Last night I went on TVO's Agenda with Steve Paikin to discuss Second Life as part of a panel with Tony Walsh, Alexandra Shimo, and Anthony D. Williams. The producer of the segment was Mike Miner and he has his own blog post about the panel on the TVO site. It was a great discussion, and the five of us were able to address some substantive issues while explaining Second Life and the genre of virtual worlds to the TVO audience. (You can watch a copy of the episode via TVO's website).

Tony has posted about the segment on his blog, and has quite a bit of second life coverage in general that's worth reading. Tony also took the time to create a second life avatar of TVO host Steve Paikin. It was interesting to see Steve's reaction to seeing his avatar, and the general distance most people feel from the "virtual world".

At the end of the panel I put forward a notion that at some point in the near future we will no longer think of the virtual and real as two different states. Rather we will accept the unity of the two, and acknowledge that we spend our time simultaneously in the real and the virtual. I suspect the advent of GPS and RFID technology will, much like gravity, draw all things and people into a virtual representation regardless of their awareness of said virtuality. Power will be the ability to understand and influence one's virtual self in the same we think of our physical or "real" self.

Already data mining and visualization has reached a point where elements of our identity and behavior exist in databases beyond our control. I personally see a time where we'll demand consistent and comprehensive avatars that accumulate all of our data representations into a single unit for us to scrutinize and control.

Similarly another interesting issue that came up during the discussion was the issue of control in the form of governance, whether social or explicitly political. Certainly the issue of griefing in Second Life is causing the notion of regulation to be discussed and examined. How can (virtual) spaces be protected for legitimate public or private use? It's irresponsible to just pretend that the net is self-regulating. I'm not in favor of government control, but I do support community control, which can be facilitated by public institutions and democratic authorities.

Relatedly, a representation of the US House of Representatives (i.e. the lower house of Congress) has been established in Second Life, coinciding with the swearing in of Nancy Pelosi, the first female speaker of the house. While this clearly does not mean that democracy is coming to Second Life (or the US for that matter), it does indicate a willingness on both sides to learn from each other. Certainly online environments like Second Life could learn a lot about governance from the likes of the US Congress, and similarly American politicians could learn a lot from environments like Second Life, in which no doubt they will find existing and future constituents/voters.

In fact, the introduction of Capitol Hill into Second Life was met with a protest/sit-in by Abe Rosenthal who was objecting to the way in which the virtual Washington Mall was configured/governed. Initially Abe was going to be treated as a griefer, and ejected, but smarter heads prevailed and Abe was acknowledged as the free-speech activist that he is. A sign of things to come perhaps.

Here's a photo of me standing in the Speaker's position in the virtual House of Representatives on Capitol Hill in Second Life: