LIVING IN AUGMENTED REALITY

It is time to throw the use of the term ‘virtual' out of the window

Recently I explained the wonders of digital virtual reality to an uncle and aunt, both in their 90's. I told them I had just had my first experience of 3D, using a Playstation VR headset while ‘being’ Lara Croft in Rise of the Tomb Raider.  When I told them about the real-life sensation of walking around in a virtual room, my aunt was bemused. “But isn’t the real world good enough?”  Of course, in most respects reality cannot be beaten, however much 3D games and movies using computer generated imagery in the mean time have filled our brains with awe inspiring sceneries and sensations that ‘reality’ can never provide.

In this light one could say that the use of the term ‘virtual reality’ holds a contradiction. For rather than that they are trying to increasingly match reality, the movie and games industries have – greatly - surpassed it. Virtual reality today is far more than reality, not a little less. Secondly, I think that the greatest leap forward will not be any kind of equivalence of the real and the virtual, but the intrusion – and ultimate fusion - of one another. In this world the virtual and the real together become ‘enhanced’ or ‘augmented reality’ (AR), a term already widely used.

Examples of this fused AR already exist, for instance Google Glasses and Hololens (Microsoft), both still being subject to further development.  Perhaps the same applies to Pokémon Go, which became an instant hype when it was launched. It pushed people out of their homes and catch imaginary digital monsters in the streets, in parks and public buildings, “blending digital fantasy and tangible reality in exciting and sometimes dangerous ways,” as one review phrased it. The hype soon passed, it was just a teaser of AR things to come.

Nonetheless AR applications also include the realities which already have become standard, e.g. in the car industry, through manifold electronic devices (automatic backwards in-parking, warning signals in dense traffic). It won’t take long before cars are talking to us, not just our electronic navigation device.

Let's think of the long term prospects. One website offering some predictions tells us: "augmented reality is exciting new technology, and there are probably ways to use it that will emerge in the coming years that we can't yet even imagine".

Still, it is not difficult to picture this blended world of the natural and the digital, where people move around, anywhere and anytime, doing various transactions along the way, either buying or selling, and thus fulfilling their niche in a globalized (as much as purely regionalized cyberspace. This may seem very abstract, but in fact we already have made our first steps in such a multidimensional space. Just apply Pokémon Go technology to your grocery store. and the next minute your purchases are ready to be picked up (it is a reality in China). Or alternatively, click your car with any remote device (probably your Smart Phone), and it will drive out of the parking by itself and open the driver's door before your doorstep. Next you produce and sell a valuable 'thing' or service, you press "print" or "send", you do the transaction, and it will literally materialize at some distant spot, whilst costs and revenues are automatically recorded in your bookkeeping, subtracting taxes (e.g. V.A.T.) along the way. When doing this, you may be comfortably sitting on a beach side, or perhaps doing some typing work in a flexible office.

Increased personal flexibility and mobility translate into flexible and mobile on-demand production and service outlets with also do the pickup and delivery at your fingertip's notice. We transact, we communicate, we "see" all we need to respond and co-operate in AR networks, in trains, in our own car (when it is directed by satellite systems) etc.

Let's just hope we can still enjoy real-life human company at dinner time and some physical paperwork if need be.

LET THE WORLD PREPARE FOR US PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP

Dislike for Hillary Clinton- however competent she may be – is as widespread as the current disgust among many when they think of Donald Trump. And on the other side, the millions of who like Trump thoroughly, regardless his (in)competence, far outnumber those who positively want Hillary back in the White House. Just think of it, the Clinton couple in the Oval room for a second time around simply cannot work. It is too boring, too old school.

But Donald Trump is a true challenge. It has been long since a man ostensibly lacking any credential for the position is fighting for the US presidency. An aura of excitement, outrage and unexpected turns of history somehow seems to lurk behind the curtain. No doubt there are many who simply want to let him have it. If need be, we’ll clean up afterwards (or so quite a few might think).

I am a moderate person with moderate views and driven to understand both sides of any story – and of any person. It too see the downsides of a third Clinton term – and perhaps even of a continued Democratic presidency – and most certainly it is not difficult to imagine mani-fold shock waves in our world in the event of Trump’s victory. And the America that would lift him to the saddle most certainly is not the America I cherish. However, we have to face the fact that in our present time the main stream populace is entitled to some kind of satisfaction.

Rightly or wrongly, many people feel sidetracked and grossly ignored particularly in the face of estranging phenomena such as Arabic terrorism and increasing economic inequality. Clinton offers no convincing cure, nor does Trump, but at least he echoes what people feel about the many disruptions in their world.

But for Trump himself, matters become too serious now to continue his strategy of intimidation. He has to make sense somehow. You can hear his advisers crunching their brains. What should this presidency be, if ever?

I believe that Trump, no matter what he says, deep in his heart wants to secure peace. He is not a hawk for the sake of it. Nonetheless, he will wish to shake things up, probably whatever he can get his hands on. He will turn friends into enemies and the other way around. He will ignite fierce debates about the rights and wrongs in our world. All of it, in a way, despite himself.

We should not shrink in horror when thinking about the prospect of Trump. Let’s prepare, and make the best of it, if it comes to it.

THE END OF MATERIALISM

Will it also mean the end of liberalism? 

A book should be written, I believe, about the rule of finance and economics that pervades the policies particularly of Western nations. We all see it at work. It is going just one direction, at ever greater scale.

We have become mere consumers. All of us. And we carry grave burdens to continue enjoying this. In the course of the post-WWII era this seeming world of material comfort has turned into a condition of mass slavery, supported by the global system of fierce capitalism. The majority of the people in our world are reduced to just names and figures in the accounts of our creditors.

Those who manage the world’s financial resources money have a steadily increasing power compared to those who have almost none of it. We experience a gradually increasing divide between the people who can readily enjoy the richness of our planet’s resources and those who can’t. 

Fukuyama prophesied the end of history and the ultimate predominance of economic liberalism and democracy. “What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government”.  After his publication a growing number of question marks and arguments have been raised in disagreement. At the turn of the millennium the world was confronted with new conflicts and attacks at the heart western liberalism.

Dissatisfaction with the world order of markets and global finance is becoming increasingly violent, massive and destructive. Let us truly understand the driving factor of today’s so-called terrorism. Out of what despair and misery was it born? Don’t think it has anything to do with religion. It is the same everywhere in all times. Religion is the most common disguise of ignorance and dissatisfaction in history. 

How do we best respond to it? Dot we defend our fortress of wealth and accomplishments with similar (or rather: even greater) military force, simply to crush it? And let us broaden the scope: sooner or later, violent aggression will arise out of our societies too. An increasing mass of dissatisfied people, disgruntled slaves and further victims world wide of – essentially – western exploitation of the earth’s resources.

But even without the force of aggression, can we come to the notion ourselves, that our world cannot persist the way it is? What do we defend, and what actually is the best way to do it? We don’t need the cries and misdeeds of the disgruntled to see the dead end road we have been riding for quite a while.

In 2014 Fukuyama commented that humanity's control of its own evolution will have a great and possibly terrible effect on the liberal democracy. Well, this is the question: it is either our common sense or indeed, it is the dictatorship of the few that will determine our future, with whatever force it requires. And either way, the foundations of true liberalism and democracy are already shaken by the very state we are in at present, when figures and statistics command the world.

UNCERTAINTY

IN THE VIRTUAL UNIVERSE THERE ARE COUNTLESS CREATORS

 

 

 

Game Makers are out to rule your brains

 

I have a good young friend who recently bought the latest version of Playstation (PS4). It is a marvel to see what it can do. My friend plays a variety of games and most likely, from what I have watched him do thus far, he is a crack at it. With PS4 you can jointly play with friends online or with anybody else in the world who is logged on to the same game.

 

Out of this it is not difficult to visualize an emerging virtual universe in which real life people roam freely in this realm of almost infinite options, through their self-created character – or avatar - which (or ‘who’) has all kinds of wondrous capabilities far exceeding our own real life capabilities. Subsequently we can experience every adventure or journey – either alone or with friends – served up by the numerous game makers who constitute the true creators of this universe.

 

At present we can say that the world of computer games and our material world are totally separate. But this will change over time. We will cross the strict borders between the real and the virtual, which will then increasingly become a blur. Real life and virtual life are bound to merge. This is what the current games and gaming facilities are gradually training the younger generation of my good friend familiarize with.

 

But there is a twist. In actual fact our individual liberties in the virtual universe are restricted. Our actions are largely guided by the minds and rules of those who created the hardware and software of our games (and other applications) in the first place. If you want to be successful in Playstation – or X-box – games, you must learn to understand their minds and logic and not apply your own. There may be many instances where the option you would wish to have simply is not available and where you have to settle with a choice of actions that seem ineffective or illogic. Increasing the players’ flexibility thus would seem an important aspect of the future evolution of (online) gaming.

 

Then there is the increased sense of real experience in virtual reality. Probably many people share my sensation of reality when you simply drive a car, traveling through any kind of landscape in currently available games. How will this sensation be when one day we all wear 3D-monitors like the one depicted below.

 

 

 

But I could also simply wish to enter the virtual universe and meet with friends abroad, go shopping in some great virtual mall, or do sightseeing in an ancient city, like Rome at the time of Emperor Augustus. The possibilities are infinite.

 

Ultimately we can all become creators in the virtual universe. Perhaps this is the true journey for which we need to prepare.

AN EFFORT TOWARDS NEW LAW MAKING: GAY RIGHTS

THE TERROR OF GOOD INTENTIONS

Through different ways – and experiences - I have learned to be suspicious of any gesture of good will or generosity, unless it is clear what the author of the gesture gets out of it for him (or her)self.

The first experience by which this notion grew onto me had nothing to do with interpersonal relations but with inter-state relations: one country providing development aid for the other. 

Essentially I came to believe that decades of development aid throughout the world have gone down the drain very much because the interests of the western countries involved were rarely made explicit right on the table. It is impossible to believe that western programs of development aid or development cooperation, as they were carried out in the nineteen eighties and nineties – which was when I was more closely involved - came out of pure altruism. Of course they didn’t. 

Development aid grew in an atmosphere paternalism and post-colonial guilt. Western countries solemnly committed themselves to a percentage of their national income as gift to developing countries. Huge sums of money, manpower and political debate went into the effectiveness of this aid: did it really develop these countries?

An extensive institutional infrastructure and numerous policy documents accompanied this one way traffic. Inspections were carried out, reports were written, disappointments highlighted. Corruption undermined the process in many instances, warnings could be issued, compliance – by the beneficiaries – to the rules of the game was reinforced. Sometimes the flow money was suspended. Etcetera. 

The leading morality was that of enforced gratefulness. The psychology of having to say thank you, which is the way a civil servant in one of Holland’s development countries told it to me, one day. The total subordination to the terror of good intentions, which is how I came to see it. You have be grateful for something you didn’t ask for.

Much later, I observed similar processes between people. I came to realize that we should always be suspicious of someone who professes to be good just for the sake of it. Pure altruism cannot hold. There has to be a personal interest too.

Still, there is a twist. As a rule, we hesitate to be too explicit about our personal interests. We prefer to project goodness, largely for the impression we make. It can happen at any given occasion when someone asks you: “Can I help you?”. When it happens in a shop, you immediately know that the intention (and interest) of that person is to sell something, a service or a material item. We know that “sales talk” always is double talk at the same time. We take it for granted.

But then a total stranger offers you his assistance, let’s say: to carry your bags on your way to the train. What is your immediate response? I would say, we would be suspicious initially, or at least cautious. Can we trust this person, does he want some compensation? Should we readily offer some compensation? Etc. The same applies to anyone offering financial help or some other assistance essential to you.

Perhaps we should avoid any deal – even with close friends – where there is no substantive quid pro quo. When you risk a situation where you have to show gratitude at unexpected moments. It is the beginning of our submission to something (and someone) we cannot control. 

Therefore, as a rule, we should be clear (at least to ourselves) about our interests in respect of our fellow human beings, and demand similar clarity from any other. Why do I want to help you? Well, it is because I know you will help me another time, when I need it. Or, if it is between countries: because your country will be able to produce which I need. It is only under these conditions we can avoid the psychological conundrum of having to say thank you when actually you wish you hadn’t.