Should Any Second Life User Be Allowed To Continue To See Another User's Camera Beacon Location - Privacy Issue?

[Prokofy Neva]

On 1/6/2022 at 5:03 AM, Paulsian said:

 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Prokofy Neva

[Prokofy Neva]

I believe this function is only on Firestorm, correct? I seemed to have also been very late in discovering this. One day I was on my own homestead, and someone came on it either to look at the rentals or the items for sale. Since this sim had been repeatedly attacked by griefers, I zoomed in on this person just to see if they looked like trouble or not and what they were doing. She immediately IM'd me angrily and said, "I see what you're doing there, you're camming me, stop it." So apparently some people think they can use this as yet another vector to police the behaviour of their fellow residents.

But sorry, I'm going to zoom in on you in two settings: a) when you are on my land and your purpose is not clear yet; b) when I'm at a public event.

I think on the Mainland, it's common courtesy not to cam into people's houses and snoop on them. But then they can turn off "avatars can see me," if that's of concern to them, then they'll be invisible.

After they have paid, I don't see any need to study my tenants, or their profiles, and sometimes months later I'm surprised to discover that someone with what seemed like a male name was female or visa versa, I never look at them, there isn't time, unless there is some kind of griefing situation or complaint. And I think people are entitled to their privacy, and their private lives are not your business. Unless I can tell at a glance that they are overprimming and I need to figure out which high-prim item to return as they ignore warnings, I don't cam into their houses.  Some tenants ban each other when they think another tenant is doing that to them. But of course if you're in the same group with the same powers, you can unban yourself. Still, "avatars can't see me" is the gold standard of privacy which the Lindens brilliantly conceived and I find it a blessing to deter the use of orbs on the ground which I don't allow, they are such a beastly nuisance to everyone.

I do find it hilarious that people dress up to the nines and go and strut their stuff at merchant events, then sometimes angrily hiss at you if you have cammed on them or taken their picture. Sorry, but you're in public, guys, and if you don't like being looked at, stay home in your humper bunker.

The issue of whether reporters and photographers can photograph people in public is endlessly debated and even tried in courts in RL and basically, that's life in the big city, the right is usually established for reporters in public places. Is it a courtesy to first ask a person before you photograph them, or even to cam them? Perhaps, except see above.

So let's say you are in an elaborate costume at a RP event with all kinds of accessories, jewelry, shoulder pets, etc. and if someone wants to snap your picture either to remind themselves to look for that very outfit, or to put on Flickr I believe that is their right. I find the camming thing creepier than taking a picture, but again, see above, you're in public or on my land. I've found also that when you IM people to ask them where they got their shoulder pet or ask them if they mind being on Flickr, most of the time they are AFK, which is why you could see them stationery in the first place.

I've met some of the most interesting people I know in SL by seeing them at a shopping event and admiring their finery and IMing them and telling them they won first prize in the costume contest. Isn't that what people are here for? To buy things and show them off. So stop it with the pearl-clutching about someone camming on you, hide in a Pew Pew closet if it bothers you.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Prokofy Neva

[Rowan Amore]

2 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I believe this function is only on Firestorm, correct?

It's on the official viewer, too.  You have to enable being able to see it yourself.  You'd also have to disable broadcasting your own if you don't want people to see yours.

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Show_Look_At

[Lucia Nightfire]

I like seeing when people alt-cam me.

It sometimes leads to people IMing me and complimenting me on the look of my avatar or my pet companions.

It only gets weird when the lookat beacon stays on my head for literally tens of minutes and no dialog has happened.

[Chaser Zaks]

No.

Look at targets are what power the inverse kinematics that make the head move. It also adds context to a few things but I forget what.

People who use look at targets are just looking for drama. Why would any sane person turn them on? They look awful.

I did make a feature that increases the privacy of look at targets though. If you are using firestorm, you can limit the distance from your head that the look at target is allowed to travel. This introduces a slight issue where it doesn't track moving objects but it is barely noticable.

Personally if I had to choose, I'd prefer if LL made showing the names and origin beam a TPV violation, or rather just make offering it as a feature rather than a debut setting a TPV violation, rather than outright removing it together.

Still I don't think it needs to be changed.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Chaser Zaks

[Arielle Popstar]

19 minutes ago, Lucia Nightfire said:

I like seeing when people alt-cam me.

It sometimes leads to people IMing me and complimenting me on the look of my avatar or my pet companions.

It only gets weird when the lookat beacon stays on my head for literally tens of minutes and no dialog has happened.

I don't mind it either, and if there's a mutual interest it just makes it easier to start up a conversation. Very much like real life where looking at is the basis for almost all interactions. I don't get why people are getting bent out of shape about being looked at.

I'll admit to being guilty of at times leaving my Look at on a particular avatar for a long period if they have a fairly in-depth profile and links to their flicker accounts. Never had anyone complain about it though.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Arielle Popstar
Clarifying

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Chaser Zaks said:

No.

Look at targets are what power the inverse kinematics that make the head move. It also adds context to a few things but I forget what.

People who use look at targets are just looking for drama. Why would any sane person turn them on? They look awful.

I did make a feature that increases the privacy of look at targets though. If you are using firestorm, you can limit the distance from your head that the look at target is allowed to travel. This introduces a slight issue where it doesn't track moving objects but it is barely noticable.

Personally if I had to choose, I'd prefer if LL made showing the names and origin beam a TPV violation, or rather just make offering it as a feature rather than a debut setting a TPV violation, rather than outright removing it together.

Still I don't think it needs to be changed.

It is in the official viewer and has been since before 2003. There is no reason whatsoever to ban TPVs from using standard LL viewer features.

Remember when lookat was on by default in the official viewer and everyone was freaking out trying to figure out how to get rid of them? That was fun. 😐

Edited January 7, 2022 by Silent Mistwalker

[Sprout Evergarden]

I always assume if someone is caming me they either like the looks of my avatar or more likely they are interested in something I have on

[Nick0678]

I always have LookAt enabled, of course some people might get triggered from it and overreact by sending aggressive PM's etc but i chuckle and keep it locked on their avatar until they shut up (or leave the area).

[Qie Niangao]

3 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

It is in the official viewer and has been since before 2003. There is no reason whatsoever to ban TPVs from using standard LL viewer features.

Remember when lookat was on by default in the official viewer and everyone was freaking out trying to figure out how to get rid of them? That was fun. 😐

I never use this feature in any viewer, so maybe I'm doing it wrong, but one alt trying it in Firestorm and one in the Linden viewer, the Firestorm crosshairs are labelled with the avatar name associated with the lookAt, whereas the Linden viewer shows the functional nature of the cam control (Focus, Idle, FreeLook, etc). Probably there are like a dozen settings somewhere to adjust what's displayed for that label, but these appear to be the defaults—and avatar name labelling would seem a much more effective drama magnet.

(Just cuz it was handy, I tried Catznip and like the Linden viewer it's showing the functional label, not the avatar name.)

[Coffee Pancake]

We (Catznip) get asked for the ability to hide lookats fairly regularly from users coming from firestorm ..

Lookats have actual debug purposes and the data is only of the only ways we have to add a little dynamic movement to avatars.

Some have gotten very aggressive / abusive over not being able to hide their own and pay attention to everyone else's .. and that alone has been enough for us to just want nothing to do with the whole mess. 

 

I really wish FS hadn't decided to put people's names over the crosshairs, that has no purpose other than drama.

 

[Persephone Emerald]

On 1/6/2022 at 3:56 AM, Maitimo said:

In Firestorm you can hide your "Look At" targets so no-one (even on other viewers) can see what you're looking at. You can also turn on or off the targets of other people. I keep them off because the screen gets cluttered.

And if people don't want others looking at their avatars, Second Life is not the right platform for them. 

^ This. 

There are all kinds of perverts in SL, so for this discussion I'm defining Cam-Pervert as those who enjoy looking at other avatars for salacious reasons, assuming those avatars don't know they're being looked at. 

A Cam-Pervert is not likely to be a newbie, since most newbies have not learned how to cam and certainly don't know how to turn off the ability of others to see they're being cammed. Camming is a common part of SL, for various reasons, mostly not salacious.  Camming up one's own skirt to do a panty check, looking at what an avatar is wearing, or camming inside a house to see how it's been decorated are all normal and acceptable SL behaviors. Camming on others who might be naked or engaging in adult activities is also normal in SL, so if you don't want to be Cam-Perved, you have to learn how to disable letting others outside of your home parcel view avatars inside it, then don't ever get naked or do anything adult in someone else's parcel. If it still bothers you that other people can look at your avatar, maybe SL is not a good fit for you.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Persephone Emerald
to add

[LittleMe Jewell]

2 hours ago, Nick0678 said:

I always have LookAt enabled, of course some people might get triggered from it and overreact by sending aggressive PM's etc but i chuckle and keep it locked on their avatar until they shut up (or leave the area).

I've actually considered doing this at times.  Sometimes, I'm bored enough to be willing to invoke some drama.

[Lyssa Greymoon]

4 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

There are all kinds of perverts in SL, so for this discussion I'm defining Cam-Pervert as those who enjoy looking at other avatars for salacious reasons, assuming those avatars don't know they're being looked at. 

Show look at has the unfortunate effect of letting you know exactly how many people are not looking at your avatar for salacious reasons. 

[CaithLynnSayes]

On 1/6/2022 at 7:55 PM, Cinnamon Mistwood said:

Just turn it off.  In Firestorm preferences:

red arrow - I don't want to see your crosshairs/lookats

green arrow - I don't want you to see mine

Finally someone said it... I was waiting when it would eventually happen. took about 3 pages in this thread.. hm, interesting  

[Alwin Alcott]

23 minutes ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

Finally someone said it... I was waiting when it would eventually happen. took about 3 pages in this thread.. hm, interesting  

it was on the first page pointed at it in the debug settings.

[Alwin Alcott]

38 minutes ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

Finally someone said it... I was waiting when it would eventually happen. took about 3 pages in this thread.. hm, interesting  

it's also amazing me that somebody complaints about it but doesn't turn it off.

[Silent Mistwalker]

2 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

I never use this feature in any viewer, so maybe I'm doing it wrong, but one alt trying it in Firestorm and one in the Linden viewer, the Firestorm crosshairs are labelled with the avatar name associated with the lookAt, whereas the Linden viewer shows the functional nature of the cam control (Focus, Idle, FreeLook, etc). Probably there are like a dozen settings somewhere to adjust what's displayed for that label, but these appear to be the defaults—and avatar name labelling would seem a much more effective drama magnet.

(Just cuz it was handy, I tried Catznip and like the Linden viewer it's showing the functional label, not the avatar name.)

Where did I say anything about specific settings? Where did I say Lookat doesn't cause drama?

Sorry. I'm not seeing anything in my post you quoted that would have elicited this response.  I never even mentioned drama in the post you quoted.

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Coffee Pancake said:

We (Catznip) get asked for the ability to hide lookats fairly regularly from users coming from firestorm ..

Lookats have actual debug purposes and the data is only of the only ways we have to add a little dynamic movement to avatars.

Some have gotten very aggressive / abusive over not being able to hide their own and pay attention to everyone else's .. and that alone has been enough for us to just want nothing to do with the whole mess. 

 

I really wish FS hadn't decided to put people's names over the crosshairs, that has no purpose other than drama.

 

 

That kind of thing gets added when enough users request it.

[Nick0678]

3 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I've actually considered doing this at times.  Sometimes, I'm bored enough to be willing to invoke some drama.

Without drama Second Life would never be the same..

[Rowan Amore]

Drama...an exciting, emotional, or unexpected series of events or set of circumstances.

Don't mind drama.  Dislike the f***ery.

Fcukery

(noun) Insidious deceit, treachery, falsifications & evil works intended to harm, hurt and/or destroy the intended recipient. 

[Innula Zenovka]

3 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

 

That kind of thing gets added when enough users request it.

Do you think so?   My impression was that the developers of most TPVs make viewers with features they want to use, and are kind enough to share them with the rest of us.    That's one of the reasons I like both Catznip and Marine's viewer so much -- besides being RLV reference viewers, which is important to me as a scripter, they're based on the Official Viewer, which I'm used to using because I like having access to all the latest features, plus a few extra TPV features I find happen to find really useful.   Firestorm has them, too, plus dozens of extra features which are all very cool, but I never need to use them (and I imagine that's most people's experience -- Firestorm has a few features they can't do without and a whole load of others they never touch).

I'm not criticising Firestorm for this, but I don't see why other TPV devs should be expected to add features just for the sake of it, when there's already a viewer that has them, and the kitchen sink besides.    Marine does her thing, Coffee and Kitty do theirs, Niran does his, and so does Henri, and I'm very grateful to them for sharing their work with us.    I'd never dream of asking them to add features, though.  

Edited January 8, 2022 by Innula Zenovka

[Scylla Rhiadra]

On 1/6/2022 at 4:16 PM, Innula Zenovka said:

Cristiano can't get the archives back

Whyyyyyyyyyyyy???

[Innula Zenovka]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Whyyyyyyyyyyyy???

You'd have to ask him.  I know he tried very hard -- the content creation forums were a really valuable reference source, quite apart from the general forum providing a wonderful history of SL -- but I think the whole archive was just too huge.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, Innula Zenovka said:

You'd have to ask him.  I know he tried very hard -- the content creation forums were a really valuable reference source, quite apart from the general forum providing a wonderful history of SL -- but I think the whole archive was just too huge.

I'd ask him, but he only ever talks about how much he hates wearing pants.