Benedikts Seven Principles of cyberspace

What do they mean and how do they apply to Second Life?

When looking at cyberspace and virtual environments we also have to look at the different theories about it. I have decided to look into Benedikts theory and his seven principles and how they relate and apply to Second Life. Just to understand where he is coming from, what he means by it and if he might be right in what he argues.
Some academics don’t agree with his principles and I want to find out why that is.
Not necessarily to prove his theories wrong but to see how they would apply to SL and its virtual architecture.
His seven principles are as followed:

1. Exclusion- No two things may be in the same place at the same time
2. Maximum Exclusion- each world contains fewer dimensions than itself
3. Indifference- The world is indifferent to the user
4. Scale- Motion through a cyberspace takes place at a rate inversely proportional to the complexity of the space through which it occurs
5. Transit- Movement must traverse intervening space and involve some cost
6. Personal Visibility- One may not enter a space invisibly
7. Commonality- Shared spaces exist by the consensus of those sharing them

As I do not have a lot of knowledge of the architecture of cyberspace and the designing and programming of it I have found an article online which explains Benedikt’s theories better than I ever could. I will quote them and see how it might translate to Second Life and how these theories comply with this new virtual world.

Here are the explanations of Andrew Vande Moere, Herman Neuckermans & Ann Heylighen in their article about the architecture of cyberspace. This is what they have to say about the seven principles of Benedikt and how they explain it.

We are going to start with the Principle of Exclusion.
“Two objects are said to be identical if they have the same values for the same intrinsic dimensions; similar if they have different values for the same intrinsic dimensions; and different if they do not have the same intrinsic dimensions. Obviously, problems arise when two non-identical objects have, at some time, the same extrinsic dimensions. In that case, the Principle of Exclusion, commonly understood as “you cannot have two things in the same place at the same time”, clearly states that this is forbidden. “

The Principle of Maximal Exclusion (PME) is meant to help a cyberspace designer decide on the dimensional partition of the offered data. This second fundamental principle states that "Given any N-dimensional state or phenomenon, and all the values (actual and possible) on those N dimensions, a designer has to choose that set of extrinsic dimensions that will minimise the number of violations of the Principle of Exclusion" (Benedikt 1991).

Principle of scale:
However, limiting the amount of new object info per frame could provide a consistent realm where ‘phenomenal immensity follows information density’, and where certain laws of information begin to create new spatio-temporal physics. The latter is stated in the Principle of Scale: "The maximum (space0) velocity of user motion in cyberspace is an inverse, monotonic function of the complexity of the world visible to him" (Benedikt 1991:162). Benedikt compares this principle with a traditional Japanese garden, in which miniaturised elements only reveal their detail from very close. Partial views direct the provision of new information, while various spatial elements (bridges, stones, obstructions, etc.) slow down the movement of the viewer. Nevertheless, the user still feels powerful, as the motion itself affects what can be seen.

Principle of Indifference:
When cyberspace would become more and more complex, the range of scales at which users can operate could be increased, so that the density of information per volume unit of (cyber)space would expand as well. Increasing density, however, cannot be accomplished without technical difficulties, as nearly all experienced VR users will have noticed before. Any dense virtual environment is surrounded by some strange phenomenon that could effectively be described as a ’reverse gravity field’. When approaching a group of complex objects, the user's motion gradually slows down. Of course, this can be ascribed to the finite computational speed, which depends on the rate of a new-frame display, the level of detail displayed, and the ‘increase of information‘ with each frame. When maximal smoothness and imitation of nature is required, an appropriate technique is adaptive refinement. This means that the level of detail of an approached object automatically and gradually increases. However, making this technique the norm would violate the Principle of Indifference (PI), stating that "the felt realness of any world depends on the degree of its indifference to the presence of a particular ‘user’ and on its resistance to his/her desire" (Benedikt 1991:160).


Principle of Transit:
According to the Principle of Transit (PT), "travel between two points in cyberspace should occur phenomenally through all intervening points, no matter how fast, and should incur costs to the traveller proportional to some measure of distance" (Benedikt 1991:168). The concept of ‘cost’ in this context is open to various interpretations (e.g. loss of resolution, of range of view, of smoothness of motion, etc.), yet seems reasonably identified with the notion of time. In this case, the Principle of Transit may seem unnecessary, as one of the main advantages of network computing is the almost instant access to every file, document, and program one is interested in.

Principle of Personal Visibility:
The Principle of Personal Visibility (PVV) states that "(1) Individual users in/of cyberspace should be visible, in some non-trivial form, and at all times, to all other users in the vicinity, and (2) individual users may choose for their own reasons whether or not, and to what extent, to see/display any or all of the other users in the vicinity" (Benedikt 1991:177). Although this principle seems to threaten the notion of privacy, Benedikt maintains the contrary, as he envisions a minimum of visibility. Small coloured spheres, for instance, might represent persons in cyberspace, indicating nothing but their position, movement, and of course presence. No restrictions are mentioned as to the channel for interpersonal contact, such as voice, video, text, gesture, VR-touch, etc. In this minimal presence, user-identity is not essential, and anonymity thus acceptable.

Principle of Commonality:
According to the Principle of Commonality, "Virtual places should be ‘objective’ in a circumscribed way for a defined community of users" (Benedikt 1991:180). In other words, all users in a certain domain and at a given time should see and hear largely the same things, or at least subsets of them. Obstructions (shadows, for example) may differ in separate views of two viewers. It is also allowed to introduce other features, depending on the feeling, experience, and knowledge brought into the situation. For instance, one user might sit in a leather chair that is for another user an ordinary wooden bench. In short, the worlds of two users A and B must only be subsets of an overall domain D. What is experienced by both users is called common and makes up the intersection of their respective worlds.


When comparing Benedikt’s principles of cyberspace to Second Life we have to keep in mind that when he actually came up with these theories, Second Life did not exist. Although cyberspace and virtual worlds have changed massively over the last few years and more advanced technology made more things possible, Benedikt is still sticking to his principles and argues that they would need to be considered when creating a new virtual environment.
As the first two principles are a guideline for designers of virtual spaces, with Second Life these principles would be hard to keep track on, as in Second Life everyone who has enough knowledge of programming and cyberspace, can create their own little worlds within this dimension. Here two things can exists at the same place at the same time. As it is up to the inhabitants of Second Life to leave it up to their imagination what they want to do with the space they requited which in SL is land and islands.
So here we find Paris in the past and present. And some places which are called the future, depending on whatever one had in mind and imagines, it can be created and because there are more than just one designer, his first two theories about Exclusion and Maximum Exclusion might not be relevant when it comes to Second Life.

In Second Life no one can enter a space invisibly. As we have our Avatars to show our present in the world we can not by any means enter invisibly. Of course the real us, can not be seen but whatever character we create can be, and will be seen by others. Of course we have the option of IM(Instant Messaging) in Second Life where one can communicate with their friends although one might be in different places and which works, compared to the real world like a phone. Here we are not visible to the ones we are talking to, only visible by text and nothing else. Which is a way a violation of one of Benedikts principles but all in all Second Life follows the rule that one can not enter invisibly at any point.

Also with travelling through spaces and time in Second Life, we find that it has consequences and costs. The programme does slow down and we are faced with a black screen while our Avatar teleports itself from one place to another. Also when we do arrive there we have to wait a little while for all the features of the new place to load and be completely visible to us. But this is rather up to the speed of ones computer, graphic card or internet speed and varies from person to person. Sometimes it is instant and sometimes it takes some time. But again it is different for anyone. Also we have the problem in Second Life that the more people are in one place the slower the programme runs. If we go to places where there are a lot of other residence the speed of our movements and the loading of the features of the island and place we are on are very slow, and take a while to load. Also whatever is available on the island it is available to anyone. For example music, movies, art, and so forth. It is all the same unless, there are faults with the programmes of individuals but all in all the experience offered on certain island is mainly the same for everyone.

All in all I think Second Life moves within the seven principles of cyberspace set up by Benedikt. It does however brake some of the rules as with new technology available things are made easier to create, and the imagination of people are endless and if they are given a chance to create their own little worlds inside a world, it should be interesting what Benedikt would have to say to that. I think it is a positive change which in my point of view will even change more and more in the future. With computers getting better and faster all the time and people’s imagination with no limitations regarding cyberspace who knows what they will come up with next and I am sure in a few years time, Benedikts theory will not be able to stand against the movement of technology and its advances. Also the way we will view cyberspace and virtual world will evidently change at some point. But this remains to be seen.



References:

An Architectural Approach to Cyberspace written by Andrew Vande Moere, Herman Neuckermans & Ann Heylighen, K.U.Leuven, Belgium


Bell, D. & Kennedy, B.M. (ed), (2000). The Cybercultures Reader. Routledge: London and New York