: Arminasx (but alas, fails miserably on several other counts...)
• Bad Examples: Aaron, Charles, Rob, Pablo, Adam (see more at Obijan's list of most popular names)

You may disagree with these factors, as they are only my personal opinion. Perhaps we can make name analysis more interesting? Next week I will try to post a scoring system that you can use to check your own name against these factors.

All Reality, All The Time

Something I frequently observe in virtual reality is transformation. Of ideas, personalities, opinions, and minds. Today I’m speaking of how my mind’s conception of reality has been severely distorted by my virtual experience.

Prior to my Second Life experience I viewed reality in the conventional way: things, people, molecules and matter arranged in an intricate manner. But mostly I viewed the world as a place of things. Houses, people, plants, grilled cheese sandwiches, etc.

Then I entered virtual reality. For a very short while I viewed the virtual world as I do the real world: as a place of things. Shortly thereafter I learned how to build virtual objects. After a few weeks of virtual construction (of mostly incredibly bad newbie-oriented flotsam), something weird happened in real life.

I had previously visited the virtual encampment of Canadian telecom carrier Telus. At the time they had (and may still have) a virtual store that appears very similar to their real life stores. The colors, styles and layout were nearly identical, as was no doubt their intention.

The next day in real life I happened to walk by a true, real-life, made-with-Actual-Molecules Telus store. I saw the same colors, structures and layout as existed in virtual reality. I saw that they had rezzed the real life store with a stretched prim cube along the top, and had textured the desks in a slightly transparent green.

Wait a minute...

Prim? Texture? Rezzed!!!

Those are virtual concepts, not for use in real life. Even so, my then-virtual-oriented mind was mentally decomposing the real Telus store as if it were made from virtual prims! This virtual bounce-back effect continued, as it seemed everything I looked at was no longer a “thing”. Instead real life had become “objects” made of Real Prims. I had transformed. My world view had permanently changed as I then saw real life and the virtual world in the same way. I continue to perceive reality in this way.

More recently during a quick trip to humanity’s Capital of Extreme, Las Vegas, Nevada, more transformations occurred. First, I happened to bumble into the lobby of the astounding Bellagio hotel (which, by the way, has a virtual counterpart). Just off the lobby is a giant greenhouse in which amazing displays of horticulture sprout on a regular basis.

I stopped dead in my tracks as my gaze rose up to see Huge Flowers! Flowers so tall they were Not Possible In Real Life! That's NPIRL, a term I've heard elsewhere of late.

Amazing yes, but much more so than most of the Bellagio’s patrons realized. Not only was real life similar to the virtual world in components (prims), but here they were similar in Things. As I walked among the titanic plants, cow-sized butterflies and gaily decorated giant snails large enough to ride upon I felt just as I would floating through a sim with such monstrous flora and fauna. The real world is not only made of prims, but also contains Strange Impossible Things, just like virtual reality!

As if that wasn’t enough, a final incident at the pool sealed my reality confusion. A woman beside me suddenly got up to chase her young boy, as he had galloped off toward the menacing water. As she stood, I saw the boy’s sandal attached by Velcro to the lady’s behind! Evidently the real world also has the “shoes up your ass” bug.

Real World, Virtual World. What’s the difference? It’s All Reality, All The Time.

Stindberg Speaks

A very quick post today: I stumbled into a very interesting post by SLEntrepreneur, who interviewed my pal, SL translator extraordinary Peter Stindberg. Peter discusses various aspects of his translation business, which I believe will be of interest to Second Effects readers... at least the business types, anyway.

Elderly Visitors

Last October I wrote about a strange phenomenon occurring at my store, Electric Pixels. I had examined my traffic counter and found that the age of my visitors was gradually increasing over time. At that time I speculated that it was perhaps due to:

• The same set of customers continues to visit, and they simply get older over time? (This can't be true because inspection of the transaction log shows few repeat long-term customers. Yes, there are repeats, but the majority of customers are new to the store.)
• Perhaps as my avatar gets older and more experienced, he makes more sophisticated products that attract a more sophisticated clientele? I'd like to think so!
• As knowledge of these products increases via word-of-mouth, older avatars become aware of Electric Pixels and come by to shop? If so, where did the young ones go? This graph might be indirect evidence of word-of-mouth viral promotion, which is typically not easily measurable.
• Perhaps the more recent arrivals to Second Life simply don't buy as much as those who joined earlier? We know that Linden's policy changes have affected the makeup of the Second Life residents somewhat - maybe this is one of the side effects?

I thought it was time to revisit the data, especially after reading this paradoxical article in New World Notes. Here's the result in 2D graphical form: the customers are continuing to get older. Virtually no newbies come by, as the majority of the customers are now 1+ years old. In SL, I mean!

The NWN article suggests another cause may be at work: there simply aren't as many newbies any more! Also, I suspect another factor may be at play. The new signups may have a disproportionate number of alts created by existing avatars, and they do their shopping with the main avatar that has the fattest wallet.

We all do this, don't we?

Voice Protocol

Over the past few months I've found that I am increasingly using voice over chat. At first when voice was unleashed on the virtual hordes, I wondered what the effects might be. Others thought it might be the end of the world. Still others welcomed it. I just wasn't sure if it was good or bad. I admit this: I was a little nervous about using it myself, since it strips a little bit of that anonymity away.

However, after some months of use it turns out Voice is mostly useful to me. But for others, it may indeed be bad.

Here's the good points:

Voice is simply much, much faster than typing. I don't care how fast you type, you cannot beat voice for the speedy conveyance of valuable information. Or taunts.

Voice interactions are synchronized. What do I mean by this? Consider the situation where someone in chat is taking a long time to type a response, and during the delay we start on a new train of thought. We end up answering the question from two entries back and mix it all together, sometimes with hilarious, embarrassing or catastrophic results. This rarely happens in voice, since questions and answers are usually in sync.

Voice is more than just characters. It carries tone and emotion far more accurately than chat. This might be important. Really important.

And the bad:

Anonymity is compromised. Imagine the shock I felt when I discovered one of my female friends was outed as a guy! (Truth: nothing shocks me very much now in Second Life. Or Real Life either, for that matter.) Depending on the type of Second Life activities or role-playing you engage in, it may be impossible to do them with voice since the freedom that comes with total anonymity evaporates. Or maybe you just don't sound like a Dragon/Chick/Mafia Gangster/etc.

Background noise. More than once I've had rather interesting voice conversations with people who suddenly have real life audio interruptions - be they cat, dog, spouse or spawn, it can completely destroy the moment. Suddenly you are looking at pixels again instead of your virtual friends.

Isolation. This occurs when you have a group in which some are Voiceable, while others are not. The question is, who does what? Should the Voicers "degrade" back to typing to accommodate the typists? Or should the Typists listen to the voice stream and respond with their fingers? Sometimes the Voicers simply communicate on a different level (voice) and leave the Typists totally out of the loop. At first I found crowds willing to "degrade", but lately the occurrences of that seem to be getting fewer, as the Voicers get increasingly attached to voicing.

Translation. Apologies in advance to Peter Stindberg aside, you cannot obtain automatic language translation while using voice. However, there are a few translation gadgets you can use that automatically (and often poorly) translate your text into various other languages. It's not great, but sometimes it's better than nothing. No such thing is available with voice.

It's Busted. Yep, happens to me constantly. Drop outs, mic not working, etc. It's not nearly as reliable as it should be.

So which side wins? Voice or Not Voice? There seems to be more negatives with Voice than positives.

The only possible answer: It Depends.

It depends on what you are doing, who you are with and everyone's ability to compromise. My advice is to simply make a sensible decision on each situation. Be sure to account for everyone's needs, because it does no one good to alienate others. And be ready to WEAR and DETACH your headset at any moment!

What's your opinion of voice?

They Walk

I've met many people in Second Life, some from far, distant places and some terrifyingly close to home. There are those who speak other languages and those who just don't know how to dress properly. Some are new, some are old. Many are astonishingly nice, and a scant few are raving lunatics. But they are all, every single one of them, real people underneath those pixels. And we must never forget that.

I like to observe people in an attempt to understand them. If I can understand someone better, I can become a better friend, a more effective worker or a more caring partner. Mostly people seem to act like they would in real life, or as they wish they could be via role-playing. Their actions are often predictable, or at least understandable in the same sense as you might expect a real life person to act if you know them somewhat well and understand the context they work within. You might understand if your friend jumped off a virtual building for the thrill of it, but you would not expect them to do things totally out of their normal character.

But once in a while there is an aberration. Something out of the ordinary. Actions out of context. People doing things that don't quite make sense, based on my understanding of their personality.

I observed a friend playing in Second Life. Moving around. Running around. Jumping. And jumping again. And again. Sure, it's fun to do that, but not over and over and over and again. I wondered a long time about that. About why they would do act that way.

And then I learned the terrible truth.

In real life my friend is disabled. In a wheelchair.

And that is why they moved around so much. Doing what many do in Second Life: Being and enjoying what they cannot do in real life. And being treated as an equal, on par with anyone else in the world.

Later, I learned another friend was also disabled. And another.

Many are here.

Now, when I see people doing things “too much” I stop to watch. I don't comment or criticize their actions. Instead I think about them. And smile, for they are free of reality for a time.

Some may say their life is tragic. Perhaps so, perhaps not. To me the real tragedy is elsewhere. The true tragedy is the disabled millions who do not or cannot transform themselves with virtual reality to briefly experience things that cannot be. They may not even realize the virtual possibilities they have lost, and I weep for them.

And what of the disabled among us?

Shed no tears for them, because

They Walk.

Particle Prejudice

This week I happened to be helping a friend set up a display for a Second Life snapshot contest, including assisting the selection of photos. But we had a disagreement over which pictures were most appropriate. We deferred to the contest rules in an effort to determine which photos were permitted. The rules contained the usual, such as no photoshopping, must be PG material, etc. But hidden inside was one other ominous rule: No Particle Effects, or as the rules stated, “No Poofers”.

There. It happened again.

It's what I call, “Particle Prejudice”. When others declare that particles do not belong in Second Life.

I've had the same thing happen to me many times. A typical scenario involves visiting a new location, and I might discreetly start up an appropriate and minor particle effect just to add to the visual experience. Suddenly the owner or manager charges up to me and says “Turn that OFF Immediately!” and “You are causing LAG on the server!” Since it usually isn't my property, I turn it off. And leave.

There seems to be a peculiar type of paranoia regarding particles. Sure, if you have a really crappy graphics card, your PC might be unable to render all the particles, but that slows no one else down. Some may call this effect “lag”. In fact, most people don't seem to realize that particles usually have very little to do with lag. At my shop, Electric Pixels, there are often several effects running simultaneously. Does this slow things down? Not in the slightest. Server stats remain stable and running quite well. My experiments tell me that the single biggest factor of sim lag is simply the number of people within it. A single particle effect has virtually no effect on the sim whatsoever. Yet, you'd better shut that effect off Right Now otherwise you'll crash the sim!

When used correctly, particles can transform a Second Life scene from a lifeless stack of objects into a living, breathing environment, in much the same way as sounds can. I've found many people really enjoy particles. Some are my customers and they collect effects of all kinds. But others, particularly older avatars who rezzed years ago tend to avoid them, or worse, actively try to get rid of them. Perhaps this is a phenomenon originating years ago when servers were slower and PCs were far less graphically capable than today? Or maybe it's due to the griefers who abuse particles to disrupt public events. They are the bad guys.

And the rest of us? We're not the bad guys! We just love particles and use them appropriately. Don't shut us down, save it for the griefers.

Starving In Second Life

I didn't realize it was possible to starve in Second Life. But it is possible. I have a friend named Xena Bikcin, who I think is very talented. She knows how to build, script, sell and organize. She's even constructed a unique vehicle (pictured, that's her at the controls flying me around Furumachi.) But she's always having trouble in Second Life. She tries really hard to earn a living by doing various business activities, most recently running fireworks shows. She's also had a store that sold artwork, and managed events as well. Unfortunately, she never seems to make enough money to be financially independent. I think she's very typical of many in Second Life who struggle to survive.

There seems to be two modes of financial existence in Second Life: Earner and Consumer. The Consumers are content to spend whatever they need to satisfy their immersionist roles, and they are the foundation of our virtual economy. Meanwhile, the Earners create the items and services that are purchased by the consumers. Both need each other, obviously.

However, I propose a third financial category: Non-Earners. These people, such as Xena, are inbetween Consumer and Earner status. It's a very uncomfortable position indeed, as they transition from one comfy mode to the other. They try to be Earners by creating businesses, but never seem to make enough money to offset the costs of creating their business. They act like Earners, but must spend like Consumers. It must be a very frustrating existence. Many must give up and go back to being consumers or even leave Second Life altogether.

I often encounter Non-Earners, and am always impressed by their (Second Life) youthful enthusiasm. I want to help them. I give them tips and suggestions, and sometimes they benefit. Or at least I hope so. I believe I help many more Non-Earners by posting Second Life business tips here on the Second Effects blog.

Their enthusiasm and creativity is absolutely required. But there is something else they need, something that Xena has: Persistence. You cannot give up. You have to keep trying. Trying different things until you find something that works for you. Yes, it is always disappointing that a business idea didn't work out, but that's OK. You learned something valuable for next time. You must build on your failures and successes. But you won't have any failures or successes unless you try.

Xena is still trying, and I help her when I can. Someday she will be a successful Earner, because she has all the things she needs. Do you?

Where are the Avatars?

Mainstream media often complains that the population of Second Life is tiny. Perhaps it is, and I constantly see debates on the best way to measure it. But here's my opinion on the matter.

I think that among the general RL population, many people are unwilling or unable to enter Second Life or any virtual world. You all know them – the people who give you a blank look when you try to explain your virtual reality experience. Or worse, they give you that you're-out-of-your-mind look. They say things like, “but it's just pixels on a screen!” or “Why don't you talk with real people?” These folks will never go virtual. And that's why Second Life and other virtual worlds will always attract fewer users than traditional web services. At least until virtual reality concepts become widespread.

I heard a good story that illustrates this common phenomenon when I was introducing a friend, TwelveBar Botha, to Second Life. I told him about my store, my “second life”, how it works, etc. Later, he was relating all this to his senior-age parents:

TwelveBar: “I have a friend who owns land in a virtual world.”

Parents: (skeptically) “Oh?”

TwelveBar: “And he has a store on it.”

Parents: “What does he sell?”

TwelveBar: “Fog!”

And then they “lost it.”

Parents: “What do you mean, he sells fog?!? What kind of a store would sell fog?”

It seems that I have this kind of conversation with somebody in RL almost every week. I almost think that some proportion of the general population has a gene or type of brain structure that seems to prevent comprehension of virtual reality.

Regardless, there are tons of people who can fit into Second Life, and we can see them every time we login and get the concurrent online Second Life count. Say what you want about Second Life problems, but that number just keeps growing, week after week. When I first rezzed just over a year ago, that number hovered around 15,000 or so. Today it's almost four times as large. That's pretty decent growth for one year. I expect it to continue and certainly will break 100,000 within a few months. But how can this growth be sped up?

I believe that the major barrier to growth (aside from the segment of the population that can't grok virtual reality) is the user interface. I'm a techie (if you haven't noticed already) and even I find the interface clunky at times. Here is the historical sequence of events:

• Linden Lab creates Second Life, with the principle that users will build everything.
• Accordingly, the viewer contains all the tools necessary for users to create things.
• Innovative and early adopters willing to suffer through non-optimal clunky builder tools show up and build stuff. Wonderful stuff.
• Non-builder users are attracted by the wonderful stuff and the population swells.
• Non-builders are subjected to the same viewer as originally intended for early-adopter techies, and many give up because it's just beyond their capability to understand how to use these tools.

The mere presence of "Orientation Island" indicates that the interface is too complicated. Most people won't spend the time to go through it, and if they don't, they'll likely have a bad Second Life experience before too long. In fact, I often hear of people of basically skip the orientation and just jump into the world. And then make a mess.

The solution is obvious. In RL I discussed this issue with Gartner's Virtual Reality Analyst, Steve Prentice, and he had the same idea. Second Life needs a simplified browser suitable for general users, especially those who have no intention of building anything. Builders will find their way to the necessary tools, don't worry about them.

We've seen a couple of steps in this direction so far: First, Linden Lab open-sourced the viewer code, and secondly Electric Sheep built their simplified browser with that code, broadly distributed during the famous (infamous?) CSI episode. What will the next step be? A simplified interface usable from a web browser? We can only hope.