Last year, I noted that the Metaverse is Coming (October 2021). There was a follow up in November when one of the social media companies actually changed its name to reflect its belief in the coming of a new interactive computer world of the future: The Metaverse (November 2021).
We are told that there will be greater convenience. With our headsets on, we will experience the entire world from the comfort of our own homes. The potential is to game, socialize, work, and more without ever leaving home (or whatever secure location you choose). The signals are perhaps there of ever-increasing network and data access. If you have an iPhone, try using the map program to search for some exotic destination like Rome (no, not Georgia, the other one), Tokyo, or Sydney (easier, there is not one of either of those in Georgia), and hit the "flyover" button for an amazing virtual reality aerial tour. And this is available right now.
You can reflect back on the Hollywood preparations for our foray into the next virtual world. Many remember Ready Player One (Warner Brothers 2018), a Spielberg expose on a dystopian brave new world. Fewer may remember Surrogates (Walt Disney Pictures 2009), a strange combination of virtuality and robotics. And for those who long to self-isolate in their home environ, who can forget The Net (Columbia Pictures 1995). That last one was about a woman who worked from home and effectively lost her identity to thieves in the process. When she eventually ventured out in person, claiming to be Angela Bennet, she was hobbled by the fact that none of her coworkers had ever seen her in person.
Each of those films showcases some vision of the future and exposes perhaps some potential flaw in our reliance on technology. But, with or without our individual consent, technology is persistent in changing our world. Whether it brings us to utopia or dystopia is a fair question perhaps, but the answer may depend as much on personal perspective as anything.
As the Great Pandemic broke on American shores, many were challenged to remain functional. Other state's workers' compensation systems "figured out" how to accept electronic documents as evidence. Lawyers in other states "learned" how to try a case by video. I recently read an article in which a workers' compensation judge explained a state's decision to eschew video as it presented too many challenges; Florida, on the contrary, switched to video with nary a hitch. And, in that time, a great many professionals everywhere struggled with merging their work lives into other daily commitments such as child care, teaching, elderly care, technology, and more. For many, the now ubiquitous Zoom was a shock and adaptation; for others, it was a natural progression.
Will we need such video technology as the Metaverse dawns? Or, will we evolve from Little Black Boxes (December 2021) to full-on avatars walking, talking, meeting, and more in a virtual reality? Will hearings become yet another quasi-virtual experience? How will the facial expressions of the witnesses or counsel be interpreted if we only see each other's avatars?
Courtesy Wii, and PasteMagazine.com
Maybe the computers will do that for us, as mentioned in Chatbot Wins (June 2016). The world is evolving and it seems technology has proposed answers for every question, even before we ask them perhaps. People seem to be inventing things just because they find them interesting, and perhaps they hope some need for them might evolve or develop.
But, outside of Hollywood's imagination, in the real world, there may be significant challenges with the Metaverse of tomorrow, or perhaps even the metaverse(s) of today. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reports on "a researcher posing as a 13-year-old girl" who ventured into the present-day technology of a metaverse and "witnessed grooming, sexual material, racist insults and a rape threat." There were also "avatars . . . simulating sex," and more. In short, the experience was beyond real, and ventured into real scary.
The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) in Britain is quoted there, alleging that "some apps in the virtual-reality metaverse are 'dangerous by design.'" It concluded that the investigation it conducted demonstrated "a toxic combination of risks." for children in the metaverse of today.
It is notable that there are multiple platforms currently offering virtual reality (VR), and those platforms are each perhaps not necessarily involved in the facilitation or distribution of troublesome content. These might each be termed "a metaverse," and as yet perhaps there is not yet "The Metaverse" (though when there is one, it is possible Al Gore will claim he invented it. Sorry Al, just kidding). The current vendors perhaps are, much like social media and the Internet itself, better described as pathways to content. Content that is good, not-so-good, horrible, and even despicable. As platforms affording access to content, how much responsibility will be placed upon them, or accepted, regarding the quality and content of the experiences offered there?
Will the platforms be liable for the content? In The Internet, Evidence and Defamation (April 2015), I highlighted 47 U.S.C. section 230 and its shield for social media platforms. There was a time when government strove there to protect platforms, and thus perhaps diminished their motivations to keep their platforms tidy and clear. The news is persistent with allegations of various individuals and groups claiming censorship and throttling in that environment. They allege that social media does in fact control content, but are critical of the methodology or consistency.
And, there are conversely critics of social media being protected. Harvard Business Review (HBR) notes that the protections were "written a quarter century ago," in "a long-gone age of naïve technological optimism and primitive technological capabilities." The time has come, it says, "to update section 230." These criticisms are seemingly on a spectrum between allowing government to regulate content and merely allowing civil liability to be imposed against the platforms.
The most troubling aspect of that BBC story is that the researcher needed only a Facebook account to download one such pathway (an application or program) that she then used to traverse the described content of the (a?) metaverse. Notably, her age was not verified, and "her real identity was not checked" in that process. In short, it appears in some aspects the underworld of virtual reality (VR) is available to anyone, and there are perhaps little or no standards for admission, submission of content, or communications. Should the platforms be held accountable for affording our children access, in the same way a venue like a shopping mall might be held responsible for what occurs within its premises?
In another article, the BBC focused on a particular "children's game," that has some general susceptibility for poor behavior, and potential damage to children. The focus there is on a platform described as "a huge sprawling world of games which is sometimes described as a kind of primitive metaverse." In short, it may be a precursor of what is coming with the current trend of billion-dollar metaverse investments.
How huge and sprawling? The company has reported in the past "that two-thirds of all US children between the ages of nine and 12, use the game" in some manner. In this particular children's gaming platform, the BBC found user-created and controlled spaces (called "condos") in which people virtually gather. Sounds a bit like the bulletin boards and chatrooms of the Internet in the old days. Those were full of the words of contributors, and the platforms were shielded from complaints about content by section 230. In this children's game platform, apparently easily accessible to children, the BBC found:
"A naked man, wearing just a dog collar and a lead, is led across the floor by a woman in a bondage outfit. Two strippers dance next to a bar.""A group has gathered around a couple openly having sex, watching and occasionally commenting.""One man is wearing a Nazi uniform."
And, it is a children's gaming platform.
This is not to say that "The Metaverse" that is now under development will be a bad place per se. It is to question whether society, government, and regulators are ready for the risks and challenges that this brave new world might bring. Forget Al Gore, perhaps we need Tipper back for this effort instead? For those who have forgotten, She was Al's wife, and was once alleged to be the inspiration for the novel Love Story. Back in the day, she lobbied very strenuously for controls or warnings on music lyrics to protect the children. She was attacked by those who saw her efforts as an affront to the First Amendment. Perhaps, those lyrics were not as troublesome as our current challenges?
Thus, there are these warning signs in the news, and a billion-dollar industry progressing toward the dream of widespread and unfettered virtual reality. There are existing legal protections and those who criticize them. There are freedoms of expression, and the challenges of a truly world wide web upon which some operators or "condo" owners may be in countries that take a far different view than others regarding what is or is not right, legal, or sanctionable. Who will regulate or legislate? Who will enforce it? Where will there be boundaries or warnings? How will the children and other unwary users be protected in that new world? How can they be? Is section 230 the place to start as HBR and others advocate?
Perhaps that environment be the wild, wild west, or will the platform owners, the application developers, and government to act in some manner now? If there is action, will it be in some concerted manner, or will each potential actor begin a process of protections in isolation? Can there be safeguards developed and deployed now, before the virtual becomes reality, or has that ship sailed?
The idea of virtual reality is intriguing. The views of Hollywood as to our future are interesting. But, the future, it seems, is here now and perhaps "getting bigger every day from Hawaii to the shores of Peru" (Surfin' Safari, Beach Boys, 1962). How will it, how will we, evolve in the days to come?
