Interview w Hamlet in The Atlantic

[Paul Hexem]

On 3/27/2022 at 1:39 PM, Coffee Pancake said:

Nothing kills SL over night, it's a slow death by a thousand tiny cuts. We lose a community here, a demographics there...

This bears repeating. Bleeding residents is bleeding residents.

2 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

That's nice.

Losing users to another program is normal - do tell if you refer to such loss as "(Insert Program Name Here) Killer" as well.\

So if all residents eventually leave SL for various other things, and there's no one left, you'd think everything is fine because they're not all in one singular new place?

[Prokofy Neva]

2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I remember you saying you were a Christian. Lessening the ego and its excessive desires is a big part of that, and appears to be something one can aspire to. Yet you're saying humans "won't change ever'?

I'm a Catholic. The doctrine of Christianity pretty much throughout the realm, barring some New Age versions of the faith, perhaps, is that human nature is inherently flawed, and inherently sinful, and cannot be improved by humankind alone. It is redeemed by Jesus Christ. It's not me saying this; this is the doctrine of Christianity, look it up, even on Wikipedia. 

I personally don't take my self-help and self-improvement cues from people on the forums who imagine if someone disagrees with them -- and with good reason -- that they need to "lessen the ego" or shut up or have their RL exposed without Linden intervention. The forums are not a place I come for Lenten reflections.

 

[Solar Legion]

Just now, Paul Hexem said:

This bears repeating. Bleeding residents is bleeding residents.

So if all residents eventually leave SL for various other things, and there's no one left, you'd think everything is fine because they're not all in one singular new place?

If all users end up leaving over a period of time, I'd call it normal - You can repeat your "bleeding residents" statement until the cows come home and still not be saying anything new and still be responding to something that was never in dispute.

Second Life will one day end up shut down/devoid of users. That is normal and unavoidable. Yes, that day can be put off. No, we do not need to follow in the footsteps of VRC, Neos and the like (which is what was loosely suggested by another in the thread).

Now, are you done pretending to have a discussion and pretending to argue?

[Silent Mistwalker]

15 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:

This is absolutely not true.

As an example, look at Conan Exiles. It's got very little in common with SL, but it scooped up many of SL's fantasy and Gor roleplayers, many of whom haven't come back.

Similarly, I used to drive trucks on the Linden roads a lot, and these days instead find myself playing SnowRunner for a better experience. I know others do, too.

Losing residents is losing residents, whether they're all going to one new platform, or various other platforms.

The Goreans created their own grid years ago. Now, what's left of them, mainly use SL as a place to recruit. They used to try to "drag" me off to their grid, but I wasn't having any part of it. 🤭

[Paul Hexem]

11 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Yes, that day can be put off.

Then why do you act like LL shouldn't bother to make any attempts to do so?

6 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

The Goreans created their own grid years ago. Now, what's left of them, mainly use SL as a place to recruit. They used to try to "drag" me off to their grid, but I wasn't having any part of it. 🤭

Yeah, they're probably not a great example specifically. The overall trend is something we shouldn't encourage, though.

[Solar Legion]

10 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:

Then why do you act like LL shouldn't bother to make any attempts to do so?

I act no such way.

I am tired of the hyperbole.

I am tired of seeing people wishing that Linden Lab would pick up cues from imagined competitors or from sources which went in a much more restrictive direction.

Edited March 28, 2022 by Solar Legion

[Coffee Pancake]

2 hours ago, Solar Legion said:

Second Life will one day end up shut down/devoid of users. That is normal and unavoidable. Yes, that day can be put off. No

It's all doomed. Let's not even try. Let's actively put down the people who want to.

#nochanges

[Paul Hexem]

3 hours ago, Solar Legion said:

I act no such way.

You may not intend to, but you really do give the impression you'd rather see SL die off than change or fix anything.

While you're absolutely correct that there are plenty of things LL shouldn't copy, we have to keep in mind that SL has barely changed in two decades. We're lucky it's still here. Most things that don't adapt don't last too long.

[Solar Legion]

1 minute ago, Paul Hexem said:

You may not intend to, but you really do give the impression you'd rather see SL die off than change or fix anything.

If one is getting that impression then one really hasn't been paying attention over the years.

Quote

While you're absolutely correct that there are plenty of things LL shouldn't copy, we have to keep in mind that SL has barely changed in two decades. We're lucky it's still here. Most things that don't adapt don't last too long.

I'll take slow, barely noticeable changes over what most have suggested in the last few years. I'd much rather they work on stability before anything else.

[Mollymews]

 

1 hour ago, Solar Legion said:

I'll take slow, barely noticeable changes over what most have suggested in the last few years. I'd much rather they work on stability before anything else.

i am this camp. I much prefer steady as it goes with small incremental steps

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Mollymews said:

 

i am this camp. I much prefer steady as it goes with small incremental steps

I don't disagree necessarily, just curious. How frequently with the small incremental steps?

@Solar Legion too.

The weekly rollouts is what makes me ask.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Silent Mistwalker

[Mollymews]

1 hour ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

I don't disagree necessarily, just curious. How frequently with the small incremental steps?

this is my understanding of incremental

a example is how rigged mesh avatars were done

1) start with a basic rigging method
2) in response to user initiative and feedback then a more comprehensive rigging method
3) a further response to user initiative - BoM
4) additional bones for avatar animated expression

future steps on the incremental path could include BoM materials, could also include the ability to change the level of a Modify animation after upload - which would be a blessing for everyone into avatar animation

it can be argued (which I have done myself in the past) that had Linden had a policy of continuous improvement then the rigged avatar as we know it today would never have happened. Which is true on the surface, but is one of those be careful what you wish for things

like is not possible to make one avatar mesh which can be all things. As we know when we compare furry avatar construction to human avatar construction. Buxom avatars to slim avatars. Then the more subtle but equally important adjustments. Like trying with the sliders to make an polynesian nose using a head designed for a european

so we end up with multiple bases from which we outfit avatars. And I think is better that the resident creatives get to determine what those bases are, just thru the making of them, than Linden deciding all by themselves

continuous is not the same as incremental. Incremental is do a little bit. Pause, wait and see what the residents do. Based on what is observed then do a little bit more. Pause and observe. And on and on it goes

the continuous process doesn't pause allowing for user feedback, it just keeps on chugging along as the designers of the system/platform intend it too

[Persephone Emerald]

On 3/27/2022 at 3:28 PM, Prokofy Neva said:

[snip]

I'm proud to be a landlord in Second Life. I don't even have to dazzle anybody with some razzmatazz about how my prices are low or some of my areas are subsidized, I pay more tier to LL than I get in rents. What matters is that I have a small business like many other small and big businesses and that is part of LL's recipe for surviving, and for that they need to make a profit, and that's fine. I don't view them as evil rent-seeking squids sucking the blood from society. I see them as business people who basically want to do good, for themselves and others. The countries that you imagine are socialist havens actually have a good deal of capitalism in them; the countries of "true socialism" are abysmal and people flee them. AOC drove business away from her district and her people have only suffered from it. So another district then benefits from it.

And I'm proud to be a small landlord, a micro-version of LL itself which is essentially a large landlord,  because Linden Lab, regardless of their California ideologies of technocommunism or technoliberalism or cosmic engineering or what have you, grasp that they need to make a profit, they need to take in more revenue than they spend on their plant and staff, or else they can't stay in operation. They aren't a charity, and while COVID business loans can be vary generous, and some you don't even have to pay back, they can't have that as a business plan now.

I'm proud of helping this company have a viable business by paying them for their servers and helping retain their customers.

You claim to be the great proponent of Capitalism, yet you also say you don't make any profit from your works in SL. You say your work in SL is at least in part to help other residents have nice places to live and that you spend much of your Human Capital in keeping SL vibrant and viable. You claim to be anti-socialism, but aren't some of your own drives socialistic in nature?

Real Life is never black and white, but rather shades of all different and often shifting colors. No economic or political system is perfect, but they don't have to be perfect to work pretty well. If one looks at the standard of living and self-reported happiness of people living under different forms of government, Democratic Socialism (or a Socialist Democracy) seems to work pretty well. Of course there are always multiple factors to consider, but comparing the vast landmass and resources of the United States to those of the Nordic European countries, then comparing the relative economic and personal satisfaction of their populations seems to show that a Socialist spin on Capitalism is probably not a bad thing. Neither pure Capitalism nor pure Socialism seems to work very well, but a blend of both might be a better option. 

Second Life obviously has to be profitable to survive. We can't just wish away the Capitalist system it functions within. Linden Lab can however, take note of the social and economic behavior of its users to try to adjust their policies to keep people using and paying for this platform. Collecting this kind of data might require using algorithms. (Not all algorithms are evil.)  We certainly have to use our computers and electricity inside of our warm and secure houses to also use this virtual world, so not all technology is inherently evil either. Humans are flawed, so the stuff we make is also flawed, whether that's a cake, a video game or a system of government. That doesn't mean we should toss out all this flawed stuff, but it does mean we're capable of learning from our mistakes and trying to do better.

Also, if you're paying more money in tier than you make in rent, you're not so much running a business as running a charity. You may be able to do this as an individual, but Linden Lab cannot afford to to this as a business that exist within a Capitalist economic system.  

[Arielle Popstar]

6 hours ago, Mollymews said:

i am this camp. I much prefer steady as it goes with small incremental steps

 

9 hours ago, Solar Legion said:

I'll take slow, barely noticeable changes over what most have suggested in the last few years. I'd much rather they work on stability before anything else.

Nothing wrong with small incremental steps except that they are all in the direction of either landholders or creators. For the average socializing, consuming and rent paying resident, those steps have not helped make the platform more usable or less of a learning curve. It is in fact, increasingly difficult as the lack of changes from LL to make it more playable are compensated for by an ever increasing variety of methodologies utilized by various creators to compensate for the deficiencies. 

It is understandable in that LL makes the bulk of its money from the Land barons and to a lesser extent, the commercial creators. From the short term perspective it is obvious that LL would do so but it doesn't do much for the long term because ultimately creatives and land barons are dependent to a large degree on the average consuming resident. They can and do absorb the losses for a time which messes with the algorithms and deceives LL into believing they do not have to do anything different or change the direction of their incremental steps but yet we keep bleeding regular residents if even no more then through normal attrition. With an inability to retain new users, other than what are mostly retread users,  the consistent bleeding can only lead to S/L's ultimate demise. That will be in spite of S/L having a variety of features which in bulk are not duplicated by any other platform. 

Every platform will eventually die out and I agree it is normal in the general scheme of things, however S/L was and to some degree still is, ahead of its time. The code might be old but the concept behind it is still unique and fresh in comparison to many other platforms. Unfortunately the problem here is that LL (along with some forumites) has this belief that it can solely focus and cater to a small select group of commercial landlords and creatives and ignore the needs of the masses of socializing and consuming residents. That mass of residents need to be of a higher calibre of intelligence to make some sense of using the viewer and interacting inworld. I would venture that the IQ level of the average S/L resident is higher by a good 10 points if not more then many of the residents of other platforms out there, simply because one needs to be in order to make some sense of how to play here. 

If the lab would start making incremental steps to making this platform more user friendly to a user of average intelligence, it would go a long way to stopping and maybe reversing the bleeding they have experienced over the past decade.

[Silent Mistwalker]

9 hours ago, Mollymews said:

this is my understanding of incremental

a example is how rigged mesh avatars were done

1) start with a basic rigging method
2) in response to user initiative and feedback then a more comprehensive rigging method
3) a further response to user initiative - BoM
4) additional bones for avatar animated expression

future steps on the incremental path could include BoM materials, could also include the ability to change the level of a Modify animation after upload - which would be a blessing for everyone into avatar animation

it can be argued (which I have done myself in the past) that had Linden had a policy of continuous improvement then the rigged avatar as we know it today would never have happened. Which is true on the surface, but is one of those be careful what you wish for things

like is not possible to make one avatar mesh which can be all things. As we know when we compare furry avatar construction to human avatar construction. Buxom avatars to slim avatars. Then the more subtle but equally important adjustments. Like trying with the sliders to make an polynesian nose using a head designed for a european

so we end up with multiple bases from which we outfit avatars. And I think is better that the resident creatives get to determine what those bases are, just thru the making of them, than Linden deciding all by themselves

continuous is not the same as incremental. Incremental is do a little bit. Pause, wait and see what the residents do. Based on what is observed then do a little bit more. Pause and observe. And on and on it goes

the continuous process doesn't pause allowing for user feedback, it just keeps on chugging along as the designers of the system/platform intend it too

I asked a simple question that only required an answer in amounts of time. Like days, weeks, months, years.

Let me rephrase.

How often do you think LL should be updating SL on this incremental thing: daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually? How often? We already have weekly updates that drive everyone nuts. Are we adding to that?

[Love Zhaoying]

10 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

How often do you think LL should be updating SL on this incremental thing: daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually? How often? We already have weekly updates that drive everyone nuts. Are we adding to that?

I think it should be incrementally.

[Love Zhaoying]

14 hours ago, Paul Hexem said:

You may not intend to, but you really do give the impression you'd rather see SL die off than change or fix anything.

They change things all the time, like how we pay, or if we have to pay taxes. So there!

[Silent Mistwalker]

2 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I think it should be incrementally.

Sometimes humor can relieve the frustration. This isn't one of those times.

[Love Zhaoying]

Just now, Silent Mistwalker said:

Sometimes humor can relieve the frustration. This isn't one of those times.

Any change should follow the normal release schedule - even if tiny changes are made. For reference, see the "Sprint/Scrum" development methodology. If it's not, and we were promised a feature.. then we deserve to know "why", and "when" those features will get back on track. 
 

Better?

[Silent Mistwalker]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Any change should follow the normal release schedule - even if tiny changes are made. For reference, see the "Sprint/Scrum" development methodology. If it's not, and we were promised a feature.. then we deserve to know "why", and "when" those features will get back on track. 
 

Better?

 

No. It's a simple question that requires a simple answer, not a freaking lecture or a boatload of research.

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

 

No. It's a simple question that requires a simple answer, not a freaking lecture or a boatload of research.

Ok then. Bi-weekly. Better?

[Silent Mistwalker]

36 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Ok then. Bi-weekly. Better?

Would you mind letting Molly answer the question I asked her? Unless you can read her mind?

[Luna Bliss]

1 hour ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

I asked a simple question that only required an answer in amounts of time. Like days, weeks, months, years.

 

1 hour ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

 

No. It's a simple question that requires a simple answer, not a freaking lecture or a boatload of research.

 

44 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Would you mind letting Molly answer the question I asked her? Unless you can read her mind?

When asking a question I consider it a gift if someone takes the time to respond to my needs....even if they don't answer my question as fully as I might want or in the specific way I desired. At least they tried.

You are being too demanding, and I find your attitude toward someone who is always kind to others on this forum, if a bit too detailed for my tastes at times, very bothersome.
Likewise, your attitude toward another forum member who is simply trying to help, is also bothersome.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Luna Bliss

[Solar Legion]

The "simple" answer is close to what Love already gave. The "simpler" answer is that they are already doing so, on a schedule with no clear cut delineation.

The "simplest" answer includes the following: No one mentioned a timeframe which infers that they continue on with what they are already doing -  do their incremental updates on the same schedule as they have for everything else. Which is what they have been doing.

[Luna Bliss]

20 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

22 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I remember you saying you were a Christian. Lessening the ego and its excessive desires is a big part of that, and appears to be something one can aspire to. Yet you're saying humans "won't change ever'?

I'm a Catholic. The doctrine of Christianity pretty much throughout the realm, barring some New Age versions of the faith, perhaps, is that human nature is inherently flawed, and inherently sinful, and cannot be improved by humankind alone. It is redeemed by Jesus Christ. It's not me saying this; this is the doctrine of Christianity, look it up, even on Wikipedia. 

I personally don't take my self-help and self-improvement cues from people on the forums who imagine if someone disagrees with them -- and with good reason -- that they need to "lessen the ego" or shut up or have their RL exposed without Linden intervention. The forums are not a place I come for Lenten reflections.

I'm basically trying to make the case, or attempting to begin to do so, that nurturing the potential of humans (Scylla's phrasing), or seeking justice, is indeed what a valid type of Christianity attempts to do. Doesn't the Bible say, over and over, that 'God Is Love'?  Not that we would likely arrive completely in our efforts to make a better world...but it is worth the attempt.  So my confusion is...why don't you think it is? Or why do you make fun of/denigrate the nurturing of human potential?

Of course how exactly we would apply this to SL or any virtual world complicates the issues further.