This article in PDF with citations
Reality
AI has passed the Turing Test†, where if a human is unable to tell if they are in a conversation with another human or if it is a machine–when it is actually a machine.
We can imagine a further test, as presented by David Chalmers in Reality+ where he questions whether or not we can tell if our environment is ‘real’ or ‘artificial’. This is a question as old as philosophy, dating back to ancient Chinese thinkers including Zhuangzi’s Butterfly Dream, Greek with Plato’s Allegory of the Caves, and further, formalized by René Descartes questioning of our perception of reality, so for the sake of simplicity, let’s call it the ‘Descartes Test’.
With the cyberspace of XR/VR we are inching closer to systems being able to pass this test. Maybe not this year, or this decade, but we should not be surprised how much the future can surprise us based on our experience of the past. In our Future Text Lab community we feel that it would be a very sad state of affairs if this is all it will be–a simulacrum of physical reality. We ask how far our minds and bodies can be augmented–not replaced–augmented. We ask how far we can move beyond Euclidean space and into mental spaces which will truly extend our cognitive abilities.
Tools
Outside of my work on developing text related software, research and hosting dialog, I am a photographer. Recently I had the honor of photographing a friend’s small, intimate wedding. The couple and their families were very, very happy with the results and of course that was nice for me. However, it does not take long before I credit the extraordinary lens (Sigma 50 1.2), camera (Lumix S5iix) and grading & film simulation capabilities of Adobe LightRoom. As is often the case with photographers, we easily share credit with the equipment we use.
If we look at the origin of the word ‘camera’ it means ‘room’. ‘Camera obscura’ (dark room) has featured in history from at least two and a half thousand years ago, and perhaps far beyond, used by Leonardo Da Vinci and (suspected by scholars (Steadman 2002)) by Johannes Vermeer, Canaletto, and given the name by Johannes Kepler in the 1600s. In the early 1800s it had become a standard instrument for painting. Louis Daguerre in France and William Henry Fox Talbot in England independently introduced a way to ‘fix’ the image produced by light in the ‘camera’ for perpetuity and the modern ‘camera’ had arrived.
Descartes used the notion of the camera to consider the human mind, and this is where it all comes together.
Back to my personal experience as a photographer. I admit that it is interesting when I show someone a photograph I think is particularly beautiful–where the composition, lighting, texture, focus falloff to smooth bokeh, the shape of soft outlines, the sharpness of what is in focus and all of those aspects come together–and they ask me what camera I used (sometimes simply say “wow, great camera!”) or if they are also a photographer “wow, great lens!”, I feel that they engage with what I have produced, what I have created.
As a software developer this has made me realize this morning that I have a wish–and I know this is crazy–that when someone reads something written with my software, the reader might question how such beautiful writing was made, what word processor was used, in much the same way the may ask about camera and lens. I can imagine that many reading this would bristle at the idea–because writing is a purely intellectual pursuit! Some procedural and generalized differences may be accepted between typewriter and digital text, but that digital text no matter where it was typed is all the product of the human mind and whatever attributes and functions of the software being purely ‘nice’ or personal preference, not part of shaping the words or the thoughts behind them. BTW, I write this on the day I release Author macOS Version 11, which has taken six months of careful development, polish and testing so I feel particularly strongly about the potential of what the tool can do for the thought.
But this is not why I am sharing this with you.
Thought
I am sharing this perspective since I believe very strongly that us humans are moving into working in VR/XR, at least part of the time, for not only the very first time, but–importantly–the very last time for the first time: Soon there will never be a time in human history where we will not have the option at least to work in a headset, similar to work with digital two dimensional text today (or projection or other form of XR). Just as we cannot formulate naive ideas of working with flat digital media since we are all completely embedded in digital media today, at some point in the near future we will not be able to formulate naive ideas of working in a fully immersive eXtended Reality and thus our imaginations will have become irrevocably constrained.
And here is the thing; XR/VR–‘Cyberspace’ is a space, a room, a ‘camera’. It is a space for thought. Room for thought–extending our perceptions and our minds.
I hope that one day we will be so successful that when someone presents information–or even express a deep and novel thought–someone in the audience will say “wow, what a great thinking space you must have used”.
Therefore, I think it will be vital for us to truly invest in XR as a community to consider what it might be in deep and wide dialog, to develop a myriad of perspectives, to ‘experiment to experience’ different ways to work, create and truly unleash our minds in XR.
It is with this that I invite you to contribute to the conversation.
P.S.
I ran the above text (written in Author of course) through the integrated ‘Ask AI’ function (ChatGPT 4o August 25, 2025) and it replied with this as part of the ‘Spark Imagination’ prompt (custom for Author), which I think was nicely worded: “What would it mean for a “thinking space” to be recognized as integral to the quality of ideas generated within it?”
Frode Alexander Hegland, PhD.
Co-Editor