blogs.zdnet.com— Going, going, gone. Amsterdam sold for $50,000. Ok it's not the real-life city, but the virtual one created in Second Life which was auctioned off this week on eBay.
Mar 30, 2007View in Crawl 4
Sigh. It's like spitting in the wind here with all the idiots who clearly have no clue what they are talking about but I'll say it anyway: Second Life isn't a game any more than the rest of the internet is a game.
Regarding Real Money vs. Virtual ItemsThe thing is *all* money is virtual. It's a representation who only has value in so far as we trust it to have value. The pieces of paper on which my money is printed aren't "money" neither is the number which my bank keeps in a computer associated with my name. All these things are merely representations of "value" and they have "value" in so far as we trust the establishment which guarantees they have value (in the case of money, this is usually a government (in most countries) or system of banks (in the US and a few others)) in the case of Second Life, there's a set of people who've built up a trust in the value of the "property" that is available there, this trust isn't guaranteed by a government or bank, but is in a private company, and more specifically the trust is that a private company will have motives which are purely profit driven, and hence as long as their servers continue to make them money, they will continue to provide the virtual "property" with which these people have associated value. As long as that trust is in place (And I really don't think trusting a profit-driven company to continue to be profit-driven is a far stretch) then people have the freedom to associate whatever value they'd like with their "virtual" property, which is just as real as the "virtual" money they trade for it (Whether that virtual money is guaranteed by a bank, government, or private company is immaterial, as it's only our trust in the establishment which causes it to have value in the first place.)One could go on to produce an argument saying *all* property is "virtual" and dependent entirely on the trust in the organization guaranteeing that property.Finally there's the argument of property being a physical thing instead of an idea or representation. However if property was restricted to physical things one could not "own" a business, a design, a trademark, a patent, or any number of other ideas or representations, electronic representations having the concept of ownership attached to them, and thereby an associated value is an extension of a long-used convention of "ownership of an idea or representation" and anything you can own, can in theory be bought, sold, traded, etc. in whichever marketplace will allow it.Now all that being said, I don't think, personally, that I would pay *any* amount of US dollars for a chunk of Linden real-estate, but that's not because I don't think they might have value to some people, and couldn't be used for a possible profitable trade, but rather because I don't trust *any* technology company to remain solvent and competent for a long period of time, and because I have an inherent distaste for trade of ideas (I feel that this often results in ideas becoming strangled and that a lot of real *people* suffer because of it)
nerfdudeMar 31, 2007
as silly as second life is, it is a HUGE step towards something big. go read Snow Crash and draw your own parallels. the Metaverse is coming!
andysaMar 31, 2007
And the buyer has an ebay rating of zero? I'm a bit suspicious that the sale won't actually go through.
shanesemlerMar 31, 2007
Sigh. It's like spitting in the wind here with all the idiots who clearly have no clue what they are talking about but I'll say it anyway: Second Life isn't a game any more than the rest of the internet is a game.
serenikillMar 31, 2007
Things are worth something if someone is willing to pay 50,000 for it
siegurtMar 31, 2007
Regarding Real Money vs. Virtual ItemsThe thing is *all* money is virtual. It's a representation who only has value in so far as we trust it to have value. The pieces of paper on which my money is printed aren't "money" neither is the number which my bank keeps in a computer associated with my name. All these things are merely representations of "value" and they have "value" in so far as we trust the establishment which guarantees they have value (in the case of money, this is usually a government (in most countries) or system of banks (in the US and a few others)) in the case of Second Life, there's a set of people who've built up a trust in the value of the "property" that is available there, this trust isn't guaranteed by a government or bank, but is in a private company, and more specifically the trust is that a private company will have motives which are purely profit driven, and hence as long as their servers continue to make them money, they will continue to provide the virtual "property" with which these people have associated value. As long as that trust is in place (And I really don't think trusting a profit-driven company to continue to be profit-driven is a far stretch) then people have the freedom to associate whatever value they'd like with their "virtual" property, which is just as real as the "virtual" money they trade for it (Whether that virtual money is guaranteed by a bank, government, or private company is immaterial, as it's only our trust in the establishment which causes it to have value in the first place.)One could go on to produce an argument saying *all* property is "virtual" and dependent entirely on the trust in the organization guaranteeing that property.Finally there's the argument of property being a physical thing instead of an idea or representation. However if property was restricted to physical things one could not "own" a business, a design, a trademark, a patent, or any number of other ideas or representations, electronic representations having the concept of ownership attached to them, and thereby an associated value is an extension of a long-used convention of "ownership of an idea or representation" and anything you can own, can in theory be bought, sold, traded, etc. in whichever marketplace will allow it.Now all that being said, I don't think, personally, that I would pay *any* amount of US dollars for a chunk of Linden real-estate, but that's not because I don't think they might have value to some people, and couldn't be used for a possible profitable trade, but rather because I don't trust *any* technology company to remain solvent and competent for a long period of time, and because I have an inherent distaste for trade of ideas (I feel that this often results in ideas becoming strangled and that a lot of real *people* suffer because of it)
derfusMar 31, 2007
I have never understood Second Life, it's a game without any fun gameplay to it... how boring.Interesting article though
jcgvMar 31, 2007
please say it's Prime Minister Balkende.
michelroseMay 7, 2007
Doubtful info... Very Doubtful.
uchimalbanishMay 14, 2007
I can't believe it! I couldn't see any graphics in IE7 or FF.
lolo2007Sep 21, 2007
I am waiting for the next SecondLife post on Digg,"Guy sells virtual Amsterdam he bought for 50k to News Corporation for 100 million, then buys Digg and redirects it to goatse"<a class="user" href="http://www.gwafi.com/news.html">http://www.gwafi.com/news.html</a> <a class="user" href="http://www.gwafi.com/story.html">http://www.gwafi.com/story.html</a>