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

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, QwiQ said:

Well you "learn" or you leave I guess, and the ones who leave take with them fresh insight and voices and what's left is an echo chamber reverberating with the same old prejudices and "opinion".

Unless you like taking pics of course, there's always room for some more pretty pictures to look at 🙂

That's it exactly. I stayed, but it took me a good half year, and a great deal of anti-burn ointment, to establish myself as a member of the community.

I wish that we were a bit more tolerant of new posters, maybe, sometimes. On the whole I don't think we're too bad though. It used to be much much worse. Generally, this iteration of the forum is a great deal less toxic than others I've known, and the people here are good people, and welcoming.

There's also enough diversity of perspective that I don't think it's really an echo chamber. But new voices and ideas are always a good thing anyway.

And the picture threads, BTW, can host their own variety of nastiness. People are people after all, even when there is nothing more at stake than "likes" and pretty pics.

[Silent Mistwalker]

5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I wish that we were a bit more tolerant of new posters, maybe, sometimes.

It's only the ones that come in like gangbangers that I have no tolerance for. That kind of attitude immediately puts my hackles up. We seem to have been getting more than our 'fair share' lately.

[Arielle Popstar]

19 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I've been here for a long time, and I suppose I'm part of "The Establishment," but if I posted, in rapid succession, three different OPs on, say, feminist issues, I'd get push back too. One mistake that newish posters often make is not to listen and gauge the conventions of the community before leaping in with both feet. I did that in . . . 2009? whenever it was that I started . . . and got flamed. You learn.

And he could help himself by being a bit more attentive to his own thread and actually addressing points here rather than posting video clips.

And maybe the long termers that are stuck in a 2006 time loop should also try learning to the degree they think new posters should. If they did, we'd have better success at new user retention. This calling for the mods to close a thread because it deals with something they seem incapable of handling is maybe a sign that they themselves need to relook at what they think they know. When posters start accusing new people of being paranoid and in need of treatment is a pretty good sign they haven't much of a clue themselves. Didn't a slew of members upvote a recent post in another thread that the first sign that someone has lost an argument was when name calling started being used? Not much different in my eyes from what is going on with this and a couple of the other threads the OP started up. Besides which, he wouldn't be the first OP that started a thread and then the regular forum members ran with it because it brought up some issues that needed to be discussed, regardless if it was what the OP agreed with. 

A point that QwiQ didn't mention is the potential legal ramification of recorded Look At targets (if such was actually done), and that is if a resident was prone to alt camming "Lil Lolly Lilly" and her little friends should a legal entity want to look up and subpoena anything that might implicate a resident in questionable behaviours. From that perspective, such data harvesting goes beyond just bettering commercial interests and delves into moral and legal implications that can be tracked and recorded.

Ps: Used your post as a launch pad Scylla and not directed at you specifically.

[Marigold Devin]

1 hour ago, NiranV Dean said:

The majority? Certainly not. The majority ignores this feature, doesn't know it exists or doesn't need it like a good consumer/user. A very tiny minority of the rest uses it for an extremely limited and weak excuses of "good" uses, such as Firestorm for teaching their users. The rest are bullies or weirdos who think SL and the virtual area around them belongs to them and no one is allowed to move their camera even remotely close to them and let this stupidity out on other people. The amount of people who use this feature for anything good is so incredibly tiny we might as well remove this feature and there would be no harm done. But i say lock it for users, keep it for support/developers/betatesters/teachers.

You mean like all the other issues we keep ignoring for over a decade now? Way to go. Just add it to the stack.

 

I hardly care about data being collected (its LL's service after all and we use it) and this is the internet but there are valid reasons and concerns here (not saying the privacy thing is one, i find privacy or security a weak excuse in this topic).

No, no, no. Read again properly what I said. 

I was speaking specifically of those residents who DO use this feature. They might still be in the minority. 

Let me be more specific.

If, out of every 500 residents there are 480 who do not even know about this feature, then there are 20 who do know about this feature.

Of the majority of the 20 who DO know about this feature, maybe 19 of them use it for positive purposes, and one is a bully/weirdo/a-hole.

NB: Of course these figures are not accurate.

This is a hidden feature, not on by default. That is why the majority of residents do not know about it. 

Do you have actual figures?

You said somewhere earlier in this thread that you've had several thousand complaints over several years, about this feature being used for negative purposes specifically.  There are several thousand MORE who use it for positive purposes and who DO NOT complain about it.

The majority should surely not be ruled by the minority.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

23 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

And maybe the long termers that are stuck in a 2006 time loop should also try learning to the degree they think new posters should. If they did, we'd have better success at new user retention. This calling for the mods to close a thread because it deals with something they seem incapable of handling is maybe a sign that they themselves need to relook at what they think they know. When posters start accusing new people of being paranoid and in need of treatment is a pretty good sign they haven't much of a clue themselves. Didn't a slew of members upvote a recent post in another thread that the first sign that someone has lost an argument was when name calling started being used? Not much different in my eyes from what is going on with this and a couple of the other threads the OP started up. Besides which, he wouldn't be the first OP that started a thread and then the regular forum members ran with it because it brought up some issues that needed to be discussed, regardless if it was what the OP agreed with.

Without getting into the details of what you said here (in part because I'm too lazy to look for the things you've referenced), I don't disagree: as a collective group, we should be more tolerant than we sometimes are.

And . . . new posters should sometimes be more sensitive and attentive to the conventions of the culture into which they've chosen to introduce themselves. You wouldn't barge into a room full of people you didn't know and start firing off questions and comments without taking some time at least to get a "feel" for the room, would you? And if you perceived that you were not being well received, you'd hopefully adjust yourself accordingly?

We need, perhaps, to be more respectful of new posters. And new posters need to acknowledge (and often do!) that this isn't just a soapbox: it's a community. They need to respect that too.

23 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

A point that QwiQ didn't mention is the potential legal ramification of recorded Look At targets (if such was actually done), and that is if a resident was prone to alt camming "Lil Lolly Lilly" and her little friends should a legal entity want to look up and subpoena anything that might implicate a resident in questionable behaviours. From that perspective, such data harvesting goes beyond just bettering commercial interests and delves into moral and legal implications that can be tracked and recorded.

Interesting. I think something like this was mentioned earlier, I think by the OP. I wonder if there is existing jurisprudence or law that addresses this? If "the metaverse" takes off, it's certainly going to be an issue.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra

[Qie Niangao]

2 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

I'm pretty sure FS isn't the official viewer that most start out with.

And are you sure you can use those preferences with the Dev menu disabled? I'm not. @Whirly Fizzle

Just tested and yeah, with neither Advanced nor Develop menus enabled the Firestorm lookAt preferences can be set and they work.

Personally, I think this is responsible for a large majority of the drama around this feature, but as somebody else pointed out, the folks who find lookAt drama, if deprived of this drama, would surely find drama elsewhere.

[Profaitchikenz Haiku]

59 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

the folks who find lookAt drama, if deprived of this drama, would surely find drama elsewhere.

Drama means a lot to some people, I mean, why else would Soaps build up such a massive audience?

[Paul Hexem]

3 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I wish that we were a bit more tolerant of new posters, maybe, sometimes. On the whole I don't think we're too bad though. It used to be much much worse.

This is true, and actually extends to the moderation team, even. There are some of us that used to get a ton of reports, warnings, and suspensions (you can still see some of them in my profile) for simply not agreeing with the majority.

 

1 hour ago, Paulsian said:

I never called out any specific lindens, nor did I suggest any did anything wrong. 

As far as your security inquiry: 

security

[səˈkyo͝orədē]

NOUN

the state of being free from danger or threat.

The only way you'll ever be free from danger or threat is after you're dead. Want to be safe in SL? Uninstall SL.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

18 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:

There are some of us that used to get a ton of reports, warnings, and suspensions (you can still see some of them in my profile) for simply not agreeing with the majority.

Fiiiine.

If you're going to get all grumpy about it, I'll stop ARing your posts.

There? All better now? 😠

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

Just tested and yeah, with neither Advanced nor Develop menus enabled the Firestorm lookAt preferences can be set and they work.

Personally, I think this is responsible for a large majority of the drama around this feature, but as somebody else pointed out, the folks who find lookAt drama, if deprived of this drama, would surely find drama elsewhere.

Not doubting you but it may be possible that since you already had Advanced and Dev enabled it doesn't turnoff lookat when disabled. That's why I paged Whirly.

[Silent Mistwalker]

28 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:

(you can still see some of them in my profile)

You can, no one else can. You can only see your own, no one else's. I checked.

[NiranV Dean]

7 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Threads like this are one of myriad of reasons LL decide to put the lookat tool under the DEVELOPERS menu AFTER you have to enable the ADVANCED menu.

The damn thing IS hidden. You have to deliberately look for it in order to enable it. Neither the Advanced nor Developer menus are readily visible. BOTH HAVE TO BE ENABLED in order to be able to find the tools.

If someone is using lookat as an EXCUSE to harass/grief you, they have enabled those menus deliberately for that singular purpose and should be ARed.

LL Viewer has Advanced and Develop menu both in menu and in preferences, absolutely not hidden. Also, still way too easy to access.

[Crim Mip]

I have my beacon turned off in Firestorm. It doesn't get sent. Even if it did, it wouldn't be accurate because it doesn't track when you use flycam which I almost always do.

[Arielle Popstar]

28 minutes ago, Odaks said:

I have never seen "lines" like this, in connection with this issue. Could you be a bit more specific?

He is probably meaning the "Render lines to lookat target" check box under the Firestorm Privacy LookAt tab.

 

[Paulsian]

49 minutes ago, Odaks said:

8 hours ago, Paulsian said:

I've seen such videos with lines leading from the spot the lindens were looking back to the lindens looking

I have never seen "lines" like this, in connection with this issue. Could you be a bit more specific?

it would be this video plus the circle I made to the image. It draws a line from the avatar to what the avatar is looking at viewed by another user using this. I'm having difficult time finding reference video demonstrating it. If anyone is able to post a video of what the lines look look like would be awesome. I can't find the video someone took of me at the linden event showing the lines. I'll keep looking. 

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Paulsian

[Arielle Popstar]

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

Several times I've had my camera hijacked by other users and my cam'd camera was moved. 

I can understand some users point of view "we have to watch the beacons to make sure no one is caming us" and in those cases, should users have an option to not allow camera/cam avatar within 1 meter and never cam from below for the users who like to look up dresses. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After I realized other users can see my camera location I never cam. Problem solved right? Wrong, new users are being spied on unknowingly and I think that is a huge privacy concern. 

 

In case noone else has mentioned this:

When you have the cam focused on an avatar and that avatar jumps or TP's away from that spot, your cam follows them. It has not been hijacked or "moved" as it is still focused on what you told it to focus on. Double tapping the Esc key will revert your view to your default position. This is expected and designed behaviour. There are rlv tools that can modify and change your view but only when you wear an RLV collar and give the viewer explicit authorization to allow another to do so.

If "upskirting" is a concern then either do not wear a dress (or kilt) or make sure to be wearing undies or derender those private parts. That onus is on you and there are some Moderate locations that will boot an avatar who is not modestly dressed complete with panties.

New and old residents are being looked at all the time, with or without the Look At (beacon) showing to others. There is really nothing nefarious about it. The cam operates no differently in what it shows whether the look at function is turned on or not so there is no heightened privacy or security concerns with its use.

[Paulsian]

3 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

In case noone else has mentioned this:

When you have the cam focused on an avatar and that avatar jumps or TP's away from that spot, your cam follows them. It has not been hijacked or "moved" as it is still focused on what you told it to focus on.

That's disturbing. I wonder how someone was able to move my camera, it's happened a couple times I usually have my cam cam'd out set behind me and up a bit and then it just moves? 

[Arielle Popstar]

Just now, Paulsian said:

That's disturbing. I wonder how someone was able to move my camera, it's happened a couple times I usually have my cam cam'd out set behind me and up a bit and then it just moves? 

Well I explained one way it moves but you are describing something else. You would have to give more information then to be able to troubleshoot what exactly happened. Perhaps you simply clicked an alternative view on the Camera Control UI which would do what you describe.

[Odaks]

Thanks, @Paulsian. Now I see what you meant.

Some of the terms get confused - beacons and look-at targets are sort of different things. A look-at target identifies exactly where your camera is focused whereas a beacon identifies an object's position on the grid.

[Paulsian]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well I explained one way it moves but you are describing something else. You would have to give more information then to be able to troubleshoot what exactly happened. Perhaps you simply clicked an alternative view on the Camera Control UI which would do what you describe.

I'm thinking maybe im cam'd slightly way from my avatar and someone else knows where it's at and then has a way to focus their avatar on my cam which makes it move? some of the movements are very slight and sometimes are way more noticable. 

[Paulsian]

2 minutes ago, Odaks said:

A look-at target identifies exactly where your camera is focused whereas a beacon identifies an object's position on the grid.

Sorry for the confusion, I use beacons and never lookat targets. Now I understand they are different. 

[Rowan Amore]

3 minutes ago, Paulsian said:

then has a way to focus their avatar on my cam which makes it move

No

 

[Arielle Popstar]

7 minutes ago, Paulsian said:

I'm thinking maybe im cam'd slightly way from my avatar and someone else knows where it's at and then has a way to focus their avatar on my cam which makes it move? some of the movements are very slight and sometimes are way more noticable. 

There are various keyboard shortcuts that can make your cam move. Look under the Camera control shortcuts. When it comes to the viewer there are multiple ways you can make unintended changes without realizing. If it was really another taking control of your viewer which it is designed to not allow, then I would think they would do a lot more then make slight movements but rather large ones. Assume first that it is yourself before assuming you been hacked.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Arielle Popstar
spelling

[Paulsian]

3 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

6 minutes ago, Paulsian said:

then has a way to focus their avatar on my cam which makes it move

No

True I would have noticed someone flying over my avatars head to grab my cam. Hmm 

[NiranV Dean]

Your camera can start moving if it needs to be pushed due to collision with terrain or objects. Not sure about Firestorm but by default your camera gets shoved around alpha objects if they are not set phantom, even if they are completely invisible (you can create invisible camera barriers). It's really annoying and i've had my camera repeatedly zoom in and out again to its default position because something invisible was moving between my avatar and my camera.