Wired recently reported on government plans to study virtual worlds and their potential for terrorist training and activities.

Over at Threats Watch, an intriguing commentary on whether there’s validity to the study:

I have often commented to my friends in the academic community that I am surprised that more extensive studies on the sociology of the Internet, how people can interact and co-exist with each other in the virtual world has affected life away from the computer. Frankly, I have a hard time accepting the opposing point of view that virtual relationships cannot become very real. On a very simplistic level, the interactions between so-called “citizen journalists” in the blogosphere is a perfect example where they collaborate and mix and blend ideas, collaborate and believe in a common objective. But more to the point of the emerging threat posed by virtual worlds like Second Life, I think the question of “why not” needs to be asked and answered. In a place like a virtual world, remotely located individuals can collaborate in nefarious efforts, or establish ground rules and parameters in which operational scenarios can be gamed. To reject that as even a possibility leaves open the likelihood that such activities will occur.

What’s perhaps most intriguing about the government’s study of virtual worlds is that their initial “seedling project” will be public domain. The research objectives might provide broader insight:

The cultural and behavioral norms of virtual worlds and gaming are generally unstudied. Therefore, Reynard will seek to identify the emerging social, behavioral and cultural norms in virtual worlds and gaming environments. The project would then apply the lessons learned to determine the feasibility of automatically detecting suspicious behavior and actions in the virtual world.

Reynard will conduct unclassified research in a public virtual world environment. The research will use publicly available data and will begin with observational studies to establish baseline normative behaviors.

I’d argue that the initial premise is misguided however. In fact, there’s a great deal of study of how people socialize and behave in virtual worlds. Much of it is, however, of limited value and seems to discover the obvious. Sort of like those government-funded research efforts that generate headlines like “Government Study Finds That People Don’t Like Dying”.

“People Feel Like They ARE Their Avatars, Harvard Discovers”

Trying to study the culture of virtual worlds to identify current patterns and this perhaps create some sort of pattern-exception algorithm begins with the premise that virtual worlds are homogeneous.

In the meantime, I’ll start using more slang in world to see if I can’t muddy up the findings of the secret agents who will no doubt be following me around while trying to blend in by dressing up as furries or Nekos.