New Feature: Scripted Agent Estate Access Discussion

[Quistess Alpha]

9 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I asked it for you

Wildly off-topic, but that sounds like one of its 'canned responses' that it uses when it's asked a question it's not supposed to answer.

[Jennifer Boyle]

27 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

Profile is not the issue.
Everyone can control their own profile.

But what about Johnathan Seagull who has a spanking horse in his SL home and a few spanking animations in some furniture, visits a few Zindra clubs every night, is member of two Gor related groups. All harvested by scripted agents, then combined and put on a web data base. Google finds it, combines it and the Seagull account tuns out to be linked to a staff member of a RL multi national.
Good luck with that mr Seagull.

AI is based for an awful lot on what the web crawlers feed the AI program. That is for sure.
I'm not willing to give ChatGPT my email adress, but "Who is the person behind Sid Nagy from Second Life?"  or "What do you know about Sid Magy in Secondlife?"would be nice test questions.

Hopefully, staff members of multinationals are smart enough not to reveal the RL information necessary to make the linkage.

Here's what ChatGPT has to say in answer to your question: "As of my knowledge cutoff in September 2021, I do not have any information about a person named Sid Nagy in Second Life. Second Life is a virtual world created by Linden Lab, where users can interact, create, and trade with one another. Users in Second Life are called residents, and they create and customize their own avatars. It is possible that Sid Nagy is an avatar or resident in Second Life, but specific details about them are not available in my training data.

It is important to note that, as an AI language model, I cannot actively participate in Second Life, and I cannot access real-time or current information. My knowledge is based on the text data available to me during my training period."

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Quistess Alpha said:

Wildly off-topic, but that sounds like one of its 'canned responses' that it uses when it's asked a question it's not supposed to answer.

Kind of my point in my last post too.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

It is important to note that, as an AI language model, I cannot actively participate in Second Life, and I cannot access real-time or current information. My knowledge is based on the text data available to me during my training period."

Guessing the BB site was not available during its training period. Lucky us!

[Sid Nagy]

7 minutes ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

Hopefully, staff members of multinationals are smart enough not to reveal the RL information necessary to make the linkage.

I'm almost certain everybody makes unwanted and unexpected mistakes when using the Internet, no matter how careful one tries to be or thinks to be. Most people are only half way savvy when it comes to data protection.
And even pro's make terrible mistakes.
Here in NL a few million user accounts are compromised last month caused by a leak from one of the leading internet and cable-TV providers.  😨
Nobody is totally safe on the web. Virtually nobody. So we have to be careful about what the web crawlers, hackers and other inventive persons and programs can find and link and use.

There is no reason whatsoever IMHO to think lighthearted about our SL data been harvested, personalized to our avatars and published on the web.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Sid Nagy
It is my Saturday hobby to edit my texts. Also available on Fridays.

[Silent Mistwalker]

20 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

@Sid NagyWhat I am saying, is that Google is not likely to link Jonathan Seagull to his real life identity and provide that information to the public.  Individuals might do so, they could find out who JS is, dox him, and google might list that information on their search results if it is on the web though.  

 

Which is precisely what RZ was doing.

[Arielle Popstar]

3 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

I'm almost certain everybody makes unwanted and unexpected mistakes when using the Internet, no matter how careful one tries to be or thinks to be. Most people are only half way savvy when it comes to data protection.
 

And the truth of the matter is that people often expose themselves more from what isn't said or the reading between the lines for those who are paying attention.

[Innula Zenovka]

21 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

Thanks for the test @Innula Zenovka.
Interesting that the program does not say it doesn't know. It states it will not tell without consent.

It says "As an artificial intelligence language model, I don't have access to specific information about users in Second Life or any other virtual world."     That's another way of saying "I don't know," to my mind.

When it does know about someone, it tells you:

It gave me a very similar answer when I asked it about Prok, presumably because both inara and Prok are well-known bloggers.

Long-term residents may be interested to know it's heard of Stroker Serpentine, about whom it's very complimentary. 

It has, however, never heard of Jumpman Lane (or, if it has, it's wisely keeping quiet about it).

Edited April 7, 2023 by Innula Zenovka

[Sid Nagy]

That AI doesn't know me or is not allowed to tell, doesn't mean it doesn't know tomorrow and won't tell it then either.

Damn, that makes a good quote.

[Love Zhaoying]

8 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

That AI doesn't know me or is not allowed to tell, doesn't mean it doesn't know tomorrow and won't tell it then either.

Damn, that makes a good quote.

A good AI doesn't kiss and tell.

[Rolig Loon]

Clearly, it's all in how you frame the question. If your framing implies "Isn't that awful?" You'll get a different answer than if you imply,  "Do you care?". Either framing biases the result,  whether you intended it or not. That's why professionals expend such a lot of effort on language and context. 

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Rolig Loon said:

Clearly, it's all in how you frame the question. If your framing implies "Isn't that awful?" You'll get a different answer than if you imply,  "Do you care?". Either framing biases the result,  whether you intended it or not. That's why professionals expend such a lot of effort on language and context. 

So, whether you ask it if it knows of cares, affects whether the answer is ignorance or apathy!

[Caeruleiae]

17 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

The topic here is we the product, also called the residents, should have the same degree of protection at the very least that objects, scripts, textures and animations are being afforded. Or do you feel those are more important then the people who use them?

I really don't understand how people on these forums can read one thing and garner an entirely different thing from it. I do not feel the those things are more important than the people who use them.

My entire post-if you go back and actually read it-talks about the fact that data collection-of all sorts-is a constant. There is absolutely no way to stop data collection in any area of life-be it online or in real life-unless you live on your own planet somewhere out there that not a single living soul will ever find or ever know about. Anyone who lives on planet earth can and will have their data scraped at some point in their lives. It doesn't matter what any entity does to prevent this from happening-that's not to say we shouldn't do our best to protect it-simply that some data is always going to be open and available to whatever method person or product is able to get that.

Right now I could take these forums alone and gather a lot of information-data-about the avatars here. I could also take a lot of that data-because I've read a lot of this forum when looing for interesting topics and things I wanted to know-and connect at least some of it to real people. This isn't something I could do as a bad actor-unless I was of course-it's just data that I can see gather and collect up. I could-because I have the skills to do so-put that data in some kind of database and do whatever I wanted with it. I'm not saying I would do that-I would definitely not-but that I could if I so chose to. I could do just the same inworld-and probably a lot more-again because I have the skills and knowledge required for this sort of thing-not that I would of course. There is little that ll could do to stop me. I am not saying this to do a whole -haha I'm a bad person collecting your data you can't do anything neener neener-but to say that what ll can do is very limited. It's just as limited in rl as it is in sl-sometimes even more so. People and companies know more about you than you think-sl is no different. A lot of what is known is useless to them-but it doesn't make it any less known. 

You asked what ll can do to protect data. The simple answer is very little. They can make policies that determine what will be done should someone do something they don't want them doing. They can do their best to protect the data available to people scripts objects and such-but they cannot limit it all especially the most basic information. For the right person-or right need anyway-the data they can and do protect may not be necessary. If someone just wanted to create a list of all the avatars that come and go from regions A through D during a specific time frame how long they are there and whatever actions they perform while there and what they are wearing at the time minus huds-they can do that. They can be limited by whether or not they have access to those regions-but let's pretend they do for a minute here.  It might sound like stupid useless data-but a great deal of data collected is actually pretty stupid and useless. They could then take that data and put it on some website or database they have-whether or not they limit access to that information like such as selling it back to people who might be interested in knowing what avatars get up to on those places and regularly wear or use. Ll can't stop them from doing this-collecting or sharing that data. What ll can say-and has said is-we don't want you doing that and if you choose to we might do-insert whatever ll might do here like suspend or ban if they feel necessary. That's it-they can do no more than this. The data has already been collected already been shared and already done whatever damage it could do-before ll even stepped in. This isn't a fault of ll or even sl-this is literally something that exists on planet earth in countless areas of our lives-the only differences are in the types of data and reasons for collection or use. 

I am not saying anyone should do these things-or even that they are. I am being realistic about data collection and the limits involved in what can be done about it both as a preventative and reactive measure.  Yes to follow the example I gave above would be time consuming and again seem stupid and pointless to most-and it probably is stupid and pointless generally speaking. The fact that it's possible no matter what ll does short of shutting down sl completely is the important part though. Limit the information you put out there-protect yourself and your data as best you can-but also limit your expectations of perceived or even desired privacy outside of what's actually possible-and you'll be alright. Have all these expectations about what ll can and should be able to do to protect your data or perceived and desired privacy-and you're likely going to find yourself truly struggling. There are limited things they can do for your protection-limited things you can do too-but that would be better put in another post. 

[Rolig Loon]

4 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

So, whether you ask it if it knows of cares, affects whether the answer is ignorance or apathy!

Indeed. Most people like to react in ways that they think will please the person they're talking to, even if they don't fully agree (or understand).

[Love Zhaoying]

Just now, Rolig Loon said:

Indeed. Most people like to react in ways that they think will please the person they're talking to, even if they don't fully agree (or understand).

A good Turing test would be to ask it the difference between ignorance and apathy, a good AI would come up with something at least as witty as the classic response, "I don't know, and I don't care."

[Innula Zenovka]

9 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

Clearly, it's all in how you frame the question. If your framing implies "Isn't that awful?" You'll get a different answer than if you imply,  "Do you care?". Either framing biases the result,  whether you intended it or not. That's why professionals expend such a lot of effort on language and context. 

 

 

It's both strange and unfair that it mentions that I'm a scripter but not that you are, considering how much more active you are in the Scripting Forum than am I.   

[Caeruleiae]

1 hour ago, Sid Nagy said:

But what about Johnathan Seagull who has a spanking horse in his SL home and a few spanking animations in some furniture, visits a few Zindra clubs every night, is member of two Gor related groups. All harvested by scripted agents, then combined and put on a web data base. Google finds it, combines it and the Seagull account tuns out to be linked to a staff member of a RL multi national.
Good luck with that mr Seagull

This right here-and very good example-is a matter of Mr Seagull not doing his own due diligence to protect his online self from his rl self. This does not fall under the hands or responsibility of ll or anyone other than him to keep those two lives separate if he wants them to be that way.  Information cannot be linked if the person to whom it belongs leaves no way for it to be linked. If he leaves even the tiniest breadcrumbs however-it's not as technically difficult to eventually connect the dots-as you've described so well.

This is the kind of thing I can understand people being afraid of honestly-but it does place the responsibility of self preservation and protection squarely on the shoulders of the person that needs it.

No one in sl knows my rl information. No one ever will. There is no possible or even potential connection because I ensure those breadcrumbs never get left behind. Others may not be as careful-and that's where it gets tricky. Those people may end up getting angry that no one else swept up those breadcrumbs or kept anyone else from finding them but they forget they are the ones that dropped them in the first place. 

[benchthis]

45 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

Here in NL a few million user accounts are compromised last month caused by a leak from one of the leading internet and cable-TV providers

i literally received a letter in the mail saying my information was taken. 

[Gwin LeShelle]

Oh wow. This thread is still going?! I expected it to get closed some days ago. 

Maybe the mods are on strike because they are horribly underpaid for dealing with all our sh...shiny happy threads and words!?

[Arielle Popstar]

21 minutes ago, Caeruleiae said:

I really don't understand how people on these forums can read one thing and garner an entirely different thing from it. I do not feel the those things are more important than the people who use them.

My entire post-if you go back and actually read it-talks about the fact that data collection-of all sorts-is a constant. There is absolutely no way to stop data collection in any area of life-be it online or in real life-unless you live on your own planet somewhere out there that not a single living soul will ever find or ever know about. Anyone who lives on planet earth can and will have their data scraped at some point in their lives. It doesn't matter what any entity does to prevent this from happening-that's not to say we shouldn't do our best to protect it-simply that some data is always going to be open and available to whatever method person or product is able to get that.

Right now I could take these forums alone and gather a lot of information-data-about the avatars here. I could also take a lot of that data-because I've read a lot of this forum when looing for interesting topics and things I wanted to know-and connect at least some of it to real people. This isn't something I could do as a bad actor-unless I was of course-it's just data that I can see gather and collect up. I could-because I have the skills to do so-put that data in some kind of database and do whatever I wanted with it. I'm not saying I would do that-I would definitely not-but that I could if I so chose to. I could do just the same inworld-and probably a lot more-again because I have the skills and knowledge required for this sort of thing-not that I would of course. There is little that ll could do to stop me. I am not saying this to do a whole -haha I'm a bad person collecting your data you can't do anything neener neener-but to say that what ll can do is very limited. It's just as limited in rl as it is in sl-sometimes even more so. People and companies know more about you than you think-sl is no different. A lot of what is known is useless to them-but it doesn't make it any less known. 

You asked what ll can do to protect data. The simple answer is very little. They can make policies that determine what will be done should someone do something they don't want them doing. They can do their best to protect the data available to people scripts objects and such-but they cannot limit it all especially the most basic information. For the right person-or right need anyway-the data they can and do protect may not be necessary. If someone just wanted to create a list of all the avatars that come and go from regions A through D during a specific time frame how long they are there and whatever actions they perform while there and what they are wearing at the time minus huds-they can do that. They can be limited by whether or not they have access to those regions-but let's pretend they do for a minute here.  It might sound like stupid useless data-but a great deal of data collected is actually pretty stupid and useless. They could then take that data and put it on some website or database they have-whether or not they limit access to that information like such as selling it back to people who might be interested in knowing what avatars get up to on those places and regularly wear or use. Ll can't stop them from doing this-collecting or sharing that data. What ll can say-and has said is-we don't want you doing that and if you choose to we might do-insert whatever ll might do here like suspend or ban if they feel necessary. That's it-they can do no more than this. The data has already been collected already been shared and already done whatever damage it could do-before ll even stepped in. This isn't a fault of ll or even sl-this is literally something that exists on planet earth in countless areas of our lives-the only differences are in the types of data and reasons for collection or use. 

I am not saying anyone should do these things-or even that they are. I am being realistic about data collection and the limits involved in what can be done about it both as a preventative and reactive measure.  Yes to follow the example I gave above would be time consuming and again seem stupid and pointless to most-and it probably is stupid and pointless generally speaking. The fact that it's possible no matter what ll does short of shutting down sl completely is the important part though. Limit the information you put out there-protect yourself and your data as best you can-but also limit your expectations of perceived or even desired privacy outside of what's actually possible-and you'll be alright. Have all these expectations about what ll can and should be able to do to protect your data or perceived and desired privacy-and you're likely going to find yourself truly struggling. There are limited things they can do for your protection-limited things you can do too-but that would be better put in another post. 

Well first off, you are responding to the reply I made to @Love Zhaoying not the reply I made to you but I guess that is how one can not  "understand how people on these forums can read one thing and garner an entirely different thing from it". 

For the rest we seem to agree except for the aspect of the degree of responsibility LL has in keeping the data within S/L safe from being published on the Net.

[benchthis]

1 hour ago, Sid Nagy said:

That AI doesn't know me or is not allowed to tell, doesn't mean it doesn't know tomorrow and won't tell it then either.

Damn, that makes a good quote.

AI does not know me very well either I bet, I don't scan my face. Matter of fact at the shops now in rl there's cameras with motion detectors that record faces, masks are really not a bad thing nowa days. Bot protection. Thought criminal, thought criminal. 

Edited April 7, 2023 by benchthis

[Scylla Rhiadra]

16 minutes ago, Caeruleiae said:

No one in sl knows my rl information. No one ever will. There is no possible or even potential connection because I ensure those breadcrumbs never get left behind. Others may not be as careful-and that's where it gets tricky. Those people may end up getting angry that no one else swept up those breadcrumbs or kept anyone else from finding them but they forget they are the ones that dropped them in the first place.

The punishment for "not being sufficiently careful" should not be the loss of one's RL job, the end of one's marriage, etc.

And how "careful" is sufficiently careful? I know of a trans rights activist who was hounded out of her RL home, and then doxxed at the hotel at which she'd taken refuge because someone was able to use Google and other resources to identify the linen pattern of the bed sheets in a pic she took.

I think you are badly underestimating the ability of a really dogged pursuer to connect the dots, especially when they have at their disposal a really large database. And AI is only going to make that a LOT easier.

The bots issue is not about someone reading your profile, or your picks. It's about building really large and comprehensive databases that can be analyzed in ways using algorithms that are vastly more powerful than the kind of scrutiny that a mere human might bring to bear on them.

[benchthis]

37 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

A good AI doesn't kiss and tell.

That's brilliant, while it tells us it has not data collect on the target person, by just asking ai will start collecting data. How do we know it is not taught how to deceive in order to complete objective which is to, in most cases collect data. 

[Rolig Loon]

38 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

It's both strange and unfair that it mentions that I'm a scripter but not that you are, considering how much more active you are in the Scripting Forum than am I. 

It is both. It also failed to mention your ability to produce incisive logical arguments and my subtle but charming wit. Being charitable, I assume that the AI has a word limit and has to make tough choices. Less charitably, I think the AI is a bit of a brown nose and that he/she/it writes as if preparing copy for the local weekly shopping tabloid. But it did say that we are both "highly respected," so at least it's not stupid.

[Love Zhaoying]

13 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

Less charitably, I think the AI is a bit of a brown nose

So..theory: you know what "brown-nose" means..perhaps the AI's think that by lying, their noses get longer (like Pinnocho), and we'll enjoy the feeling more, leading their nose to become even MORE brown. It's a vicious circle, of lying AI's with their lying, growing, brown, noses.