1 second Orb timing, is it necessary

[Mollymews]

if I use a LM to go some place and turns out to be old and I get kicked out by a orb because new owner, then I don't mind

sometimes I find that this can be better than me wasting my time, wandering round thinking is the old place with a new rebuild, trying to find the vendor which isn't there anymore

 

 

[AnthonyJoanne]

5 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I have a solution for all the explorers who don't want to run into orbs and ban lines. There is literally a HUD out there that will tell you where it is safe and not safe to go. 

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Ban-Line-Explorer-HUD-Professional-Quality-for-Pilots-Boaters-Planes-All-Vehicles-even-Landlords/1269113

Here it is, now invest into that. So you can safely explore non impeded. 

It would be great if that was actually an option, but for the flyers it's not:

From the advert:

Quote

Dark Red - Area is completely obstructed, but you are above the ban lines in altitude so you're safe.

Being above the ban line doesn't mean you're safe ... it means that you MAY be safe unless you encounter a security orb.

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, AnthonyJoanne said:

It would be great if that was actually an option, but for the flyers it's not:

From the advert:

Being above the ban line doesn't mean you're safe ... it means that you MAY be safe unless you encounter a security orb.

I was just trying to give a solution to aid explorers to be able to explore mainland unimpeded. I mean it's a start

[Jaylinbridges]

20 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

have a solution for all the explorers who don't want to run into orbs and ban lines.

I have that HUD. It does not detect orbs, which is what this thread is about.  It's also not as fast it claims, unless you are in a rowboat or sailing at 4 knots.  And watching that HUD is a good way to steer into someone's beach, which probably has a 0 second orb.

 

Edited June 7, 2022 by Jaylinbridges

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Paul Hexem said:

My neighborhood has no sidewalks. Grass ends at road.

If I put up "no tresspassing" signs and a bunch of say... Wet paint brushes along the edge of my property, am I a jerk or is it all those big trucks with new stripes along their sides?

In RL, in the US, there is at least a 10 foot easement on each side of the road.

 

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/easements-overview.html

 

Utility and construction contractors are all too familiar with easements belonging to municipalities, counties, states and private property. Lots of frivolous lawsuit hassles and a few legitimate ones.

[Milissa Rossini]

8 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

No, she has posted several times during the course of the thread, the last time about 5 hours ago.

 

There are over 800 replies in few days. It has too much information to my head around. 

 

I am talking about my way to use ORB.

My ORB always set to 30-60 second warning time with pushing back for skybox. And my orb if it is necessary to put sea level (but I never used), it will also give out 60 second warning.  In my old land in Teffelaw sim NW, I used to remove my property for creating a sea path for sailors. I was happy to wave anyone passing by. If I want privacy, I prefer to living in sky. As to privacy in SL, it is just some program functions to block other's access and hiding the avatar body. It does not really have any sense of privacy as in real life.

I am a sailor from the very early day in sl. I did travel between all mainlands few times. That was really hard to continue when those ORB or sea blockage to cause my losing my boat.  I do regularly check the sea path availability. I even will get a place to stay when they are new sailing spot discovered. 

I mainly live in private estate like, Second Norway, Blake Sea, Eden. I will regularly sail and report all ORB infringing the covenant found there. As I remember, I did around 40 reports on their sea level ORB. Some of them ban anyone accessing the space from sea bottom to heaven.

 

----

I agree everyone has their lawful right and have reasonable expectation. However, lawful right always wins over reasonable expectation if the result is not totally unacceptable by the large in the public.

I think about everyone talking about "land" here. In fact, we are referring to space all above the land. We do not have such power to control a large space above our land in real life, which also subject to the limitation imposed by the law for airplane, subway, etc. Neither do we have such so many options to travel in real life as well (walking, flying, diving, sailing, etc.)

For ORB against other entering a private land/space, I do think there are 2 types.

1. intended to enter approximated close enough or inside the establishment or house property of others.

2. the one travel and passing by on vehicle as a necessity.

The first one is really needed to stop, and the second type need to be considerate. If there is any sea blockage, it will not accuse the landowner, because it is the LL sold the common seaway out.

 

[AnthonyJoanne]

19 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I was just trying to give a solution to aid explorers to be able to explore mainland unimpeded. I mean it's a start

I agree it's a start.

And in fact it brings up another point:

Flight in SL is nothing like RL.

In SL it's more like driving ... jump in your vehicle, fire it up, and go.

In RL you need a flight plan. You need to take into account prohibited zones (e.g. the air above the White House), tightly controlled airspaces (e.g. airports), etc.

If our SL pilots wanted a more realistic experience they could collaborate on a 'registry' of 'problem parcels' ... places where the airspace was obstructed with skyboxes, security orbs, etc.

Then they could sit down with a map and figure out their flight plan fairly secure in the knowledge that they are able to get from point A to point B and probably not encounter any obstacles.

Obviously parcels can change fairly quickly, but if people insist on drawing RL analogies ...

[Gabriele Graves]

27 minutes ago, Milissa Rossini said:

I agree everyone has their lawful right and have reasonable expectation. However, lawful right always wins over reasonable expectation if the result is not totally unacceptable by the large in the public.

I think about everyone talking about "land" here. In fact, we are referring to space all above the land. We do not have such power to control a large space above our land in real life, which also subject to the limitation imposed by the law for airplane, subway, etc. Neither do we have such so many options to travel in real life as well (walking, flying, diving, sailing, etc.)

In SL there is just the concept of the volume that the parcel occupies from the lowest point to the highest and the land owner controls it all.

This brings up a point I was going to mention a day or two ago.  There is a lot of mention of "in RL".  Well SL is not RL, it's a fantasy world where many things are different.  For example: In RL we cannot fly without a vehicle, so should we stop avatars from flying into airspace used by planes?  Should we adopt and mandate RL aviation and maritime/shipping rules instead of them just being part of roleplay? Which would mean no low flying near residential properties unless landing.  It would mean zoning to restrict what kinds of builds can be placed next to other types of builds, I mean who wants to live next door to an airport right?  Mainland is the very antithesis  of this.

If SL has to be exactly like RL then we lose a major part of the point of it all.
Bottom line, we shouldn't be so quick to make SL<->RL comparisons in my opinion as they aren't necessarily applicable.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Gabriele Graves]

Looks like @AnthonyJoanne was heading down a simillar train of thought

[AnthonyJoanne]

2 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Looks like @AnthonyJoanne was heading down a simillar train of thought

Great minds!

Hmmm ... I should check to see if I need to update the dosage of my modesty meds! :)

[Rowan Amore]

I'm going to ask my zoning department in RL if it's ok for me to put a skybox up over my home.  I'll report back with their response.  

🤣

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Bottom line, we shouldn't be so quick to make SL<->RL comparisons in my opinion as they aren't necessarily applicable.

Agreed, but as I pointed out above somewhere, this cuts both ways.

"Land" in SL isn't really land, and one doesn't really "own" it. There are no "rights" here (except licensing rights).

And to take it further, privacy here is rather different: the platform simultaneously allows more privacy in some ways, and less in others.

The stakes here are different. If I get "caught" with or doing something embarrassing, anti-social, or whatever here, its impact upon me is a great deal less than it might be in RL. And, equally, "exploring" here is possibly not as "important" as getting to know our RL environment better.

And unlike democratic states, where we have at least some nominal control over who legislates what, here we really are at the mercy of LL's decision making process, which is about "us" only peripherally, in the sense that they make more money if we are "happy" than if we are not.

[Aethelwine]

3 hours ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I have a solution for all the explorers who don't want to run into orbs and ban lines. There is literally a HUD out there that will tell you where it is safe and not safe to go. 

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Ban-Line-Explorer-HUD-Professional-Quality-for-Pilots-Boaters-Planes-All-Vehicles-even-Landlords/1269113

Here it is, now invest into that. So you can safely explore non impeded. 

A) It doesn't do Orbs.

B) It is slow. It is great for finding rezz zones if you are happy to wait a minute for it to scan the region and report back. But not much use for banlines as you are likely to be in them before they have appeared on the hud.

C) It only does the region you are in so the next region is always a step into the dark.

Finally, using the minimap with property lines showing (in Catznip or firestorm) gives similar information including banlines, in similar fashion. Sailors already use it and for reasons above still hit banlines.

[Gabriele Graves]

12 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Agreed, but as I pointed out above somewhere, this cuts both ways.

"Land" in SL isn't really land, and one doesn't really "own" it. There are no "rights" here (except licensing rights).

Land, ownership along with the concept of buying/selling are the terms used by the service provider LL and so I think it is perfectly reasonable to use those when referring to products that are exchanged using that terminology that LL defines for them.  I think this is very important.  The service provider gets to set the terms and terminology as applied to their platform.

"rights" can be used to refer to bestowed or granted "rights" as well.  This can be when LL bestows/grants those "rights" to the "buyer" of that "land" rather than as being used to describe inalienable and/or human "rights".

I don't think we should get hung up the use of "rights" with regards to inalienable/human rights as I don't think this is what people mostly mean.

12 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Agreed, but as I pointed out above somewhere, this cuts both ways.

Indeed it does especially as the "right" to trespass roam is equally dubious in that context.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Scylla Rhiadra]

6 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Land, ownership along with the concept of buying/selling are the terms used by the service provider LL and so I think it is perfectly reasonable to use those when referring to products that are exchanged using that terminology that LL defines for them.  I think this is very important.  The service provider gets to set the terms and terminology as applied to their platform.

"rights" can be used to refer to bestowed or granted "rights" as well.  This can be when LL bestows/grants those "rights" to the "buyer" of that "land" rather than as being used to describe inalienable and/or human "rights".

I don't think we should get hung up the use of "rights" with regards to inalienable/human rights as I don't think this is what people mostly mean.

Indeed it does especially as the "right" to trespass roam is equally dubious in that context.

I think you're hung up on semantics a bit here.

The concepts are different, whatever the nomenclature. Call it what you want, "land ownership" means something very different here than in RL. The same applies to "rights."

There's been, in my view, a great deal of sleight of hand involving language on both sides of this debate. The "right to privacy" just doesn't mean the same thing here, and to use that kind of language as though it did is misleading.

The same can, of course, be said about "exploring." Camming into a building in SL sounds innocent enough a component of "exploring." In RL it could land you in jail. As you rightly note, "exploring" and being intrusive are conflated here in some accounts.

 

[Aethelwine]

2 hours ago, AnthonyJoanne said:

I agree it's a start.

And in fact it brings up another point:

Flight in SL is nothing like RL.

In SL it's more like driving ... jump in your vehicle, fire it up, and go.

In RL you need a flight plan. You need to take into account prohibited zones (e.g. the air above the White House), tightly controlled airspaces (e.g. airports), etc.

If our SL pilots wanted a more realistic experience they could collaborate on a 'registry' of 'problem parcels' ... places where the airspace was obstructed with skyboxes, security orbs, etc.

Then they could sit down with a map and figure out their flight plan fairly secure in the knowledge that they are able to get from point A to point B and probably not encounter any obstacles.

Obviously parcels can change fairly quickly, but if people insist on drawing RL analogies ...

You mean like this one?

http://shergoodaviation.com/radar.php

It is worth taking a quick look at it... Amber warnings are 20 sec orbs and no problem. Red ones are the 0 second orbs. I see none in Nautilus or Satori, I see three in Sansara.

Therefore not a big problem? Perhaps, but also not a big problem for Linden Lab to enforce a restriction on them when they cover the entire height of the parcel.

[Gabriele Graves]

8 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I think you're hung up on semantics a bit here.

The concepts are different, whatever the nomenclature. Call it what you want, "land ownership" means something very different here than in RL. The same applies to "rights."

There's been, in my view, a great deal of sleight of hand involving language on both sides of this debate. The "right to privacy" just doesn't mean the same thing here, and to use that kind of language as though it did is misleading.

The same can, of course, be said about "exploring." Camming into a building in SL sounds innocent enough a component of "exploring." In RL it could land you in jail. As you rightly note, "exploring" and being intrusive are conflated here in some accounts.

 

No, I don't think I am getting hung up on anything.  I am just responding to what you wrote with my thoughts as I think them.  I was the one who actually posted that SL != RL concepts and we should be wary of comparing.

I agree that there is definitely dubious linguistics going on.  I think that this is a huge part of the problem in discussing these things and that is why I am steering clear of going there myself.
 

Edited June 7, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[belindacarson]

They're actually not "ban lines" as you're not banned from a parcel.  I believe they're called "no entry lines"

[AnthonyJoanne]

4 minutes ago, belindacarson said:

They're actually not "ban lines" as you're not banned from a parcel.  I believe they're called "no entry lines"

I'm afraid that's not correct.

From here on the SL wiki:
 

Quote

 

Banlines

Lines of floating red letters spelling out “no entry” that appears on the boundaries of a land parcel that your avatar is not allowed to enter. Ban lines are limited to a height of 5000 m above the terrain mesh when you're explicitly banned from the land. If the parcel is simply not pubic access or restricted to certain Residents/groups, then the lines go up to 50 m above the terrain mesh.

 

Although that's no longer quite true ... they are now just yellow lines rather than the really hideous NO ENTRY of yore.

[Gabriele Graves]

47 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

I don't think we should get hung up the use of "rights" with regards to inalienable/human rights as I don't think this is what people mostly mean.

After re-reading what I put here, I just want to clarify that this wasn't meant to imply @Scylla Rhiadra was getting hung up.  It was the use of the royal "we" and I was referring to everyone in the discussion.  Sorry if that came across otherwise.

[Rowan Amore]

40 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I think you're hung up on semantics a bit here.

The concepts are different, whatever the nomenclature. Call it what you want, "land ownership" means something very different here than in RL. The same applies to "rights."

There's been, in my view, a great deal of sleight of hand involving language on both sides of this debate. The "right to privacy" just doesn't mean the same thing here, and to use that kind of language as though it did is misleading.

The same can, of course, be said about "exploring." Camming into a building in SL sounds innocent enough a component of "exploring." In RL it could land you in jail. As you rightly note, "exploring" and being intrusive are conflated here in some accounts.

 

Bottom line as defined by LL.  I have the 'right' to allow or disallow whomever I choose on land I have 'purchased' in SL.  You are given no 'rights' whatsoever on my land.  Period.  My orb, even if set to 0, is allowed.  Period.

There is no debate really.  Unless LL chooses to change these terms, it is what it is.

We're always telling people who get ejected or banned from somewhere that the land owner has the right to ban and eject who they choose.  Is that unless it's you?

I couldn't care less if someone is camming into my home.  They can't see me.  Once they cross into my parcel, they can.  

Just to add, in my 3 hours travelling a road today, I saw probably around 10 people on the map.  No drivers, no fliers.  

 

[Mollymews]

in a previous conversation on here, we talked about orbs that could announce their position when pinged. I just repeat the conversation topic  here for those who make orbs as something to consider

the orb and traveler scripts could communicate on a pair of publicly known channels. First channel to ping, second channel for response

-1886 is the publicly known ping channel. -1887 is the publicly known response channel

example code

// orb

llListen(-1886, "", NULL_KEY, "ping"); // listen only for "ping"
 
listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message)
{
   if (channel == -1886)
   {
      // we have a "ping" from key id, so respond to the requestor with our location
      llRegionSayTo(id, -1887, (string)llGetPos());
      return;
   }

   ... do other orb listen stuff here ...
}

// traveler HUD, automated ping on region change

llListen(-1887, "", NULL_KEY, "")

changed (integer change)
{
   if (change & CHANGED_REGION)
   {
      llRegionSay(-1886, "ping");
   }
}

listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message)
{
   if (channel == -1887)
   {
      llOwnerSay("Orb at: " + message);
      return;
   }

   .. do other hud listen stuff here ...
}

all it takes to get this kind of thing started is for a commercial orb maker to start doing it, and to say what the channels are. Other people will follow along and start using the same channels also

ps. As a traveler we don't need the response to be overly informative. We just need to know the position of the orb on the region. We can ourselves work out from this, which region parcels/areas to stay away from

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

11 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Bottom line as defined by LL.  I have the 'right' to allow or disallow whomever I choose on land I have 'purchased' in SL.  You are given no 'rights' whatsoever on my land.  Period.  My orb, even if set to 0, is allowed.  Period.

There is no debate really.  Unless LL chooses to change these terms, it is what it is.

I'm not denying any of this.

What is happening is that people are conflating their "right" to use tools provided by LL with their moral right to "privacy" -- or intrusion. Hence the tone of moral outrage some are sounding here. "But my freedoms! My property!"

Meh. Nonsense.

Your right to privacy in RL isn't "granted" by your government -- it's an inalienable part of your human rights.

That is not the case in SL. You are permitted to do exactly what LL permits you do. And, arguably, explorers are also permitted to do exactly what the platform allows them to do.

The moral or ethical element here, I've been arguing, is entirely divorced from the affordances and tools. It's not about "rights to privacy" or "rights to exploration" -- it's about being a decent human being.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

32 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

After re-reading what I put here, I just want to clarify that this wasn't meant to imply @Scylla Rhiadra was getting hung up.  It was the use of the royal "we" and I was referring to everyone in the discussion.  Sorry if that came across otherwise.

I didn't read it that way, nor did I intend to suggest the same of you!

We are having a lovely civil conversation. You are invited to join me in my kitchen if you want to continue it. I'll add you to the guest list. 🙂

[Gabriele Graves]

46 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

in a previous conversation on here, we talked about orbs that could announce their position when pinged. I just repeat the conversation topic  here for those who make orbs as something to consider

the orb and traveler scripts could communicate on a pair of publicly known channels. First channel to ping, second channel for response

-1886 is the publicly known ping channel. -1887 is the publicly known response channel

example code

// orb

llListen(-1886, "", NULL_KEY, "ping"); // listen only for "ping"
 
listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message)
{
   if (channel == -1886)
   {
      // we have a "ping" from key id, so respond to the requestor with our location
      llRegionSayTo(id, -1887, (string)llGetPos());
      return;
   }

   ... do other orb listen stuff here ...
}

// traveler HUD, automated ping on region change

llListen(-1887, "", NULL_KEY, "")

changed (integer change)
{
   if (change & CHANGED_REGION)
   {
      llRegionSay(-1886, "ping");
   }
}

listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message)
{
   if (channel == -1887)
   {
      llOwnerSay("Orb at: " + message);
      return;
   }

   .. do other hud listen stuff here ...
}

all it takes to get this kind of thing started is for a commercial orb maker to start doing it, and to say what the channels are. Other people will follow along and start using the same channels also

ps. As a traveler we don't need the response to be overly informative. We just need to know the position of the orb on the region. We can ourselves work out from this, which region parcels/areas to stay away from

 

The only problem I can foresee with this is that we cannot know the orb's area of influence and so it limits it's usefulness especially as often orbs can be anywhere on the parcel and so knowing it's location may not be that useful.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Gabriele Graves