« Stories and Pyramid Power | Main | One Tringo to Rule Us »

Mar 03, 2005



Well I maintain that online identity is still identity and its becoming a stronger form in all kinds of social, civil and commercial ways, thus I think that the ethical considerations of some online acts is shifting – or at least should do.

In this case I would not be at all happy if I found an image of my SL avatar in the sort of SL club that I would not go to. And while it just so happens that my SL avi looks pretty much like me (the cartoon version of me so the designers told me) this is not the crux of the issue. Just so long as any given image is strongly associated with me in a given community then I care what happens to it. Now what kind of legal protections should be afforded are a different matter as is well known I’m highly dubious about the commoditisation of identity, as I deny that commoditisation is the only way to protect rights.

Greg: Where's the harm with digitally manipulated photographs that people presume are real?
The harm occurs when a trespasser nicks a bit o' the rival, but non-exclusive, Promotion commons.

Jeff Cole


As if we believed in every photograph we saw before this popped up. We have today the technology to manipulate and create images in a very efficient and many times _realistic_ fashion. I think it's up Newsweek to decide how they want their readers to perceive their content (including images). Considered the physical and graphical manipulation we can do to the human body, an avatar might be a just as real representation of a person as if looking at a picture or a physical meeting. Not the same but as true.


Excellent Site


Enjoyed your website, it's definitely one of the best i've seen in a long time.


Excellent Site

The comments to this entry are closed.