What is the Difference Between a Static and Dynamic Virtual World?

The use of computer technology, Internet technology, satellite technology and human conscious potential to develop or form a world independent of the real world, connected with the real world, people enter in a form of consciousness through virtual helmets and nutrition capsules, a world similar to the earth or the universe .

virtual reality

(A world independent of and connected to the real world)

The "virtual world" currently displayed on the Internet is a network world in which users live and communicate with each other based on a computer simulation environment and a virtual character incarnation as a carrier. Users of the virtual world are often referred to as "residents." Residents can choose a virtual 3D model as their avatar, move by various means such as walking, flying, and taking transportation, and communicate through various media such as text, images, sound, and video. We call such a network environment a "virtual world." Although this world is "virtual" because it originates from the creation and imagination of computers; this world exists objectively. It still exists after the "residents" leave. Real humans exist illusoryly, time and space truly Blending, this is the biggest feature of the virtual world.

Many netizens refer to their online virtual life (including games, communities, personal homepages, etc.) as my "virtual world" in a broad sense. ^[1]

We humans cannot exist forever. In any case, humans will eventually disappear from the universe. But before we disappear, our computer might be powerful enough to simulate human experience in great detail. Some philosophers and physicists have begun to wonder whether we have come this far. Perhaps we are in a computer simulation, and the reality we experience is only part of the program.

Modern computer technology is extremely complicated, and the advent of quantum computing has made it even more complicated. With these powerful machines, we will be able to simulate more complex physical systems on a large scale, which may include complete organisms and even humans. But why stop here?

This idea is not as crazy as it sounds. Recently, two philosophers stated that if we acknowledge that computer hardware will eventually become extremely complicated, then we are likely to be an ancestor simulation, that is, a virtual reproduction of the past by humans in the future. Part of it. At the same time, the three nuclear physicists proposed a method to test this hypothesis based on the notion that simplifying assumptions must be made in all scientific procedures. They believe that if we live in a simulation, then we can detect these simplified hypotheses through experiments.

However, these two viewpoints, whether from a logical perspective or an empirical perspective, just leave the possibility that we may live in a simulation, and cannot point out the difference between real life and simulated life. However, even if we do not live in a simulated world, the results of simulation experiments proposed by nuclear physicists can still be explained. So the question remains unanswered: Is there a way to tell if our lives are real or not?

We all know that humans will cease to exist at some point in the future. Maybe we will be completely extinct. Without evolutionary descendants, there may be one or more post-human species as the continuation of our lives, but we humans will eventually disappear. However, if we do have descendants in the future, they may be interested in creating ancestor simulations, the virtual universe inhabited by conscious humans. If the technology for creating such simulations is widespread enough, the simulation of humans will proliferate so much that first-person experience in simulations will be much richer than first-person experience that does exist in reality.

If you happen to discover that you have a first-person conscious experience yourself, an interesting question arises: how do you know whether you are a human being or an ancestor simulation, especially in the latter? In the former case? Philosopher Nick Bostrom proposed a framework for thinking about this. He believes that the following three may be necessary: first, the extinction of human or humanoid species before acquiring simulation technology; second, the "post-human" civilization has little interest in creating or using this technology; We "may" be part of a simulation. I say "probably" because, under the same conditions, a conscious experience is more likely to simulate experience. If the other two possibilities (the extinction theory and the lack of interest theory) do not hold, there will be an enormous amount of simulation experience in the world.

Of course, before Bostrom, some people thought that the reality we perceive may be virtual, although the nature of the simulators proposed by people varies. Human consciousness is simulated. This view is not only a matter of philosophical and scientific thinking, but also the main subject of science fiction. In the first part of the Matrix Trilogy, The Matrix (1999), the world known to viewers is a computer simulation designed to keep the human brain busy while using the Chemical reactions to create energy. In The Matrix, humans experience the world in the form of computer avatars in a completely immersive virtual reality environment. However, this simulation has many flaws, allowing some awakened minds to find glitches in this system, and humans in the "real world" can also invade the simulated reality called "Matrix".

Bostrom's view is slightly different: He believes that not only humans, but the entire universe is simulated. All aspects of human life, including our consciousness and interaction with the non-perceived parts of the program, are part of the code. However, Bostrom acknowledged that even for a powerful computer system, it may be impractical to fully simulate all aspects of reality. Just as our scientific simulation contains some abstraction levels that do not require redundant details, the simulation system may also rely on certain rules and assumptions to prevent some details from being simulated. And when we do experiments, the system adds details: for example, Bostrom's 2003 paper, "Do you live in a computer simulation? "Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?" Reads: "When [Simulation System] finds that a person is preparing to observe the microworld, it can fill in [the proper simulation field] with enough detail as needed." In this way, the system does not need to accurately track all particles or galaxies. When this data is needed, the universe in the program provides enough detail to present a flawless reality. Even humans don't need to be modeled exactly every moment; our subjective understanding of "self" changes with the environment.

When Bostrom is keen to show people that we are more likely to live in a simulated world, scientists facing this problem need to answer another set of questions. This main difference exists because science cares about things that can be tested by experiment or observation. Moreover, it turns out that no matter what kind of simulation system we live in, we can infer the commonality between various simulations.

First, if we live in an analog system, the system must adhere to a clear set of rules, and the dynamic changes of these rules are relatively small. The tremendous success of the scientific method over the past few centuries proves this. In fact, the simulation hypothesis has some potential explanatory power: our universe follows relatively simple rules because it's all designed. As for the modifications made by the simulator during the program's operation, the researchers pointed out that there was an error in the simulation program, and we measured the phenomenon based on this error, but then the vulnerability was corrected.

Perhaps the truth is that we do live in a simulation, but, just as if there was an impassable god in the world, the simulation world will not change our dominance of our lives. ^[2]

The case that best reflects the "virtual real world" is the Second Life (Chinese called Second Life) developed by the "Linden Lab" in California. It's not just a game, it's redefining the entire Interneta virtual reality society in three dimensions. Here you can study, work, produce, shop, deposit, or hang out with friends, entertain ... Linden dollars, the common currency in the game, can be freely exchanged with the US dollar at a certain exchange rate. " Economic activities in Second Life can earn real money, business, politics, and entertainment begin to infiltrate into it, and the boundaries between virtual and reality are gradually blurred.

The "virtual world" in China was the first 3D virtual world Hipihi created by Beijing Hipis Information Technology Co., Ltd. This is a virtual world similar to Second Life. The users create buildings and characters in the virtual world Scenes and items. Subsequently, the domestic virtual world also successively appeared Novoking (Umagination Kingdom), UWorld (from my world), Mworld, Hapaworld (Hapaworld), ChinaQ, etc., some have been open beta, and some are still in development. After a period of operation, large client virtual world products such as Hipihi and Novoking represented by UGC (user-created content) model have fallen into operational difficulties, while another 3D virtual world with micro client and graphical community model Is rising, such as Jiuyou's 3D dance virtual community "Jiuyou Jitang Community", Dreamland Home, Nana Mimi and so on.

As for the concept of Virtual World, there are two levels of meaning: narrow and broad:

However, from the rapid expansion of the global online game market around 2000, the popular application of 3D virtual environments has now entered mainstream growth. The digital indigenous, especially the new generation who grew up in the 3D online game environment, has gradually lowered the threshold for how to use the 3D environment and engage in creation, sharing, socializing and communication in the 3D environment. Mr. Zhuang Xiuli s only 7-year-old son can explore, socialize and create without a teacher in the HiPiHi world.

At the same time, the adoption of a technology also depends on institutional and commercial incentives. At present, the majority of schools in SL are trying to use funds funded by the government and non-profit institutions. But not every educational institution in every country has such resources. It is believed that the next applications should take the lead in the fields of distance education and vocational education that reduce business costs. Language education and some vocational training are commercial applications that have appeared on SL.

In Western tradition, exodus was a history of redemption. Now, Castronova says, people are leaving for the second time, rewriting history. This time I was away from reality and fled to the virtual world. Exodus To the Virtual Worlds-how online fun is changing reality. This is a new work in 2008 by a senior gamer, Castronova, a professor of economics at Indiana University, and the world's number one research pioneer in the virtual economy of online games.

In the past few years, more and more people around the world have invested more and more time in online games, escaping from reality and entering the virtual world, forming an increasingly large virtual society and virtual economy. Castronova predicts that in the next 20-40 years, the accumulated butterfly effect will change our social climate and real life. As the design of the virtual world of the game covers a series of rules such as the economic system and the social system, as with the design of public policies in the real world, it involves assessing people's common interests and arranging the best process for governance. activity. Therefore, accompanied by the inevitable process of fleeing to the virtual world, public policy making can learn from the virtual world and improve human happiness in the real world.

The key to understanding the above inference is to understand fun. People spend time playing because of fun. Fun / fun, a kind of perception and emotion, has always been an important component of human happiness and a core proposition that the game industry has focused on in the past thirty years of development. Designers of the game virtual world formulate rules, create a social order, and maintain the continuous operation of a virtual society and economy. The purpose is to allow people participating in this world to obtain fun as much as possible, find satisfaction that the real world cannot give, and enhance individuals Happiness. However, in Castronova's view, the existing public policy design of developed countries, which pays too much attention to utility, does not sufficiently recognize and understand the importance of people's happiness. When people have enough practical experience in the virtual world, they will demand changes in public policies in the real world.

It is very strange that Castronova did not mention that all the current virtual worlds of games are the product of chasing commercial interests. Such a chase, although the core is to obtain fun around people, but because of the complexity of human nature and the complexity of the fun experience, it may not present the ideal country.

Castronova trusts the designer of the virtual world of the game, and is also obsessed with his positive experience in worlds such as Warcraft. To a certain extent, World of Warcraft also has other western classic online games. What supports game designers and players is the precipitation of their own society. Free, equal, and open, each player invests time to compete freely, selects multiple occupations, improves level skills, participates in the community, and gains recognition. In the east, online games from the West have evolved into the so-called "Kimchi" mode in South Korea-Daguai, upgrade, PK, keep repeating. The contention for power related to levels and equipment is what fascinates players most, and it is also a portrayal of the real society in the East. Players' worship and chasing of power is accomplished in the game world through time and money investment competition. Such a virtual world is just a helpless projection of the real world. It is basically the opposite of what Castronova said to guide the practice of public policy in real society.

Fleeing the virtual world, more people participate in the experience and practice, not to escape to the virtual world of a limited number of commercial games that cannot be customized. Even in the gaming world, people's experience of fun now requires more open and complex economic and social systems, and more realistic simulations of real society. Such a world cannot be a world dominated by a few game designers as God. This is why open-structured virtual worlds such as Second Life are popular now. In such a world, the definition of fun is not the same as a game.

The more open virtual world platform, because it gives players the greatest autonomy from content to rule production, has become the best socio-economic and political practice and innovation venue today, and has aroused global attention. Virtual and real are moving towards integration, mutual education and guidance. Currently in SL, there are republics formed by residents, as well as innovative economic and financial practices. The practice of the virtual world has been linked to the real world, and public policy has not only learned the virtual world experience, but also began to regulate the virtual world.

The future envisioned by Castronova is still based on technological advances. Only when more people practice the virtual world independently and form a consensus in a positive sense, can it have a positive meaning in changing reality. Since 2008, open source virtual world technology has progressed rapidly. In the next 3-5 years, everyone can escape to the virtual world they set up. Everyone is a designer. They can set their own rules and have more escape options.

Facing the same problem, compared with Castronova and Cory, the CTO of Second Life who resigned at the end of last year has a broader and deeper vision. Although "Collapsing Geography" by Cory is only a long article, how the 3D virtual world finally fulfills the mission of reconstructing the space-time of the Internet and expanding the space for human free practice and innovation is more important than Castronova's predictions around fun.

1. Virtual world 1.

In fact, there is no escape to the virtual world. The virtual world is merging with the real world. The game-like virtual world directly projects the collective consciousness of the real society. People live in two worlds at the same time. The virtual world towards SL 3D Internet applications directly determines the inevitability of real virtual convergence. Real and virtual are a world of fusion.

2. Virtual world 2.

It is very strange that Castronova seems to completely ignore the complex forces behind the formation of real-world public policy. Although the rules of the game-like virtual world have become more and more complicated, as a closed world, it can only partially simulate and abstract this complexity. At the same time, people can vote with their feet in the virtual world far more than the real world. The rules are unequal. The extreme choice in the virtual world is to shut down, log off, and exit the world. But in the real world, people have a hard time quitting. The problem is not that the ruling people do not realize that people understand fun and happiness, and how to design public policies around these, but that the formulation and implementation of public policies is actually the result of commercial / religious / political interests. The so-called experience learned from the virtual world is much more difficult to use to guide the real world.