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

[Silent Mistwalker]

43 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

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.  

It's one of the reasons FS has a JIRA. You're supposed to use it not just for issues but also for feature requests. Enough people put their 2 cents in on the JIRA and it just might make it into the viewer with LL's approval, of course.

 

Quote

There are several reasons why you would want to file a JIRA:

• To request a new feature
• To request an improvement
• To report a bug
• To request support

https://wiki.firestormviewer.org/file_a_jira

Edited January 8, 2022 by Silent Mistwalker

[Innula Zenovka]

8 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

It's one of the reasons FS has a JIRA. You're supposed to use it not just for issues but also for feature requests. Enough people put their 2 cents in on the JIRA and it just might make it into the viewer with LL's approval, of course.

Yes, but my point was that, since Firestorm take feature requests, there's no particular reason to expect the developers of other TPVs to do the same, and I'm rather glad they don't, 

[Arielle Popstar]

21 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

It's one of the reasons FS has a JIRA. You're supposed to use it not just for issues but also for feature requests. Enough people put their 2 cents in on the JIRA and it just might make it into the viewer with LL's approval, of course.

 

https://wiki.firestormviewer.org/file_a_jira

From what I seen after attending TPV meetings for a year or so was that almost any feature request one can think of has already been proposed and if rejected, any subsequent proposals for a similar request, summarily dropped even if there has been years between. That seemed to be the case for S/L viewer and by extension FireStorm. Hate to be negative but my take on it is that feature requests are pretty much a waste of time other then for discussion on the Forum.

[Qie Niangao]

4 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

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.

You were quoting (emphasis mine): 

10 hours 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.

Drama was the whole point of the discussion.

Anyway, I don't care what Firestorm uses as default lookAt label settings, but my point was that they seem different from what's used by other viewers including the Lab's, which is relevant in the following context (emphasis mine)

10 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.

The feature as presented in Firestorm is indeed based on the same messaging so it's difficult to justify much angst about it, but that default presentation might be expected to generate extra drama, which was what I understood to be Chaser's point.

[Silent Mistwalker]

58 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

Yes, but my point was that, since Firestorm take feature requests, there's no particular reason to expect the developers of other TPVs to do the same, and I'm rather glad they don't, 

I don't disagree. Each dev team should do what they think best. What works for FS won't necessarily work for one of the others.

[Silent Mistwalker]

32 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Drama was the whole point of the discussion.

That may have been your point in your part of the discussion, but it wasn't mine.

[Prokofy Neva]

13 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Whyyyyyyyyyyyy???

My first reaction to this claim is to wonder if it is in fact true. My second is to visit the Wayback Machine where you can see some past copies of the site for example in 2006 but apparently not the forums.

[NiranV Dean]

15 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

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

Impossible. Everyone knows i'm the only one who hates wearing pants.

[Arduenn Schwartzman]

1+1=3. Please discuss.

Three days later:

[Arielle Popstar]

3 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

My first reaction to this claim is to wonder if it is in fact true. My second is to visit the Wayback Machine where you can see some past copies of the site for example in 2006 but apparently not the forums.

I'm seeing posts on the wayback machine from 2006. Maybe browser dependent? 

https://web.archive.org/web/20061102111246/http://www.sluniverse.com/forums/Forum18-1.aspx

Ok, never mind, only the thread index but not the actual posts

Edited January 8, 2022 by Arielle Popstar

[Silent Mistwalker]

Many of the threads from SLU are available on Wayback in full. You just have to look for the longest ones like the Dutchie one. That's all the info I'm willing to give. If you don't know, you don't need to know.

[Arduenn Schwartzman]

Yeah, I know another good one: 'Every time I attach a pair of glasses, I lose my hair in Second Life. This Should Not be Allowed!' *proceeds to ignore all rational answers*

Edited January 9, 2022 by Arduenn Schwartzman

[Innula Zenovka]

9 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I still find it rather hard to believe the archives were lost by the owner, but whatever.

I don't think the archives are actually lost.  The specific question I raised with Cristiano was whether it was possible to import some of SLU's content creation forums (and particularly the Scripting forum) into VVO, since they contained a lot of useful material.   Apparently it's not, or not readily.    

Edited January 9, 2022 by Quartz Mole

[NiranV Dean]

Coming back to the topic.

I don't think normal users should be allowed to see lookat/pointat beacons. They should be locked behind godmode, something that any developer can easily circumvent but the average user can't. This would limit the potential drama to only those capable of getting past the godmode check, which only Lindens, developers or self compilers can do. I'd go as far as hardcoding the UUID's into this so only select people can use it (gods and devs only). Obviously that would only work if everyone does.

[StarlanderGoods]

2 minutes ago, NiranV Dean said:

Coming back to the topic.

I don't think normal users should be allowed to see lookat/pointat beacons. They should be locked behind godmode, something that any developer can easily circumvent but the average user can't. This would limit the potential drama to only those capable of getting past the godmode check, which only Lindens, developers or self compilers can do. I'd go as far as hardcoding the UUID's into this so only select people can use it (gods and devs only). Obviously that would only work if everyone does.

No, this is a terrible idea. I dont think that a tiny number of people complaining about being "watched" warrants this caste system you are proposing.

[NiranV Dean]

13 minutes ago, StarlanderGoods said:

No, this is a terrible idea. I dont think that a tiny number of people complaining about being "watched" warrants this caste system you are proposing.

A tiny number? You have no idea how many complains i get, on average one every day. Thats just roughly 3000 over the past 10 years i've been making BD. Pretty sure a lot of other people have been complaining everywhere too.

And how does this not warranty this system to be implemented? This debug feature is supposed to be used for debugging, average users have no use for this feature instead its being abused to stir up drama left and right. Keep it locked behind checks and everyone who truly needs it will continue to be able to use it while everyone else who doesn't won't.

[Marigold Devin]

1 minute ago, NiranV Dean said:

A tiny number? You have no idea how many complains i get, on average one every day. Thats just roughly 3000 over the past 10 years i've been making BD. Pretty sure a lot of other people have been complaining everywhere too.

And how does this not warranty this system to be implemented? This debug feature is supposed to be used for debugging, average users have no use for this feature instead its being abused to stir up drama left and right. Keep it locked behind checks and everyone who truly needs it will continue to be able to use it while everyone else who doesn't won't.

Far from the majority though. 

You devs are like film stars, except instead of autographs you get complaints. It just goes with the territory.

[NiranV Dean]

Just now, Marigold Devin said:

Far from the majority though. 

You devs are like film stars, except instead of autographs you get complaints. It just goes with the territory.

So you are saying i should just continue ignoring the complains of my users and users that won't use my Viewer because they feel unsafe using it due to a missing "hide lookat" feature that is a poor excuse to solve a self-inflicted issue?

[Silent Mistwalker]

LL must have had a reason for leaving lookat available to residents back in 2003. 

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

Scroll down to just past Torley's (Friendly Greetings!) video.

You will need to restart the viewer to see the changes.

[Marigold Devin]

Just now, NiranV Dean said:

So you are saying i should just continue ignoring the complains of my users and users that won't use my Viewer because they feel unsafe using it due to a missing "hide lookat" feature that is a poor excuse to solve a self-inflicted issue?

Are you now attempting to cause drama with me?  

I couldn't give a flying f*ck what you do with your viewer, I won't ever be using it.

 

[NiranV Dean]

Just now, Silent Mistwalker said:

LL must have had a reason for leaving lookat available to residents back in 2003. 

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

Scroll down to just past Torley's (Friendly Greetings!) video.

You will need to restart the viewer to see the changes.

A: Don't apply what they thought or did 2003, we are in 2022. Not everything they did back then had a reason or was good to begin with. A lot of things are kept simply because they can't be assed to change them.

B: I link users to this article every single time because it is the only workaround available but not everyone can do the edits and doing so destroys lookat, which impacts your avatar head and eyetracking which i'm sure have been implemented for a reason in 2003.

Just now, Marigold Devin said:

Are you now attempting to cause drama with me?  

I couldn't give a flying f*ck what you do with your viewer, I won't ever be using it.

 

No it doesn't change the fact that it is a valid complain that has been amplified by a third party viewer implemented feature and could easily be solved.

Edited January 9, 2022 by NiranV Dean

[LilNosferatu]

Maybe SecondLife just needs to update their TOS to include "entering SL means you agree to potentially being perceived by other players" if that many people are actually complaining about others looking at them in an... online virtual world. Must not be common sense.

2 minutes ago, NiranV Dean said:

won't use my Viewer because they feel unsafe using it due to a missing "hide lookat" feature

If someone feels "unsafe" in a virtual world because other virtual people might be glancing over at them, maybe they should step away from SL or go play something solo, such as The Sims.

[NiranV Dean]

Just now, LilNosferatu said:

Maybe SecondLife just needs to update their TOS to include "entering SL means you agree to potentially being perceived by other players" if that many people are actually complaining about others looking at them in an... online virtual world. Must not be common sense.

If someone feels "unsafe" in a virtual world because other virtual people might be glancing over at them, maybe they should step away from SL or go play something solo, such as The Sims.

Well yes, i keep telling my users to ignore being watched too. Personally i do not care being watched. It should still not be full on supported, with how extremely restrictive LL is with abusive behavior of features i feel like this particular instance has always been glanced over at best.

[Silent Mistwalker]

2 minutes ago, NiranV Dean said:

A: Don't apply what they thought or did 2003, we are in 2022. Not everything they did back then had a reason or was good to begin with. A lot of things are kept simply because they can't be assed to change them.

B: I link users to this article every single time because it is the only workaround available but not everyone can do the edits and doing so destroys lookat, which impacts your avatar head and eyetracking which i'm sure have been implemented for a reason in 2003.

Yes, I know. You can't possibly be wrong about anything. 

If you really cared about people who use your viewer and the rest of us who absolutely refuse to deal with YOU, you would find someone to act as liaison and stop treating people as if they were all too stupid to deal with.

[Rowan Amore]

People aren't using BD for a myriad of reasons.  If Look At were such an issue, less people would be using Firestorm and more people would use the SL viewer? 

People who have it turned on just to complain about people looking are hardly people you should be concerned about.  They would just find something else to whine about.