From: pepke@scri1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Subject: Re: Low end VR
Date: 7 Oct 91 17:29:30 GMT
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them



In article <1991Oct5.175152.13447@milton.u.washington.edu> 
cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Bob Jacobson) writes:

> But this brings us back to the fact that the designers of systems are only
> infrequently discussing, in a systematic way, what is needed technologically
> with the designers of worlds.  Maybe because we've presumed that thesegroups
> are one and the same (unlike almost every other field of creative endeavor, 
> in which relatively few persons are both makers and wielders of tools). 
> Perhaps there should be some delineation between the two practices.  Or does 
> the unification of tool building and using in the VR field provide a hidden 
> strength -- an intuitive incorporation of world-design needs in technology 
> systems -- which is worth giving up something in terms of acute theory?

The latter, I think.  It's good for artists to grind their own pigments 
from time to time.  It's also good for them to skip a meal occasionally to 
buy canvas.  Homebrew VR requires both.

Strict division of labor is generally a sign of maturity or stagnation, 
depending on how far it's gone.  In a field in its infancy, it's generally 
counterproductive.  Where would we be now if Alan Turing had disdained 
dirtying his hands with relays and steppers, and what language would we be 
speaking?

> In short, should the people using the tools also be the makers of the tools,
> or shall we have we two essentially different populations each of whom will
> contribute unique insights to the field?  And how shall synthesis be 
> achieved?

I like the interdisciplinary approach.  People can specialize in a certain 
thing, but they should also learn the other aspects of the field.  In my 
experience in an interdisciplinary research program, about 45% of the 
difficulty with sharing techniques results from problems in vocabulary, 
and about 45% results from matters of animosity and snootiness.  Walking a 
mile in another's sandals can help reduce both.

Summary: Specialization, yes.  Delineation, no.

Eric Pepke                                    INTERNET: pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu
Supercomputer Computations Research Institute MFENET:   pepke@fsu
Florida State University                      SPAN:     scri::pepke
Tallahassee, FL 32306-4052                    BITNET:   pepke@fsu

Disclaimer: My employers seldom even LISTEN to my opinions.
Meta-disclaimer: Any society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.