You didn’t read my article, or you did, and you aren’t understanding anything I wrote.
You do have freedom of form, you are just limited in the forms you can change to. You exercise it every time you get a haircut.
The question is about what changes if there are a variety of contexts where it is fair to assume most or all participants have photonic override. You are missing the point: this isn’t about goggles. Take a longer view, once the goggles become invisible.
The title image refers to an allegory I wrote, which I’m sure you didn’t read, that might help you understand what is probably going to happen as a consequence of technological curves.
So, this idea of avatarism seems to completely ignore the fact that access to avatars (or technologies that allow "photonic override") will be gatekept by profit-maximizing entities like Apple or Facebook. To me it sounds like just another form of conspicuous consumption where the rich will show off their opulence by buying artisanal avatars (on the blockchain, no doubt) and lording them over the plebs. To see this in action today look at any gacha game, where access to the best characters requires spending tons of money. For an entity like Facebook, this probably sounds great - a new revenue stream! But some kind of new "freedom" it ain't, at least not for the majority of the world's population.
None of this stuff exists, so it's impossible to predict how it will go. But the last 20 years has seen a closing and re-centralization of the internet and computing in general. Concepts like right-to-repair, first sale, and ownership itself are under attack on various fronts. I'm pessimistic that these trends will generally reverse. Given this, why wouldn't an avatar shop be a tightly-controlled and monetized affair? Meta (or whoever) can always offer the excuse that they can't open up access because they need to curate the content to prevent sexually explicit, or otherwise offensive avatars.
Photonic override will shepherd in the final computing platform - so its more important than ever we make sure it is free and open, and not laugh it off and ignore it as Facebook walks in and just owns the whole thing.
Actually in this hypothetical future we would. You could always not get those implants and not participate in all the advantages they bring, and in turn not have other entities get control over your eyeballs, ears etc.
Sure, but you don’t get to choose the consequences. I’m not on Facebook by choice, but I didn’t get to choose to live in the world where this leads to a ton of negative consequences, despite the positives.
You do have freedom of form, you are just limited in the forms you can change to. You exercise it every time you get a haircut.
The question is about what changes if there are a variety of contexts where it is fair to assume most or all participants have photonic override. You are missing the point: this isn’t about goggles. Take a longer view, once the goggles become invisible.
The title image refers to an allegory I wrote, which I’m sure you didn’t read, that might help you understand what is probably going to happen as a consequence of technological curves.