Since the 'Answers' Section was totally useless I will try here

[AthenaStarfire]

I KNOW ITS ON THE DASBOARD AND VIEWER...its NOT what I'm asking!

How do I find out the amount of $L on my personal avatar using LSL script? I'm not concerned with knowing others just myself.

Cheers

 

 

 

 

[Darkie Minotaur]

You can't - as easy as that. 

[AthenaStarfire]

Any idea what thier reason was for this? Seems like it would be a required function for a lot of things, especially if its only for yourself, I don't see any security risk there..

Thanks for the answer here...

Cheers

 

 

[Ron Khondji]

Maybe the reason is that the amount is allready very visible on the menu bar. 

[Irene Muni]

---

Ron Khondji wrote:

Maybe the reason is that the amount is allready very visible on the menu bar. 

---

And also in the Dashboard. That was the answer in the SL answers subforum: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Technical/How-can-I-find-out-the-amount-of-L-on-my-avatar-using-LSL-Script/qaq-p/1714815 But it seems not a sufficient reason (as the OP says in bold and big letters: "NOT SOLVED!!! ACTUALLY QUESTION WAS TOTALLY IGNORED!!!"), probably there are another reasons, who knows, we wait another answers.

 

[Qie Niangao]

In theory one might be able to script an external server to login to one's dashboard and scrape the contents for the L$ balance, serving that up to an in-world LSL script. Seems like a lot of work, unless there's some desperate need for the information.

One possible need would be for a script to know how much llGiveMoney() or llTransferLindenDollars() it can do before the account runs out.

A hideous kludge might be to have two scripted objects, one owned by an alt, the other by a main account, where the main account's script does llTransferLindenDollars() to the alt until it runs out (being careful about the time throttle on that function call) and keeping track of how much it spent, then have the alt account's script transfer that amount back, re-establishing the main account's L$ balance, now known.

Still seems like a lot of work. And judging by every other d*mned thing I've done repetitively in LSL, it must surely occasionally fail in some obscure way such that one account or the other owes Linden Lab one L$ for every hydrogen atom in the universe.

[Ciaran Laval]

There are use cases for this, as Qie points out. One example would be a split commission script whereby money goes to one avatar and then a percentage goes to another avatar, this won't work if the first avatar goes into negative balance, so the script may want to check the balance before the transaction completes.

However we don't really want scripts around that can check anyone's balance on whim.

[Rolig Loon]

Agreed.  It's very difficult to use LSL to view personal information, and it's just as well.   The possibilities for fraud are just too great.  In this case, the information is so easily available to the OP in her own viewer that there is no compelling reason for having a scripted solution, even if that were possible.

[Innula Zenovka]

---

AthenaStarfire wrote:

Any idea what thier reason was for this? Seems like it would be a required function for a lot of things, especially if its only for yourself, I don't see any security risk there..

 

---

The security risk, such as it is, is that scammers who give people things that ask for debit permissions and then attempt to clear out the victim's account could do it all in one call -- llGiveMoney(scammer, llGetMyAccountBalance()) -- rather than have to take it in tranches, which may give the victim the chance to spot something is amiss.

[Ela Talaj]

An agent cannot have a negative balance, only a zero balance. A split payment script first collects into its owner account and then pays a percentage of the amount collected to other agents. Premises considered it has no need to check its owner balance. Of course half of the LSL "scripters" would not be able to insure that a split payment is always less than or equal 100% but that's another matter.

[Ciaran Laval]

An avatar can have a negative balance, you go into the red, your account balance will have a minus sign in front of it, this happens when for example, group liabilties are due, they still get taken and you end up with a negative balance if you don't have enough in your account to make the payment.

[Innula Zenovka]

Yes, and I once ended up with a whopping negative balance for quite some time after buying some L$ from what turned out to be a dodgy source and LL removed them (this was when I was younger and even more foolish, of course).  

Having said that, I agree with Ela that, in the normal course of events, it's not something I worry about much when scripting commission vendors or tipjars and the like.

[Ciaran Laval]

Agreed, I don't think it's a strong enough use case to justify LL opening up the potential headaches from security risks and scammers trying to get people to let them see their balance, it's something we have to accept may happen and accept the limitations as being in the overall interest of the platform.

[AthenaStarfire]

Well, that was the point. I only want an OWNER script, make it owner only, there is no reason to see someone elses balance.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Yeah, but how do you stop something like this (though my worry would be tricks with debit permissions):

 

	attach(key attached)	{		if(attached){			llInstantMessage(scammer,llGetUsername(attached)+"'s account balance is L$"+(string)llGetMyAccountBalance());		}	}

 

[Ron Khondji]

You are the owner of every script in every object in your inventory. 

A hypothetical llGetMyAccountBalance() would have to check if the owner and the creator of the script are the same for it to function like you want.