From: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Bob Jacobson)
Subject: Re: Computerized Reality: Better than VR
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1991 17:07:58 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle




Okay, now I get it.  

Embodies virtuality is like putting a computer in the copying machine, so
that it knows how many copies to make and the right color.  (All you have
to do is put the pieces of paper in right side up or down, a small learn-
ing task -- and how to clear paper jams.)

But I'm not sure I want all those terminals, of whatever size, around my
working space.  I think one terminal is too many.  I want to be totally
free of having to accommodate to the machines, whatever their peculiar
requirements.  I don't want a smart pencil or a smart desktop, be it
teak or mahogany.  I just want to do my work and have my computational
devices accommodate to my needs.

I look around my room, and there are at least 500 objects in it.  Of
these, I interact, in one way or another, with approximately 125, maybe
more if you include individual items within sets of items (like volumes
in an encyclopedia).  That's a lot of automatin' to do, and I hope you 
know how I interact with each...cause I don't want any "knowledge jams."

I am sure this demonstrates only a superficial understanding of the full
meaning of embodied virtuality and the paradigm it represents (which is
still unclear to me), and I will wait to read the SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
article with interest.  But blanketly denigrating the virtual worlds
paradigm by getting into discussions of "reality" (an artifact of Jaron
Lanier's P.T. Barnum days) is no less objectionable to those of us work-
ing in this field.

Perhaps the two aren't nearly as far apart as you think.

Bob Jacobson