Connecticut based Information and technology research and advisory firm Gartner, has been in the Second Life part of the news of late with predictions that "80% of active Internet users will be in non-gaming virtual worlds like Second Life by the end of 2011" [via Reuters] followed by a warning that there are 'significant' risks for business in getting involved with virtual worlds [via ZDNet].

Potentially, both these statements are true. The intrepid 57 Miles from Metaversed is gathering Gartner's Steve Prentice, who was responsible for both assertions along with a number of other interested commentators together for a panel discussion about Gartner's assessment and position on Second Life and virtual worlds (which some have described as 'conflicted').

The discussion will take place in Second Life at Noon, on Thursday. Check the Metaversed group or blog for details.

[This is most likely to be an audio-session (technology permitting), so be prepared]

Because I'm always on the lookout for positive mentions of SL in the media, I almost hate to co-opt this article's being bullish on the platform, because I had to talk about the mention of Twitter. I'm sure many people are excited to Tweet from within SL, but it's funny for the author to talk about the immersive experience of SL, and then choose to step backward (or upward, depending on how you look at such things), and add another layer of distance from the immersion by using Twitter.

I know that SL's a currently closed platform in the sense that like Vegas, what's in SL stays in SL, and you can't have a real-time conversation with anyone not currently in SL. But given its sporadic nature, is SL-to-Twitter really a good solution? I suppose there's something to be said for "I'm heading to the Shelter for dancing -- meet me there!", but for anything more conversant, you're missing the point of being in SL in the first place. When in-world, you want to converse with your in-world friends, else why be there? Maybe I'm just getting tired of Twitter and this is me being grumpy. Thoughts, anyone?

(Via blogs.zdnet.com)

As posted previously, Anshe Chung had all videos of her being pelted with prim penises taken off of YouTube, citing DMCA issues. However, apparently some legal experts have spoken with them, as Guntram Graef, Anshe's RL husband, has now retracted the complaint.

"I would like to make it clear that I regret filing DMCA claims in this case, because the real issue at hand wasn't at all about copyright," Graef said. "I didn't realize that some people would misunderstand this as a censorship attempt, which it definitely was not." Interestingly, the video hasn't returned, as YouTube now says it was removed for " ... a Terms of Service violation"

Can anyone pinpoint what, in the TOS, this might violate?

(Via ZDNet)