Ban Lines - time to finally fix it?

[MatthewRiver]

It's 2024 and it's been 21 years since Second Life's release according to Google.

21 years and banlines still provide no real privacy or security.

Yes, you read it right. 

Correct me if I am wrong, but as far I understand:

We can restrict visibility of our avatars to the outside of our parcels, we can restrict voice and contain it within our parcel ... but none of this matters when the banlines reach only as high as 50 metres above the ground. Anyone who flies over and enters the parcel can now zoom in and see and hear everything. So ... what's the point? That's no privacy or security at all. So you basically pay for the priviledge of rezzing only?

Why has no one ever fixed it after so many years? Surely, there are many ways this can be solved. I understand there are security orbs we can purchase, I understand some people have flying hobby, but why can't we have a neat adjustable tab for these things without having to reach for often imperfect 3rd party solutions? I won't even argue the entitlement and audacity of some people to demand entry to private parcels. It's just absurd to expect people to pay $209 monthly to have a land and be forced to share it whether they like it or not.

Why can't we have a full parcel entry ban? 

Can't we have a tab to define altitudes where entry, voice and visibility are restricted to the outside avatars? We have something like this for windlights, but what if we could set visibility and voice to certain altitudes where someone staying within 0 - 2000 metres doesn't have to be worried to be heard or seen by an UFO hovering above their heads on the same parcel? 

Why? why why why? 🤔

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Qie Niangao]

Because parcels are not regions. All the privacy one could want and more is available for the low low price of a full Estate region.

Would there be adequate demand for a continent of parcels where the parcels had more restrictive access control? Maybe. There was such demand for parcels with slightly more permissive access control to create Bellisseria, by far the largest landmass in SL and still growing.

You could propose the "Fortress of Solitude" continent and see how it goes.

[Rowan Amore]

This is why security orbs are still sold and used.  Even the Belli homes come with one although slightly less aggressive than others that are sold.  Try one!

[AmeliaJ08]

Also avatars below the 50M (i.e at ground level) are not visible if flying over.

[discussionbot]

4 hours ago, MatthewRiver said:

Why can't we have a full parcel entry ban? 

Can't we have a tab to define altitudes where entry, voice and visibility are restricted to the outside avatars? We have something like this for windlights, but what if we could set visibility and voice to certain altitudes where someone staying within 0 - 2000 metres doesn't have to be worried to be heard or seen by an UFO hovering above their heads on the same parcel? 

Why? why why why? 🤔

Some ..interesting ideas here 

Posting on the forums is like shouting into the void (if you expect results than just discussion).

If you think your ideas carry any weight, then post this on https://feedback.secondlife.com where the Lindens can consider your idea (and others can critique it)

[Aethelwine]

Before I joined SL I paid subscription to Utherverse\Redlight centre to have land in their virtual world. The way they worked it everyone had access to an instanced home you could decorate. It was instanced and private, the only way into it was by the account holder through their door or by invite.

I wouldn't recommend anything else from the way they ran things there, but their instanced homes seemed like a good way to create secure spaces to run to and entertain in privacy and because of being instanced cheap on server costs. I have always thought something like that could be worthwhile addition to SL.

[Aethelwine]

6 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

Before I joined SL I paid subscription to Utherverse\Redlight centre to have land in their virtual world. The way they worked it everyone had access to an instanced home you could decorate. It was instanced and private, the only way into it was by the account holder through their door or by invite.

I wouldn't recommend anything else from the way they ran things there, but their instanced homes seemed like a good way to create secure spaces to run to and entertain in privacy and because of being instanced cheap on server costs. I have always thought something like that could be worthwhile addition to SL.

For free you used to get an apartment of about 3 rooms... but it also had a window you could climb out... so you could climb out the window fly up a few hundred metres create a platform, a huge sphere textured inside like a skydome and build your home there. It was a sort of hack people told you about rather than officially advertised but it worked and you had access to it for free, you just needed to pay premium to put down adult furniture

Edited September 4 by Aethelwine

[diamond Marchant]

5 hours ago, MatthewRiver said:

Why? why why why?

Second Life is a business* that offers a selection of products at different prices, presumably to serve various needs and budgets. What you seek is available, but not on mainland or in Bellisseria (where your stuff is always visible).

Basically, your request would require LL to incur additional expenses to provide an existing feature for a lower cost.  I asked my Magic Eight Ball for comment 4 times and got

  Don't count on it
  My sources say no
  Outlook not so good
  Very doubtful

*that's the story and they're sticking to it

[Ardy Lay]

6 hours ago, AmeliaJ08 said:

Also avatars below the 50M (i.e at ground level) are not visible if flying over.

This.  Please keep saying this until somebody here other than me notices.

[animats]

I had some old requests in the queue on ban lines back in the JIRA era:

• If a physical vehicle hits a ban line, and any onboard avatar or the vehicle itself can't enter, it should bounce off like an avatar. Current behaviors include the vehicle getting stuck.  Or worse, object can enter, avatar can't, and avatar gets kicked off the vehicle. After that, the avatar is stuck in a half-unsit state - avatar thinks it's seated, but it's not on anything, and you have to relog or TP or something. That's a bug.
• There's an "LLScriptDanger" LSL call, which tells you if you're about to enter a no-script area. I wanted a more general LLDanger call, which tells you you're about to enter a keep-out area from which you will be ejected. That would be really popular for boats.
• Have a parcel privacy mode that prohibits sits while camming unless there's line of sight, as defined by LLCastRay, from avatar to seat. Then set your TP arrival point to the welcome mat outside. Then you can't get through walls by camming and sitting. This makes doors an effective barrier. If all doors are closed and locked, nobody can get in without unlocking a door.

[Clem Marques]

10 hours ago, MatthewRiver said:

It's 2024 and it's been 21 years since Second Life's release according to Google.

21 years and banlines still provide no real privacy or security.

Yes, you read it right. 

Correct me if I am wrong, but as far I understand:

We can restrict visibility of our avatars to the outside of our parcels, we can restrict voice and contain it within our parcel ... but none of this matters when the banlines reach only as high as 50 metres above the ground. Anyone who flies over and enters the parcel can now zoom in and see and hear everything. So ... what's the point? That's no privacy or security at all. So you basically pay for the priviledge of rezzing only?

Why has no one ever fixed it after so many years? Surely, there are many ways this can be solved. I understand there are security orbs we can purchase, I understand some people have flying hobby, but why can't we have a neat adjustable tab for these things without having to reach for often imperfect 3rd party solutions? I won't even argue the entitlement and audacity of some people to demand entry to private parcels. It's just absurd to expect people to pay $209 monthly to have a land and be forced to share it whether they like it or not.

Why can't we have a full parcel entry ban? 

Can't we have a tab to define altitudes where entry, voice and visibility are restricted to the outside avatars? We have something like this for windlights, but what if we could set visibility and voice to certain altitudes where someone staying within 0 - 2000 metres doesn't have to be worried to be heard or seen by an UFO hovering above their heads on the same parcel? 

Why? why why why? 🤔

 

[Bree Giffen]

How exactly would banlines work if they were 'fixed' ? 🤔

[Marianne Little]

56 minutes ago, Bree Giffen said:

How exactly would banlines work if they were 'fixed' ? 🤔

My guess: Banlines work as fences now. Matthews proposal is to "put a lid on it" so if you fly over, you can not enter, see and listen in. And that there can be "ban zones" that can be custom set, and if one fly over or under, they can not enter, cam in or listen in.

[AmeliaJ08]

It seems based on a fundamental misunderstanding though. Ban lines only extend 50M above but flying over them doesn't allow you to see avatars in the parcel below, I'm not sure about voice but so long as those people are under the 50M height of the banlines there is nothing that someone flying over can see. You also bounce off the top of ban lines if you attempt to fly over and then descend.

I assume this was a decision LL made because banlines extending infinitely into the sky breaks aviation. Of course this makes skyboxes effectively useless as far as privacy goes since they're always going to be above 50M height so if that is a concern should not be used.

Complete privacy from and control of the ground and the air can only be achieved on private regions using access control and that seems fine, it's not something many people need to this degree.

 

[Rick Nightingale]

47 minutes ago, AmeliaJ08 said:

You also bounce off the top of ban lines if you attempt to fly over and then descend

Yes... banline trampoline is a competitive sport!

[lovestofu]

Banlines should be removed altogether from mainland.

• The grief caused to drivers by banlines far outweighs any grief that trespassers cause home dwellers.
• Bellisseria has no banlines and it works just fine.
• If you want privacy, get an island.

It is solipsistic and megalomaniacal to insist on ban lines when living on mainland. Do better and work to improve Second Life instead of turning your parcel into an obstacle.

[Rowan Amore]

Yes, security orbs are much better and why I use one.

[Love Zhaoying]

..if "Ban Lines" went all the way "up", then people would complain about THAT.  

You really can't please everyone with this type of thing, and changing it would displease more "existing users" than it would "please new users".

In my opinion.

 

 

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

15 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

..if "Ban Lines" went all the way "up", then people would complain about THAT.  

You really can't please everyone with this type of thing, and changing it would displease more "existing users" than it would "please new users".

In my opinion.

 

 

It would be neat if we had a system where each parcel came with it's own private instance.  You could give each resident just enough LI allowance to decorate the exterior and put a house on it, etc. then allow them to designate "portal objects" such as door handles, welcome mats, etc that would transport anyone that interacts with it (and has permission) to the private instance where each resident would have the same sized parcel of land but enough LI allowance to decorate it as lavishly and intricately as they like (since they'd only ever be impacting their own performance and that of their guests).

Of course SL doesn't work that way, but if I were planning on developing a similar virtual world/platform from the ground up that would probably be how I'd approach land ownership and shared environments in order to try and cut down on overloading the world with content.

[Extrude Ragu]

I still maintain we should give residents the ability to enable banlines/privacy above >2500m on the mainland.

A lot of residents like to live in skyboxes but they build them low and place security orbs. With the ability to gain true privacy and control at this altitude it would encourage people to clear the lower skies and make sightlines in the mainland nicer.

 

 

 

[Cynite00]

20 hours ago, MatthewRiver said:

 I won't even argue the entitlement and audacity of some people to demand entry to private parcels. It's just absurd to expect people to pay $209 monthly to have a land and be forced to share it whether they like it or not.

Good, because you wouldn't have any valid claim to this. Not one person on the forums can be quoted 'demanding entry to private parcels'. I have read suggestions to keep the exploration of mainland areas relatively open and free, without unfair or strict interruptions like 0-second orb kicks.

16 hours ago, Aethelwine said:

Before I joined SL I paid subscription to Utherverse\Redlight centre to have land in their virtual world. The way they worked it everyone had access to an instanced home you could decorate. It was instanced and private, the only way into it was by the account holder through their door or by invite.

I wouldn't recommend anything else from the way they ran things there, but their instanced homes seemed like a good way to create secure spaces to run to and entertain in privacy and because of being instanced cheap on server costs. I have always thought something like that could be worthwhile addition to SL.

I think it's time. There are a few loud voices who have parcels in mainland areas that want privacy using ban lines and 0-second orb practices, but refuse to pay for more private options. Perhaps they would be served better and be much happier not being part of an publicly-accessible area if provided their own private instance. This kind of solution would seem to be able to make both parties happy. The paranoid 'get off my lawn' type and the average user flying around exploring SL.

 

The question is though, is the 'leave me alone' 'get off my lawn' type going to pay for a private space?

56 minutes ago, lovestofu said:

Banlines should be removed altogether from mainland.

• The grief caused to drivers by banlines far outweighs any grief that trespassers cause home dwellers.
• Bellisseria has no banlines and it works just fine.
• If you want privacy, get an island.

It is solipsistic and megalomaniacal to insist on ban lines when living on mainland. Do better and work to improve Second Life instead of turning your parcel into an obstacle.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. In a way, those expecting 100% privacy from publicly-accessible (and expected public access) and enforcing it with disruptive ban lines and ejection orbs should be encouraged to move to private parcels. Of course, those are higher priced, so it's just easier (and more selfish) to impose restrictions on everyone else for their own benefit.

8 minutes ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

It would be neat if we had a system where each parcel came with it's own private instance.  You could give each resident just enough LI allowance to decorate the exterior and put a house on it, etc. then allow them to designate "portal objects" such as door handles, welcome mats, etc that would transport anyone that interacts with it (and has permission) to the private instance where each resident would have the same sized parcel of land but enough LI allowance to decorate it as lavishly and intricately as they like (since they'd only ever be impacting their own performance and that of their guests).

Of course SL doesn't work that way, but if I were planning on developing a similar virtual world/platform from the ground up that would probably be how I'd approach land ownership and shared environments in order to try and cut down on overloading the world with content.

For those who seem to crave a high level of privacy, this should be the answer, and make mainland return to more open (and perhaps more conducive to social interaction, meeting new people, new experiences), it may be better for everyone involved.

Look to Sansar, as an example, that all were instanced worlds. Even then, many of the owners there also didn't like to be found in their own worlds, and would go to many lengths to have hidden rooms, secret chat areas, etc - and it always struck me as odd "Why continue to have public access to your area/world/experience if you want the privacy?" Sansar offered blocklists/whitelists etc including 'friends only'.

It kinda harkens to "I want privacy, but I also want to be seen" at the same time. Always that conflict of interests. "Don't bother me, stay off my lawn, I will block and ban you.... buuuuuuutttt I want the pleasure or selfish satisfaction of imposing myself in the process"

Edited September 5 by Cynite00
Add another quote

[Qie Niangao]

If folks can really make a market for restrictive "private" parcels on a Linden estate, cool, but they really do not belong on the existing Mainland. If the privacy-focused landowners were cheek-by-jowl with each other and only each other, that would be fine with everybody, but plunked down in the middle of Mainland, it degrades the exploration experience even worse than it is already.

And yeah, for those who want that kind of privacy, there's no reason to share a whole connected grid, only enough to TP back and forth between the grid and these private instances. They could be much cheaper, simply vanishing when not in use, with no static coordinates nor landmarks, just some virtual, ephemeral "address" that materializes on demand.

[Love Zhaoying]

37 minutes ago, discussionbot said:

1 hour ago, lovestofu said:

Banlines should be removed altogether from mainland.

• The grief caused to drivers by banlines far outweighs any grief that trespassers cause home dwellers.
• Bellisseria has no banlines and it works just fine.
• If you want privacy, get an island.

It is solipsistic and megalomaniacal to insist on ban lines when living on mainland. Do better and work to improve Second Life instead of turning your parcel into an obstacle.

Expand  

This has to be the worst attempt at a bait. 

Nah, it's just an old and one-sided argument.  A VERY OLD argument! The OP missed all the previous discussions on it. Maybe the thread can be safely ignored from that context. 

[Madi Melodious]

When I first joined up a stayed with a friend who had a skybox at the perfect height.  The parcel next door had ban lines and the height was just perfect.  I could jump from my friends skybox, land on the banlines, and they would bounce me right back up to the skybox. 

[Rowan Amore]

49 minutes ago, Cynite00 said:

In a way, those expecting 100% privacy from publicly-accessible (and expected public access)

What part of my parcel on mainland is public access?  I don't have banlines but I do have a security orb for those nitwits who don't pay attention to the 15 sec warning.  You know the ones who TP to an avatar on the map and disrupt MY time alone at home.  15 seconds is plenty of time for anyone to fly over my 1024 parcel.  Why should I be expected to pay extra for more privacy?