Jump to content

Should we discuss what the shared experience implies?


Kyrah Abattoir
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 586 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

As per: https://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php Prohibited Features and Functionality

Does any of the 3rd party viewer break anything? Alterations in them self do not mean breaking policies, but for example improves say performance and/or graphic quality.

To me, the policies stipulated are more an attempt to have both open source and at same time respect copyright and intellectual property, which always is a problem with open source.

I am quite sure, if Second Life was made today, the viewer source code would only have been semi-open source with a closed digital right management system.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rachel1206 said:

Does any of the 3rd party viewer break anything? Alterations in them self do not mean breaking policies, but for example improves say performance and/or graphic quality.

To me, the policies stipulated are more an attempt to have both open source and at same time respect copyright and intellectual property, which always is a problem with open source.

I am quite sure, if Second Life was made today, the viewer source code would only have been semi-open source with a closed digital right management system.

 

Specifically I'm puzzled by the rather "loose" interpretation of:

Quote

You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer.

I can think of a lot of viewers that alter the shared experience, if anything, that's the entire point of a lot of popular TPVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

Specifically I'm puzzled by the rather "loose" interpretation of:

I can think of a lot of viewers that alter the shared experience, if anything, that's the entire point of a lot of popular TPVs.

I see and understand your point, as long it is founded in LL technology the interpretation is easier to handle, but added functionality not found the in official viewer would a different question.

Edited by Rachel1206
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Profaitchikenz Haiku said:

RLV, I'm looking at you...

You can also add to that pile:

  • Custom permission revocation conditions (scripters hate this one so much)
  • Blocking llMapDestination (first time i see this option, it does explain why some of my customers never see map prompts from my scripts, sigh)
  • Look at target hiding/ (does manipulate some data sent to the server in an unintented manner)

I mean, don't get me wrong, it's great that we have such a passionate community modding viewers in interesting ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this was originally aimed at things like the Emerald (throws salt over left shoulder) viewer's multiple attachments to a single attachment point, which which looked fine to people using Emerald (more salt), but rather bizarre to anyone using the LL viewer.

I don't see how it can be applied to rendering issues, when even the LL viewer has a host of settings that that can radically alter the look of a scene and the objects in it.

And I think the thing with RLV is that using it yourself doesn't affect anyone else's experience: if an RLV object captures and strips you, then both you and your non-RLV audience see the same thing. That a non-RLV user can't be captured and stripped by that object… well, the end result isn't that different from from a scripted object that's set to group only use.

Edited by KT Kingsley
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer.

I remember Oz vaguely implying that changing how the world looks, including graphical improvements (which my Viewer is all about) is violating this very policy. Oz however also noted that he doesn't act on it. Most likely because it would be quite stupid to do so. He and Jessica implied though that the reason he doesn't specifically act on my Viewer is because my Viewer is not as big and popular as Firestorm which is why Firestorm is apparently not allowed to do bigger visual modifications.

Edited by NiranV Dean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is that LL would not take action on things that don't cause offence or prompt annoyance; e.g. showing what client the other users have which apparently caused disparaging comments to be passed on users of the LL Viewer. (In my view shutting off the client in the tags achieved little, you could always tell somebody using the LL viewer in an RP sim when they leaped several feet in the air because they had typed an emote but forgotten to explicity open and shift focus to the chat-bar first).

 

 

Edited by Profaitchikenz Haiku
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are plenty of ways to break the shared experience in their own client, such as setting different times of day, using EEP at all, or media on a prim.

The goal is to prevent a situation where a specific product or location would require a specific viewer to operate as expected. Known examples are extra non standard attachment points, or storing a region's object list outside of SL in order to bypass parcel Li restrictions.

RLV/RLVa is a special case in that it does on face value break the shared experience rule of requiring a specific viewer, but only impacts the users end experience. It got a pass in the end as several people  (TPV devs and inside of LL) put up a very impassioned defense.

Shared experience exists as a way for LL to have final say on what features make it onto their grid. Sadly IMO, it has turned into a bit of a mantra and blocks the consideration of fundamental changes that need to happen moving the platform forward (like client side authoritative physics or scripting)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, CoffeeDujour said:

There are plenty of ways to break the shared experience in their own client, such as setting different times of day, using EEP at all, or media on a prim.

The goal is to prevent a situation where a specific product or location would require a specific viewer to operate as expected. Known examples are extra non standard attachment points, or storing a region's object list outside of SL in order to bypass parcel Li restrictions.

RLV/RLVa is a special case in that it does on face value break the shared experience rule of requiring a specific viewer, but only impacts the users end experience. It got a pass in the end as several people  (TPV devs and inside of LL) put up a very impassioned defense.

Shared experience exists as a way for LL to have final say on what features make it onto their grid. Sadly IMO, it has turned into a bit of a mantra and blocks the consideration of fundamental changes that need to happen moving the platform forward (like client side authoritative physics or scripting)

Making a region require Black Dragon to look as expected or doing the same with your product for instance because they use something only found in Black Dragon is pretty much a violation according to that definition, but these things are user choice, someone chose to build something for a certain Viewer in mind. So many people build their stuff with parcel lighting in mind which was only possible in Firestorm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CoffeeDujour said:

EEP Kills FS Parcel lighting, which was only allowed to remain till such time as LL added their own system.

That was pretty long in the coming wasn't it?

So are you implying they let me do graphical changes because they plan to do them too at some point? In like another 5 years i mean.

Edited by NiranV Dean
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer.

That's an issue. I've thought about trying some things which change what you see beyond your draw distance, so we could see the Big World. SL has a huge world, but you can never see very much of it at once. That could be fixed.

obliquemapview.thumb.jpg.a88e6d8c135356d4abe33c20d8e935a1.jpg

SL map, from an angle, using my map viewer. This is sometimes called a "slippy map". Phase One of Big World.

This was done in a web browser. No reason this can't be done inside an SL viewer. Beyond the draw distance, for non-water areas, show the map. So if you're really at the seaside, you see nice water. In the distance, you see a bit of the next land, and can steer your boat better. Not distant mountains, though. This is just a 2D world beyond the draw distance.

Nice for flying. You can see the airport before you're on top of it.

elgranada.thumb.jpg.5925157285a1df5bdbf0a87f0dcd50bc.jpg

Google Earth, from a low viewing angle. It's 3D nearby, but 2D on an elevation map in the distance. SL could look like that.

This would be phase two of Big World. Project the map tiles on the the elevation map, and display region size or larger, but low resolution, meshes beyond draw distance. Now you can see distant mountains.

This isn't expensive in terms of performance. It's one object per region. For distant mountains, one per four regions, 16 regions, 64 regions, etc. Like the 2D map tiles.

Not clear if Linden Lab would disapprove. You're seeing roughly the same thing you'd see if you turned your draw distance way, way up and waited while it all loaded.

(If we're still in lockdown all summer, I might implement Big World Phase One just to see what it looks like.)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a legacy item related to the takedown that was done against Phoenix Viewer.

I believe it refers to not changes in how you yourself view the world, but using the viewer to change how someone else - someone not you - experiences the world. Ie: it's aimed at usinf the viewer to do malicious hacking of the SL experience that OTHER PEOPLE experience.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Pussycat Catnap said:

This is a legacy item related to the takedown that was done against Phoenix Viewer.

I believe it refers to not changes in how you yourself view the world, but using the viewer to change how someone else - someone not you - experiences the world. Ie: it's aimed at usinf the viewer to do malicious hacking of the SL experience that OTHER PEOPLE experience.

 

 

This  is probably the best explanation of the actual meaning. Are you a lawyer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2020 at 3:22 PM, CoffeeDujour said:

The goal

Assumed goal.

11 hours ago, CoffeeDujour said:

However you can fake them with a screen grab and projectors

Last time i demonstrated this at a linden meeting and implied that a lot of people wear them now, they shuddered.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2020 at 8:50 PM, Pussycat Catnap said:

This is a legacy item related to the takedown that was done against Phoenix Viewer.

I believe it refers to not changes in how you yourself view the world, but using the viewer to change how someone else - someone not you - experiences the world. Ie: it's aimed at usinf the viewer to do malicious hacking of the SL experience that OTHER PEOPLE experience.

 

 

I believe you got it.

I have another reason to be annoyed.  Our decorator bought some lovely flowers but the only people that can see them are looking from within a couple of meters.  She was upset by this and asked the seller what we are doing wrong, why do we have to be close enough to take a bite to see the flowers.  The reply was that we are using the wrong viewer to view their products.  We are using Linden Lab’s release and release candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ardy Lay said:

Our decorator bought some lovely flowers but the only people that can see them are looking from within a couple of meters.  She was upset by this and asked the seller what we are doing wrong, why do we have to be close enough to take a bite to see the flowers.  The reply was that we are using the wrong viewer to view their products.  We are using Linden Lab’s release and release candidates.

No, that means the flowers have a poor lower level of detail.

Before you buy something, see it in world at lowest level of detail. Use Firestorm, open the Firestorm menu at the lower right, and slide the LOD slider all the way down to 0. Many objects will disappear, or turn into a mess of loose triangles. Buy the ones that don't.

There's a big garden center in SL from someone who gets this right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, animats said:

Use Firestorm

Never.  What the seller said we were doing wrong is NOT using Firestorm.  I'll assume they had that LOD slider shoved to the other extreme.

Edited by Ardy Lay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2020 at 7:35 AM, NiranV Dean said:

This  is probably the best explanation of the actual meaning. Are you a lawyer?

The fact that I actually do have a law degree wouldn't give me any clarity on this one. I just recall them actually saying a more detailed version of that concept - and it coming about on the heels of and as stated in response to the Phoenix fiasco. 😉

Somewhere out there we should be able to find a blog or post or something from the LL's of several years ago that would clarify the details and correct whatever I got wrong... O.o

 

Edited by Pussycat Catnap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2020 at 1:44 PM, animats said:

That's an issue. I've thought about trying some things which change what you see beyond your draw distance, so we could see the Big World. SL has a huge world, but you can never see very much of it at once. That could be fixed.

obliquemapview.thumb.jpg.a88e6d8c135356d4abe33c20d8e935a1.jpg

SL map, from an angle, using my map viewer. This is sometimes called a "slippy map". Phase One of Big World.

This was done in a web browser. No reason this can't be done inside an SL viewer. Beyond the draw distance, for non-water areas, show the map. So if you're really at the seaside, you see nice water. In the distance, you see a bit of the next land, and can steer your boat better. Not distant mountains, though. This is just a 2D world beyond the draw distance.

Nice for flying. You can see the airport before you're on top of it.

elgranada.thumb.jpg.5925157285a1df5bdbf0a87f0dcd50bc.jpg

Google Earth, from a low viewing angle. It's 3D nearby, but 2D on an elevation map in the distance. SL could look like that.

This would be phase two of Big World. Project the map tiles on the the elevation map, and display region size or larger, but low resolution, meshes beyond draw distance. Now you can see distant mountains.

This isn't expensive in terms of performance. It's one object per region. For distant mountains, one per four regions, 16 regions, 64 regions, etc. Like the 2D map tiles.

Not clear if Linden Lab would disapprove. You're seeing roughly the same thing you'd see if you turned your draw distance way, way up and waited while it all loaded.

(If we're still in lockdown all summer, I might implement Big World Phase One just to see what it looks like.)

 

I really want to see this.  Would be great if you built it on LL's viewer so they might accept it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 586 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...