The Star Trek Holodeck Enigma.

[Marduk]

The interresting question is : how do you now when you are out of the holodeck ? Think about it : The holodeck can simulate that you step out of the holodeck and the program seem finished, and you go on doing your normal stuff, but in reality you are still in the holodeck. So for a suffisently complex holodeck, how do you determine that the program finished and you are really out of it ?

Now we're taking "Better than life"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Than_Life_(Red_Dwarf_episode)

The post pod arrives 3 million years late, which, as Holly states, is about average for second class mail. Among the usual bills and junk mail is the "Better Than Life" total immersion video game. Rimmer receives a large tax bill from Outland Revenue, along with a letter from his mother informing him that his father is dead.[3] To cheer him up, Lister and the Cat invite Rimmer to play "Better Than Life", where everyone's deepest desires come true. Everything is going well; the Cat has got himself two girlfriends, Marilyn Monroe and a mermaid (top half fish, bottom half woman). Rimmer leads an admiral's life with drinks and parties, while Lister enjoys golfing around the lavish golf courses.[4]

But eventually Rimmer's mind rebels against him and he can't control his imagination. He soon ends up with a wife, (Yvonne McGruder) seven kids, a mortgage and an unsympathetic Outland Revenue Collector. This continues until the others find themselves caught up in his nightmare, buried up to their necks in sand, smeared with jam and about to be eaten by ants. Holly, apparently, ends the game, which comes as a great relief to everyone. But is it over? When they get back to their quarters, the tax collector emerges from a locker and breaks Rimmer's thumbs.[4]

 

[sthomson]

It wasn't really a rebuttal to addicted or non-addicted at all, that's what I'm saying. I was addressing the "not realistic enough" aspect, that's all. Most people aren't bothered at all by "not realistic enough", at least on the first run through a game or movie. (A Holodeck would basically be usable as either.)

Ah, I think you should consider my original statement: the "people" created by the Holodeck program were not realistic enough for the average person to substitute Holodeck interactions with real-life interactions. This was my only assertion.

The Holodeck is often used as a game. It's used in substitute of books. It's used for combat training and to create romantic date scenarios between two real people. I'm sure lots of people used it for jack-off fodder behind-the-scenes (actually, we know that Riker like a particular jazz lady). But only people with disorders like Ensiegn Barclay preferred Holodeck interactions to real life.

 

[JFrankA]

....But only people with disorders like Ensiegn Barclay preferred Holodeck interactions to real life.

Couldn't that be said of anyone who uses, well, anything to excess?

And just to be clear, I'm with Hans about the addiction thing.

 

[Mister Agenda]

Some people are motivated by having a feeling of accomplishment, or 'doing something that matters'. I wouldn't bother posting here if I didn't think there were real people reading what I write. Entertainment is nice, but I'm not so sure living to be entertained would be. I don't play WOW, but if I did I think part of the appeal would be the break from working and humdrum reality, which would evaporate if you didn't have to deal with working and humdrum reality.

Then, there's economics: there doesn't seem to be a lot of profit in permanently separating people from reality, why make something addictive if doing so won't make you rich? A million people with jobs paying ten bucks a month for your service is way more attractive than 50,000 people who don't need jobs paying you a hundred bucks a month for your service. So, 'don't make your game so addictive that your customers lose their jobs' seems like a good guideline for purveyors of simulated reality.

 

[Lurker]

A million people with jobs paying ten bucks a month for your service is way more attractive than 50,000 people who don't need jobs paying you a hundred bucks a month for your service. So, 'don't make your game so addictive that your customers lose their jobs' seems like a good guideline for purveyors of simulated reality.

hmm, it works for the multi-million dollar drug industry. Once people have their drug of choice (including games) they will do whatever it takes to feed their addiction.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

how do we know we are not in a holodeck, or a matrix? if we are in the verge of creating them (ok relatively near) maybe we already made them and so all this is our playground. Maybe we are bored about being immortal and facing no problems, and so our "life" here is merely a game in which we forget who we really are and make all kind of limitations possible.

 

[HansMustermann]

Some people are motivated by having a feeling of accomplishment, or 'doing something that matters'. I wouldn't bother posting here if I didn't think there were real people reading what I write. Entertainment is nice, but I'm not so sure living to be entertained would be. I don't play WOW, but if I did I think part of the appeal would be the break from working and humdrum reality, which would evaporate if you didn't have to deal with working and humdrum reality.

Then, there's economics: there doesn't seem to be a lot of profit in permanently separating people from reality, why make something addictive if doing so won't make you rich? A million people with jobs paying ten bucks a month for your service is way more attractive than 50,000 people who don't need jobs paying you a hundred bucks a month for your service. So, 'don't make your game so addictive that your customers lose their jobs' seems like a good guideline for purveyors of simulated reality.

But, again, it's a problem they don't have to really deal with in the ST universe. Remember, there are no money, and humanity evolved above doing things just for material gain or amassing wealth and power. ST is about a Marxist utopia by any other name.

A Ferengi holodeck program, well, now that one would probably sell for gold-pressed latinum and be designed to milk the most gold-pressed latinum out of customers. A Federation one would be made just because someone felt that's the best way they can contribute to society.

 

[Xulld]

I was responding to the post saying "most Science Fiction series have an episode... in a computer simulation", not about holodeck specifically. Sure, if holodeck characters are ELIZA-type programs who grow repetitive quickly, it won't be very satisfactory even to a shallow person. But the point of such plots, including "Star Trek: Generations", is that made-up mate/adventure/experience is unsatisfactory even when indistinguishable from reality, just because "you're always aware [mate/adventure/experience] is not real".

Which I think is false, for a large part of humanity. Probably a majority.

Hmm I an not so sure.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dan_gilbert_asks_why_are_we_happy.html

 

[Fnord]

how do we know we are not in a holodeck, or a matrix? if we are in the verge of creating them (ok relatively near) maybe we already made them and so all this is our playground. Maybe we are bored about being immortal and facing no problems, and so our "life" here is merely a game in which we forget who we really are and make all kind of limitations possible.

Well, that would explain all the crap about reincarnation and spirit guides.

 

[JFrankA]

Well, that would explain all the crap about reincarnation and spirit guides.

Heh. "Life is but a dream...."

Makes me think this though: we all have our own realities based on what we percieve. For example, if three people watch an event unfold before their eyes and a forth asks what happened, that forth person would get three similar, but different answers. In a lot of cases it takes many perceptions and sometimes investigation to actually know what has transpired.

Considering how faulty our memories are, how much misinformation is put out and how our minds are limited in our perceptions of what is going around us, it's easy to see why something like a holodeck or computer game, or television or drugs, or whatever, can seem like an addiction - or at the very least a preferable alternative. With that kind of stuff, the person doesn't have to focus and percieve the unreality exactly the same way as one does reality. It's an easier "reality" to deal with.

 

[Fnord]

... we all have our own realities based on what we percieve...

Correction: There is but one reality, and we all have our own perception of it based on our prejudices, assumptions and preconceived notions.

 

[Mister Agenda]

hmm, it works for the multi-million dollar drug industry. Once people have their drug of choice (including games) they will do whatever it takes to feed their addiction.

It only works because there are plenty of productive people not addicted to drugs to beg, borrow, steal, and trick from, and the illegality of many of them creates a scarcity not directly related to how much they cost to produce, but to the risk involve in supplying them. Those conditions select for a particular type of provider, one who is usually better off if they make some money and get out of the business before the risk catches up to them.

 

[JFrankA]

Correction: There is but one reality, and we all have our own perception of it based on our prejudices, assumptions and preconceived notions.

You're right. Sorry, bad wording on my part.

....I really shouldn't post at 3am....

 

[HansMustermann]

It only works because there are plenty of productive people not addicted to drugs to beg, borrow, steal, and trick from, and the illegality of many of them creates a scarcity not directly related to how much they cost to produce, but to the risk involve in supplying them. Those conditions select for a particular type of provider, one who is usually better off if they make some money and get out of the business before the risk catches up to them.

I don't think it's actually a problem anyway.

E.g., I don't think a higher percentage of people get "addicted" to WoW to the point of losing their jobs, than did to Ultima Online back in the day. Although just about everyone who didn't start on UO, i.e., everyone for whom UO doesn't have nostalgia value, would agree that it's far better than UO.

There were people getting "addicted" to Everquest before WoW and losing all their friends and job. And there were people doing that on UO before Everquest. And there were people doing that on MUDs before UO. Or people who became obsessed with their Nintendo or Atari console before that.

Some people will prefer a fantasy to reality, and they tend to make headlines. Meanwhile the vast majority never did and still don't. And I don't think making the game better causes that many more of them. Or we'd already have a major social problem, given how much games advanced from those original Atari games to modern day ones.

And for that matter, I think the same can be said about drugs. The vast majority of people who lost a job because of drugs, pretty much only lost it because they were caught by a urine test and fired, or got chucked into jail for possession and then it got much harder to find a job. Not because every user just started doing nothing more than drugs.

There are places where some drugs are perfectly legal -- e.g., the Netherlands for marijuana -- and they don't have more unemployed. In fact, last I heard a number, it was 4.1% and actually the lowest unemployment rate in the whole EU. Obviously being allowed to smoke hash didn't cause the dutch to just sit around stoned all day, nor to just steal for their next hit. They actually go to work like everyone else.