No. While I do believe that there should be national ethical standards for the safety and ethics of virtual reality content I do not believe that there should be international standards. This is …Read MoreNo. While I do believe that there should be national ethical standards for the safety and ethics of virtual reality content I do not believe that there should be international standards. This is because a single global standard is too broad, potentially restrictive, and/or possibly incompatible for countries as each country is different and varies in norms, legal systems, technology, and capacity.Read Less
Nope. Although establishing international standards for the safety and ethics of VR content might appear necessary in theory, it is highly unrealistic in the real world just like other agendas …Read MoreNope. Although establishing international standards for the safety and ethics of VR content might appear necessary in theory, it is highly unrealistic in the real world just like other agendas encoraging international controls for cyber-related tools. VR technologies evoles rapaidly, and different countries hold fundamentally different social norms, legal threholds, and cultural expectations regarding harmful content, psychological impact, and user autonomy. Any attempt to impose a universal framework would either become so vague as to be meaningless or spark political resistance from states that view external regulation as an intrusion into their domestic digital governance. As a result, gloabal uniformity is essentially unattainable.
VR is also extremely difficult to regulate becasue its risks depending heavily on user experience and context, such as psychological distress, manipulation , addictive design, or immersive violence. Enforcement therefore requires real-time monitoring inevitably rasises privacy ,surverillance and data collaction concerns. International bodies have neither the authotrity nor the technical capacity to oversee millions of decentralized VR platforms and devicesl. In practice, countries with weak institutions could easily bypass or ignore standards, while authorization regimes might selectively enforce them for political censorship rather than user protection.
Finally, internatioanl standards would create opportunities for corruption, selective reporting, and exploitation by states that can manipulate compliance documents without actually protecting users. Companies and governments could overstate adherence, fabricate safety audits, or block foreign competitors unders the guise of the so-called ethical compliance. Meanwhile, the users most vulnerable to VR harms, low-literacy groups or marginalized communities, for exmaple, lack the ability to report misuses, which means violations would remain invisible. For the above reasons, global VR safety and ethics standards are impractical, unenforceable, and likely to be abused. Read Less
No. While I do believe that there should be national ethical standards for the safety and ethics of virtual reality content I do not believe that there should be international standards. This is …Read MoreNo. While I do believe that there should be national ethical standards for the safety and ethics of virtual reality content I do not believe that there should be international standards. This is because a single global standard is too broad, potentially restrictive, and/or possibly incompatible for countries as each country is different and varies in norms, legal systems, technology, and capacity. Read Less
There should be because it could ensure consistent protections for users as the technology expands globally.
Nope. Although establishing international standards for the safety and ethics of VR content might appear necessary in theory, it is highly unrealistic in the real world just like other agendas …Read MoreNope. Although establishing international standards for the safety and ethics of VR content might appear necessary in theory, it is highly unrealistic in the real world just like other agendas encoraging international controls for cyber-related tools. VR technologies evoles rapaidly, and different countries hold fundamentally different social norms, legal threholds, and cultural expectations regarding harmful content, psychological impact, and user autonomy. Any attempt to impose a universal framework would either become so vague as to be meaningless or spark political resistance from states that view external regulation as an intrusion into their domestic digital governance. As a result, gloabal uniformity is essentially unattainable.
VR is also extremely difficult to regulate becasue its risks depending heavily on user experience and context, such as psychological distress, manipulation , addictive design, or immersive violence. Enforcement therefore requires real-time monitoring inevitably rasises privacy ,surverillance and data collaction concerns. International bodies have neither the authotrity nor the technical capacity to oversee millions of decentralized VR platforms and devicesl. In practice, countries with weak institutions could easily bypass or ignore standards, while authorization regimes might selectively enforce them for political censorship rather than user protection.
Finally, internatioanl standards would create opportunities for corruption, selective reporting, and exploitation by states that can manipulate compliance documents without actually protecting users. Companies and governments could overstate adherence, fabricate safety audits, or block foreign competitors unders the guise of the so-called ethical compliance. Meanwhile, the users most vulnerable to VR harms, low-literacy groups or marginalized communities, for exmaple, lack the ability to report misuses, which means violations would remain invisible. For the above reasons, global VR safety and ethics standards are impractical, unenforceable, and likely to be abused. Read Less