New Feature: Scripted Agent Estate Access Discussion

[benchthis]

22 minutes ago, benchthis said:

I watched the entire video, I liked it, it was funny when he lost his place; but then quickly got it back. He is not allowed to use his voice. Maybe what is he can't hear either?  

I see things differently sometimes. In fact Da Vinci was similar. His work is layers upon layers of maps and riddles hidden in the same works. If you want to locate pandora's box look no further to this. I will not give any hints except it is amazing what he did. He hid maps in times of war within his art. If you place yourself outside of something you can spot imperfections. edit: small changes makes big difference. imperfections are not always what they seem.

If you dare to find her she's waiting. 

unfortunately, this work also represents the begining and end of time and every crazy thing that happens between. The hair is interesting and so are the feet. So are the hands. so many many many many things going on here. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by benchthis

[Rowan Amore]

3 hours ago, Quartz Mole said:

If it's registered as a bot, it doesn't get counted at all.

So, the picture earlier I showed of 36 avatars, many with similar rez dates, hidden away on a sky platform at an escort club ranked #5, could be ARed?  Anyone with any sense can see they are using them to game traffic so.obviously not registered as scripted agents.  

[Sid Nagy]

2 hours ago, Paul Hexem said:

Keep scrolling down that page, you'll see it. Section 6 and 7.

And that is the reason that I'm one from the two or three persons left out there who only use the LL viewer.
Every third party viewer can basically grab whatever they can lay their hands on data wise. LL will not notice, they don't check. The butcher certifies his own meat (Dutch proverb:  something like marking our own homework?).
Not saying that they do so, but in the end we have no other guaranties than their blue eyes.

LL will not notice if something is about to go on, they don't check. The butcher certifies his own meat (Dutch proverb:  something like marking your own homework?).

Edited April 4, 2023 by Sid Nagy

[benchthis]

7 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

And that is the reason that I'm one from the two or three persons left out there who only use the LL viewer.
Every third party viewer can basically grab whatever they can lay their hands on.
Not saying that they do so, but in the end we have no other guaranties than their blue eyes.

I like to pretend they know and trust each other like family.

[Ardy Lay]

52 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

And that is the reason that I'm one from the two or three persons left out there who only use the LL viewer.
Every third party viewer can basically grab whatever they can lay their hands on.
Not saying that they do so, but in the end we have no other guaranties than their blue eyes.

I also use only Linden Lab's viewer.  After reading through ONE third-party viewer's source code, I decided to trust nobody but Linden Lab.  The code I read through was full of little tweaks to bypass limits that LL had deliberately included, limiting the texture eye-dropper tool to textures you had in inventory and were allowed to apply, for example.  The code I read bypassed that check allowing the user to pick any texture off of anybody's objects, applying it directly to any object the simulator let them edit.  The whole code review process was so tedious that I decided to just stop and stay on Linden Lab's viewer.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Ardy Lay

[Sammy Huntsman]

3 hours ago, M Peccable said:

The problem is that unfortunately, that is no longer a given anymore. So I applaud you for spelling it out so eloquently. Personal responsibility is something that seems absent these days.

That is what bugs me, people not taking responsibility for what they post publicly on the internet and then they get mad that their "sensitive info" is on a third-party site. And then expect LL to do something about it. If you didn't want that info out there, then you shouldn't have posted it. It's common sense. 

[Ardy Lay]

2 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

That is what bugs me, people not taking responsibility for what they post publicly on the internet and then they get mad that their "sensitive info" is on a third-party site. And then expect LL to do something about it. If you didn't want that info out there, then you shouldn't have posted it. It's common sense. 

Laws consider your login name, your avatar UUID, and sometimes your display name to be sensitive information, because they pertain to a single person.

[Sammy Huntsman]

3 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Do you feel that personal responsibility cuts both ways and that just because you can collect the data, it might not be a good idea to publish it where it could cause damage?

No, I feel like personal responsibility only goes one way. You are entirely responsible for what you put publicly on the internet. How hard is that for people to understand? If someone decides to scrape what you posted publicly in your profile, and you don't like it. Then you should not have put that info on your profile. Don't rely on LL to protect you for your own mess up. 

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Ardy Lay said:

Laws consider your login name, your avatar UUID, and sometimes your display name to be sensitive information, because they pertain to a single person.

I was talking more about what people publicly post to their profile or even to their social media accounts. Would you hold FB or even LL accountable for posting your CC info in a public post and someone say using it to go on a shopping spree? How is that FB or LLs fault for you putting your CC info out in the public, expecting nothing to happen? That is what I mean. 

[Ardy Lay]

2 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I was talking more about what people publicly post to their profile or even to their social media accounts. Would you hold FB or even LL accountable for posting your CC info in a public post and someone say using it to go on a shopping spree? How is that FB or LLs fault for you putting your CC info out in the public, expecting nothing to happen? That is what I mean. 

No, but you keep harping on that one point, over and over and over, so I feel you are missing the bigger issue here.  It's not just people putting information on their Second Life profiles that should not be there that is a problem.  It's that anybody relocating any information from Second Life that is unique to an individual user is a violation of the Second Life Terms of Service and is also a violation of laws in many jurisdictions, one of which does indeed apply to the business that owns and operates Second Life.

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Ardy Lay said:

No, but you keep harping on that one point, over and over and over, so I feel you are missing the bigger issue here.  It's not just people putting information on their Second Life profiles that should not be there that is a problem.  It's that anybody relocating any information from Second Life that is unique to an individual user is a violation of the Second Life Terms of Service and is also a violation of laws in many jurisdictions, one of which does indeed apply to the business that owns and operates Second Life.

There is a big difference between those bots scraping your personal info(Name date of birth address and CC info) And them just getting info that is readily available on the viewer itself. Like right now, I can search your name and read your profile and what you put on there. I don't have access to your personal data such as your Legal Name Date of birth address or even your CC info. These laws do not protect what you put out in public. 

[Ardy Lay]

1 minute ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

There is a big difference between those bots scraping your personal info(Name date of birth address and CC info) And them just getting info that is readily available on the viewer itself. Like right now, I can search your name and read your profile and what you put on there. I don't have access to your personal data such as your Legal Name Date of birth address or even your CC info. These laws do not protect what you put out in public. 

And, again, you demonstrate that you are missing the point.

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Ardy Lay said:

And, again, you demonstrate that you are missing the point.

Oh I get your point, but then again people barely listen to it. I mean LL can't police what people put on FB, and people actively put screenshots on their posts. Basically thinking they are above our human rights. IE our right to privacy. You don't see LL going after those people. 

[Ardy Lay]

Just now, Sammy Huntsman said:

Oh I get your point, but then again people barely listen to it. I mean LL can't police what people put on FB, and people actively put screenshots on their posts. Basically thinking they are above our human rights. IE our right to privacy. You don't see LL going after those people. 

Anyone posting any information about my avatar, agent, or me, gleaned from Second Life, to a website or social media platform are violating SL TOS and laws.  Now, as you say, I cannot expect Linden Lab to go after a web site or social media platform, although they certainly may.  That's my responsibility.  What I can expect is Linden Lab to go after the perpetrator's assets in Second Life, if they can be identified, which is more likely when it's a mass data-scraping operation.

[Ardy Lay]

And another thing about the information in Second Life that is unique to an individual.  We may give permission for it to be used and we can revoke that permission at any time.  By extension, someone copying that information to another storage system is likewise violating laws because they have removed our ability to revoke their access to our information.

[benchthis]

6 minutes ago, Ardy Lay said:

Anyone posting any information about my avatar, agent, or me, gleaned from Second Life, to a website or social media platform are violating SL TOS and laws.  Now, as you say, I cannot expect Linden Lab to go after a web site or social media platform, although they certainly may.  That's my responsibility.  What I can expect is Linden Lab to go after the perpetrator's assets in Second Life, if they can be identified, which is more likely when it's a mass data-scraping operation.

sl has been around for so long because there's so so many different ways to exploite her residents. lots of moving parts, lots of exploites. it gets to a point where it is so refined there's plans in place to shield, mask, and protect the ruling exploiters, usually problems are not worth bringing solutions and are forgotten. it's hard to live like that, it's easy not to care and forget. virtual worlds are not immune from corruption. it's important to have a place to feel safe to speak up about these things so they can be resolved vs. festering. Problems go away when they are fixed.  least we don't have malfunctioning robotic ai babies to worry about yet.   

[EliseAnne85]

2 minutes ago, benchthis said:

 least we don't have malfunctioning robotic ai babies to worry about yet.  

I think we did.  Someone closed their *baby* business and they used an external server, so when the external service was closed when the business closed, the babies died.  (This is not a joke).  

[Jaylinbridges]

16 minutes ago, Ardy Lay said:

Anyone posting any information about my avatar, agent, or me, gleaned from Second Life, to a website or social media platform are violating SL TOS and laws

SL clubs often have FB websites where group members post pics of the club audience.  The same as you can find on YouTube videos.  These snapshots of live avatars often show the name tags, display and account names, and even their complexity (horrors).  So you think anyone posting these snapshots or videos from SL are illegal?  How about the LL community meetings?  Are the videographers doing this for LL monthly meetings also violating the TOS?  Public information to anyone that is on FB or youtube, or that simply wants to log into SL.

 

[benchthis]

1 minute ago, EliseAnne85 said:

I think we did.  Someone closed their *baby* business and they used an external server, so when the external service was closed when the business closed, the babies died.  (This is not a joke).  

How sad, that's horrible. 

[EliseAnne85]

5 minutes ago, benchthis said:

How sad, that's horrible. 

Yes, it is sad.  But, the business had to close.  

[benchthis]

16 minutes ago, EliseAnne85 said:

Yes, it is sad.  But, the business had to close.  

there should be warnings for things that depend on external servers to operation stating: product depends on external servers to operate and LL/SL makes no guarantee how long purchased product will work/operate for. Nothing like spending 20USD for a robotic baby and have it die one day.. same with cars, yachets, motorcycles. things of luxury are so expensive here. I hear this soo much from oldies I run into, I wish my car worked...Eww they need to fix this. They need a back up support thing for stuff that requires 3rd party what? I have no idea. Why would something need servers? Beyond me. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by benchthis

[EliseAnne85]

20 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

SL clubs often have FB websites where group members post pics of the club audience.  The same as you can find on YouTube videos.  These snapshots of live avatars often show the name tags, display and account names, and even their complexity (horrors).  So you think anyone posting these snapshots or videos from SL are illegal?  How about the LL community meetings?  Are the videographers doing this for LL monthly meetings also violating the TOS?  Public information to anyone that is on FB or youtube, or that simply wants to log into SL.

 

This is the snapshot and machinema policy of LL

(b) Avatar Consent for Machinima

For machinima, you must have the consent of all Residents whose avatars or Second Life names are featured or recognizable in the machinima. This includes avatars who are featured in a shot, avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community. Consent is not required if an avatar is not recognizable and is merely part of a crowd scene or shown in a fleeting background. Consent is not required for any snapshots.

https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy

[Jaylinbridges]

4 minutes ago, EliseAnne85 said:

Consent is not required for any snapshots

Stupid policy overall then.  No difference between a video and snapshot, except the snapshot will reveal avatar information more clearly.  But that's ok, but dancers are not?   So who do I AR for LL violating their TOS for their own meetings with Lindens and residents.  I have seen my avatar show up in the Linden approved videos quite often on YouTube.  Nobody asked me if they could scan me with their camera, and stick it on youtube.   Now the FBI has more to add to my folder.  

Much ado about nothing, this fear of publicity.  We are not a police state.

[Ardy Lay]

31 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

SL clubs often have FB websites where group members post pics of the club audience.  The same as you can find on YouTube videos.  These snapshots of live avatars often show the name tags, display and account names, and even their complexity (horrors).  So you think anyone posting these snapshots or videos from SL are illegal?  How about the LL community meetings?  Are the videographers doing this for LL monthly meetings also violating the TOS?  Public information to anyone that is on FB or youtube, or that simply wants to log into SL.

 

Actually, yes.  And it's not "I think."  It's "I read the laws."  And don't be confused that Second Life's Snapshot and Machinima Policy states that consent is not required for snapshots.  If those snapshots include "avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community", the privacy laws do apply.

[EliseAnne85]

4 minutes ago, Ardy Lay said:

Actually, yes.  And it's not "I think."  It's "I read the laws."  And don't be confused that Second Life's Snapshot and Machinima Policy states that consent is not required for snapshots.  If those snapshots include "avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community", the privacy laws do apply.

I would think so but it's worded oddly.  That's why I posted the link.