From: bdel@well.sf.ca.us Subject: Re: POLICY: U.S. VR policy to exclude small business, rely on govt. and aca Date: 15 Jul 1993 Crossposted from the WELL (192.132.30.2) vr conference Topic 183: U.S. VR policy to exclude small business, favor academia and govt.? # 7: Ben Delaney (bdel) Thu, Jul 15, '93 (22:22) 214 lines Bob, I hate to disagree, but the first mention of this was in CEJ, #15, May/June '93, page 3. the article, which starts on the top of page one is called VR-NASA's Training vision, but on page 3 we report on Jenkins preliminary report, in which he pronounced "VR is too important a technology to the nation to continue its unstructured research and development." The article goes on, "We at CyberEdge Journal do not concur. We feel that while large-scale labs, including government and university installations have made many critical contributions to VR, it will be the small companies and the garage outfits that are likely to develop the "killer apps" that will ultimately drive the industry. We fell that VR is in the same developmental stage as were personal computers in 1979, and expect VR to blossom as PCs did, if free from standards and regulations other than those imposed by the marketplace." I later spoke to jenkins, and he expressed a desire for input from the community. I feel that he is well-meaning and hard working, but a bit out of touch. Here's a copy of the letter I sent him a few weeks ago. **B00000000000000 May 27, 1993 NASA Headquarters Dr. James Jenkins Code R Washington, DC 20546 Dear Dr. Jenkins, I very much enjoyed your presentation on The Federal Government's Role in Virtual Reality Research and Development at the ICAT/VET conference in Houston. It is obvious that the Group on Virtual Reality Technology is doing a good job of researching and understanding the state of this important technology, and in providing a foundation for continued growth. In this letter I would like to pass on a few of my observations and conclusions regarding the Government's role in the development of Virtual Reality. First, allow me to provide some brief background information. I am the Publisher and Editor of CyberEdge Journal, the world's leading newsletter of virtual reality. With over 3,000 readers, and subscribers in 24 countries, we have become the publication of record for the VR community. Our subscribers are executives, scientists, military personnel, students, hardware and software developers, and many others. Our publication has established a reputation for factual, reliable reporting, and I myself am honored to have been recognized as one of the world's experts on the state of the industry. While I am not a scientist, most of the people doing important work in VR have been kind enough to welcome me into their labs to see and learn about their work. We in turn report on those visits, as well as on conferences, new business developments, and product introductions. We also carry a very complete, world-wide calendar of events, book reviews, letters, and occasional essays on the field. I have enclosed a recent issue and some promotional material to familiarize you further with CyberEdge Journal. I appreciated your mention of then-Senator Gore's hearing on VR. Many people are unaware of this hearing, which I feel marked a historic point in the history of the technology. Interestingly, Vice President Gore remarked at the hearing that he was somewhat frustrated with Dr. Lee Holcomb's characterization of VR as a "promising tool", but one in which NASA was constrained, due to funding problems and the uncertainty of the usefulness of the technology. I think that, in the two years since the hearing, we have seen that the technology can deliver on at least some of the early promises. I am also pleased that NASA seems to have re- evaluated its commitment to VR. In light of the seminal work done by Doctors McGreevy, Ellis, Fisher, and others, it would be a shame if NASA did not continue its important research. Your remarks highlighted goals of your Group that I find admirable; inviting broad participation, developing a multi-agency outlook, and identifying areas open to profitable exploitation, among others. Combined with your well-thought-out definition and the taxonomy you presented, it was obvious that the Group has a firm grasp of the concepts and capabilities of VR. While the Group has considered some social aspects of this new technology, I feel that two major factors were absent in your summary. They are both access issues. First, we must ensure that VR equipment and applications are open, as much as possible, to all people, no matter what their physical capacities. VR provides a promise of making the world, and jobs, available to many people with disabilities who have until now been locked out. Regardless where someone falls on the long spectrum of ability/disability, we must work to use VR, where appropriate, to enrich their life, and to enable them to contribute to the general good. To ignore this issue in the early stages of the development of this technology, when it is most easily included, would be a tragic error. I recently participated in a workshop at the Virginia Center for Innovative Technology that addressed this issue, and all of those in attendance agreed that VR holds great promise. Second, to the greatest extent possible, we must not make VR inaccessible to people of lower income and educational achievement. VR can open doors, and eyes, to new possibilities, thus raising awareness of what may be done. Especially for young people, it may provide the hope and vision necessary to create an imperative to succeed. I personally hope that VR can lift some people out of the ghettos, both physical and attitudinal, that now have them trapped. I hope the Group can include language in its recommendations that promote this goal. There was one statement that in your presentation that I felt was basically misinformed. You said, "The task force believes that VR is too important a technology to the nation to continue its unstructured research and development." I strongly disagree. My disagreement is not regarding the importance of VR. Nearly three years of dedication to providing factual information in a field prone to hype certainly belies that. However I take issue with the concept that unstructured R&D should not continue, and that the government should oversee or control this research. There is certainly a place, and an important place, for large-scale and governmental projects. But there is also a place for "unstructured" research, which perhaps may yeild even greater returns. In my travels around the country (I attended 15 conferences last year alone.) The one hope I never hear voiced, outside of government and large university labs, is the hope for more government intervention, or even aid, in VR development. As I am sure you are aware, most of the work being done to commercialize VR is being done by small companies, such as Sense8, VREAM, VPL, Stray Light, and the like. The last thing these struggling entrepreneurs need is a government agency "helping" them. I don't thing any one of them would welcome the increased paper work, bureaucratic oversight, regulations, and general inconvenience that follows government around. The most common response from these people to the question, "how can the government help you?" is "stay away". The government is seen as not understanding small business, and in general, providing much more of an impediment than an aid. As a small business person myself, I can attest that there is almost no government program or contract that I find worth the inconvenience and bother. There are ways that the government can help, not just small VR businesses, but small business in general. That would be to lower the burden of (perceived) useless paperwork, reduce the complexity and difficulty of being in business in the United States, eliminate the legal nonsense that makes nearly every business owner an unknowing criminal, and lower the penalties for running a small business. Also, it would help to have a generous investment tax credit, or any other incentives that make it easier to buy the equipment needed to do this work. I realize that much of this is beyond the scope of the Group, but is essential that you and your colleagues realize that VR is still a small business, and will probably proceed more quickly with many small projects than with a few large, bureaucratic entities chasing the goals. I just got a call from a high school student in Houston who has invented and built his own VR system, from scratch, for under $1,200. That is the kind of innovation and inspiration that we need to foster. While there is no question that many government agencies, especially NASA and the Air Force, have made, and will continue to make extremely important contributions, I hope the Group will act positively to make it easy and profitable for small firms to stay in the VR business. Once again, thank you for the good work you and your fellow Group members are accomplishing. I look forward to Virtual Reality being an important contributor to the United States' continuing leadership in the 21st century and feel your work will help that happen. Don't hesitate to call on me if I can be of service. I will be eagerly awaiting your final report and recommendations. Best Regards, Ben Delaney Publisher Enclosures Group on Virtual Reality Technology, Dr. James Jenkins, May 27, 1993 page 2 CyberEdge Journal-#1 Gate Six Road, Suite G, Sausalito, CA 94965 USA 415 383-2458 - FAX 415 389-0251-CompuServe: 76217,3074-bdel@well.sf.ca.us CyberEdge Journal is dedicated to this mission: To provide an information channel for those involved in advancing the state of the art of human-computer interaction. To promote the open and free exchange of ideas and information related to the role of cybernetics in the future. To encourage the synthesis and growth of new ideas and devices. To assist in the development of commercial products incorporating these new concepts and technologies. [sorry about that last part, I didn't realize the Winword to ascii converter would include it] anyway, I suggest that all who are interested write to James Jenkins at the above address and express your views. Every letter carries a lot of weight. Make your feeling known and help avert a governmet fiasco in the brewing. Thanks Ben