Rodvik Shares 2011 Highlights & His 2012 Outlook

[Qie Niangao]

Except that using "powerful" features is quite distinct from creating them -- and it's just bizarre (or naive) to be introducing a "'creators' program" when it's users of the features about whom they need to be concerned.

In principle, I don't object to blessing certain residents for certain abilities.  I do not object, for example, to the requirement that Mesh uploaders pass some prerequisites.

(In practice, I feel strongly that releasing Mesh in SL without a corresponding in-world creation tool was a grave error of business judgment, but they talked themselves into that a long time ago, based on the equally ill-advised sculpty creation approach--from which concurrency has yet to recover.  But I digress.)

The thing is, there is simply no way for a creator to ensure that products based on these functions won't be abused.  If for example llTeleportAgent() does what it appears to do, the only way I as a creator using that function could prevent it being abused would be to vet my customers to be sure they'll never be griefers.  (Yeah, right.)

Unless, of course, the function itself includes safeguards to restrict it to safe uses only -- in which case, why bother screening the creators in the first place?

[Ann Otoole]

My concern is that, despite a registered creator program, the same people (superior black hat engineers) that have been wreaking havoc in SL since it's birth will simply find exploits to use the functions and LL will wind up having to cancel the new features after significant damage has been done. 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

Except that

using

"powerful" features is quite distinct from

creating

them -- and it's just bizarre (or naive) to be introducing a "'creators' program" when it's users of the features about whom they need to be concerned.

In principle, I don't object to blessing certain residents for certain abilities.  I do not object, for example, to the requirement that Mesh uploaders pass some prerequisites.

(In practice, I feel strongly that releasing Mesh in SL without a corresponding in-world creation tool was a grave error of business judgment, but they talked themselves into that a long time ago, based on the equally ill-advised sculpty creation approach--from which concurrency has yet to recover.  But I digress.)

The thing is, there is simply no way for a creator to ensure that products based on these functions won't be abused.

 If for example llTeleportAgent() does what it appears to do, the only way I as a creator using that function could prevent it being abused would be to vet my customers to be sure they'll never be griefers.  (Yeah, right.)

Unless, of course, the function itself includes safeguards to restrict it to safe uses only -- in which case, why bother screening the creators in the first place?

---

I dread to think of these tools in the hands of say Bloodlines.

[Phil Deakins]

It depends what they are. Rodvik wrote, "To prevent abuse of these tools, we will introduce a "creators" program in which verified members will be given access to these very powerful capabilities." He called them both tools and capabilities. Of course he may be useless at writing accurately but, if it is accurate, then I wouldn't describe LSL functions as "tools".

I'm waiting to see what they are and, in the meantime, I can't criticise the decision to restrict.

[Qie Niangao]

I guess.  I mean, they've been extraordinarily secretive, even by Linden standards, about what this all is supposed to mean (and, especially, when), so maybe they have something unexpectedly sensible in store.  I can't imagine what such a "'creators' program" could be that would make sense, but I suppose one should reserve judgment until there's something more concrete announced.

[Eio Tuqiri]

---

and sandboxes.  they should have more than a few hours limit. some of this stuff take some time to develop.  a standalone sandbox for $99 wouild be ok for me especially if you can transferred you work. or even $299 if it was a megaregion.

---

It has been some time since I used a sand box, as I have a place I can rez and work on things.  And I'm not sure exactly to what you're referring here Bristle, but I used to find free sand boxes with no time limit.

[Eio Tuqiri]

(Not replying to myself here, just commenting again on this idea of new tools given to only verified users).

As to the tools that will be given to only certain people and not to everyone, I guess we'll need to see what those end up being and who gets them.

How will LL decide who is and isn't allowed?  They already use the word "verified" for those of us who are age verified.  I suppose Rod could have been using the word in that sense, which would mean everyone who is verified an adult may use the new tools.

If, however, he means some new form of verification than I'm concerned about the possibility of inequity.

[SLAddict Allen]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

---

"

One of the key goals of Linden Realms was to learn more about what tools Residents could use to develop richer experiences in Second Life — and boy, did we learn a lot! In Q1 2012 , we will be releasing new tools used to develop Linden Realms, which will allow Residents to create even richer original experiences in Second Life.

To prevent abuse of these tools, we will introduce a "creators" program in which verified members will be given access to these very powerful capabilities

.

"

---

This is the part that worries me. Cutting off casual creators.

---

I don't see it that way. If the new capabilites were simply additional features for building objects, e.g. in the Edit box, then I would agree with you. But, as far as I can tell, they are completely different, and could be used buy idiot kiddies to mess other people about. If that's the case, LL has three choices - (1) make it so that everyone can use them, (2) don't let anyone use them, and (3) be nice and let users use them but control who, so that idiots can't use them against other people. I prefer the third of those.

For instance, if we didn't have flexiprims, and a new capability was flexiprims, then I would agree. It's just a building feature that everyone should be able to make use of, and I would be against it being restricted to some people but not others. But the new stuff was described as "powerful", which I take to mean something quite different to a mere building feature like flexiprims.

---

Tools in the edit box have been used by idiot kiddies to mess with others for years. Restricting access to tools is NOT the answer.