Jump to content

Third Party Viewer Policy Changes


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3157 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


Dilbert Dilweg wrote:

Good to know they are finally dealing wiht the privacy issues.

Would they not want to remove the RLV from TPV viewers because the viewer should always be rated G in nature maybe?

i'm listening to the audio now and rlv is safe..

also they sounded good about the mesh deformer also..

he did say as an example about the k2..that if linden lab did not aprove the deformer.then no viewer would be able to have it..

but it sounded really good to me that it will be added..

 

also something funny was ..the M era was referred to as the dark period where nothing had gotten done..this team sounds like they are going to  be doing things and adding more things and they want to work more with third party viewers..

what i see is that they want everyone to have the same grid experience no matter what viewer they are in..but that doesn't mean that tpv' s cannot still have the features they want..

they just can't have features that change the shared experience..

the mesh deformer was a good example they used..as well as the old emerald attachment points that had peoples boots floating over their heads in other viewers view..

in other words if you add a feature that is out there for everyone to see in some way..it's allowed if they see it in the same way..

things like that lol

 

they also gave away at times some neat stuff they are working on or will be..

they didn't say they were working on this..but they did use it as an example of when they were talking about taking steps with windlight..

something like..imagine parcel windlight and then a whole other inside setting in the building..bright and sunny outside and dark  and smokey on the inside..

it was just talk..but it's nice to hear them talking like that hehehe

the audio left a good feeling in a lot of things..much better than the M days thats for sure..

Link to post
Share on other sites


Seven Overdrive wrote:


Ceka Cianci wrote:

but we can also be on an older version of the official viewer and have that happen..some older v2's and v1's still can't see mesh that are being used..just not majority..lots of things can be just client side like that..i get the feeling it's more privacy based than anything..

the altering a shared experience to me sounds more like advantage over another more than what one could do to themselves..

something that will have an impact on someone else's virtual world.. like if you using it made my avatar look all strange to everyone and myself..something like that hehehe

also i heard LL may take that on and implement it when it's finished..at least that's what i was hearing when it was first starting up..or at least there was talk about it or something..i think they were talking to each other  at one point..

or was that just rumor?

if they do that would be awesome..

 

 

 

It was just a guess off the top of my head, but I agree, the privacy invading features of some viewers would probably be along the lines of what the Lab currently means as altering the shared experience.  

And no idea if the Lab plans on adopting the mesh enhancement that is currently being developed.   I hope they do because I want to enjoy mesh clothing too. :smileyhappy:

i stand corrected..your guess was correct as far as it being features like that..

all though from what it sounded like..the deformer they are working to get that in..i think they really want it to..

but features like that are what they are talking about with the k2..

not just things client side ..but that both can see..if it adds the same experience it will be allowed..but if it alters it like deforming the avatar to the LL viewer it won't be..

they said with features being added server side and client side they would only work better anyways..

things like AO's that hold your animations ..client side stuff..that's not a problem..unless it gives away some sort of information about other users..

they looked at the viewer tags as  nobody needing to know anyone's viewer but the user just as it is nobodies business what software we are using  for anything else..

if a user wanted to make a group tag that was fine..or make some hotkey  or whatever that says it in chat..thats fine too..but viewers are not allowed to give out that information anymore..it has to be 100% the user implementing it from scratch..not an option in the viewer..

 

it was a pretty enlightening audio..it helped to understand what they were getting at..if anyone is confused about those new rules..i would suggest listening to it..

devs are there asking questions as well and it really cleared things up for me..

 

here is the link to the audio again..

http://lecs.opensource.secondlife.com/tpvd/meeting/2012-02-24.mp3

 

i also want to add..these new guys..they don't butter your biscuit..they are straight up and don't beat around the bush trying to dodge questions with confusing answers..

they pretty much tell it how it is..i was laughing a lot because i was like..omg these are lindens?

i usually have to listen a few times at least to certain parts..but they came off clear as a bell..

they just left a confident feeling  in me that they are gonna get stuff done..

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

quite a meeting.

My only concern would be that it could hinder innovation by the TPV's, but Oz sounded very proactive that they didn't want to hinder it. 

I can also see the AR's starting:

Avatar: Can someone help me do such and such?

Helper:  What Viewer are you using?

Avatar:  I'm AR'ing you for requesting personal Info.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:


Irene Muni wrote:

A silly (or not) side comment: really a
is the best option for an offcial announcement of changes in LL policies?
Not the
blog
a better place
?

[off topic]

Ceka Cianci wrote:


Lucinda Bulloch wrote:

Oh, ty, it is what the thread is about, lol, feel silly now.

you shouldn't..the world is getting way to used to acronyms loli

Imagine if your first language is Spanish
:D

[end off topic]


It's bizarre how LL sprinkles it's announcements here and there rather than consistently blogging them.   A little more on the subject - The "Policy on Third Party Viewers" is incorporated by reference into the "Second Life Terms of Service."  So I expect we'll soon go through the process of agreeing to the changed terms.

The decision on where to post is based upon where the fewest number of people will see it.  Or where they think they will catch the least amount of heat.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ann Otoole wrote:


True online status violates the privacy of users that do not wish to be tracked. 

I don't understand.  If it were possible to conceal online status from people using the standard LL viewer, I would understand, but it's not.  All you have to do to find out if I'm online is send me an IM, notecard, or object, or look at a group we both belong to.  Many people, including me, have been asking for years for the ability to actually conceal our online status, the equivalent of closing the blinds and not answering the phone or door in RL, and LL has refused to make it possible.  I don't understand how a viewer that makes it a little easier to do what is already easy with the standard viewer violates anyone's privacy.  AFAIK, as it stands the only way to be online without anyone else who cares to finding out is to use an alt that no one knows about.

Perhaps I'm missing something.  If I am, please tell me what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jennifer Boyle wrote:

I don't understand.  If it were possible to conceal online status from people using the standard LL viewer, I would understand, but it's not.  All you have to do to find out if I'm online is send me an IM, notecard, or object, or look at a group we both belong to.  Many people, including me, have been asking for years for the ability to actually conceal our online status, the equivalent of closing the blinds and not answering the phone or door in RL, and LL has refused to make it possible.  I don't understand how a viewer that makes it a little easier to do what is already easy with the standard viewer violates anyone's privacy.  AFAIK, as it stands the only way to be online without anyone else who cares to finding out is to use an alt that no one knows about.

Perhaps I'm missing something.  If I am, please tell me what.

Linden Lab have told the TPv's to remove the feature, they are also talking of breaking the LSL scritping call that finds someone's online status so that it will only work if you are basically making the call about yourself, this isn't as mad as it sounds, you might have a customer service board that shows your online status to customers.

However there are legitimate cases for finding someone's online info that aren't about circumventing privacy, but about delivering inventory, so the discussion will be ongoing.

You are however correct to say that IM's and groups will still show the group status, but LL are trying to make it so that a users wishes are respected by their online status.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, after some clarifications on the what is a 'shared experience' and what that will prohibit in TPV, I'm a little less outraged by these changes.  Though I don't think it's any less stupid of a rule to impose on the TPV developers who've brought so much to SL over the years.  Yes, not everything has been good, but there's been more good than bad, and in the end, the 'shared experience' balances out.

We are talking about a company here that takes upwards of 6 months to remove obviously illegal content from their grid and obvious theft postings to Marketplace.  So it's understandable that some bad has crept into the 'shared experience' in the name of improving it, because well, nothing would improve at the rate Linden Labs moves.

But onto what still concerns me, which is killing llGetAgentData's ability to see if people are online.  A lot of scripting uses this in a responcible useful manner.  Another poster pointed out RLV furniture as using it to determine when the victim has dropped offline or teleported away.  I'm a RLV scripter too, and this DIRECTLY IMPACTS my work.  It's also just a pretty bad idea to break legitimate use of this function because some people just MUST KNOW when some other person is online or not.

Is knowing if someone is connected or not *REALLY* so big a deal we must BREAK things to guard it?  Puhleeze.  Overkill.  It's not that big a deal.  So what, someone you don't like knows you're online?  Is this really a big privacy issue that LL has to go breaking content over?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Chetar Ruby wrote:

Is knowing if someone is connected or not *REALLY* so big a deal we must BREAK things to guard it?  Puhleeze.  Overkill.  It's not that big a deal.  So what, someone you don't like knows you're online?  Is this really a big privacy issue that LL has to go breaking content over?

 

For some people, yes it is a big deal and we should all respect their wishes, however I think LL are going about this the right way, TPV's don't need this feature as an option, Oz has said on the Jira that people making good use cases for requesting agent data is worthy of further discussion so hopefully a happy compromise can be found.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Chetar Ruby wrote:

But onto what still concerns me, which is killing llGetAgentData's ability to see if people are online.  A lot of scripting uses this in a responcible useful manner.  Another poster pointed out RLV furniture as using it to determine when the victim has dropped offline or teleported away.  I'm a RLV scripter too, and this DIRECTLY IMPACTS my work.  It's also just a pretty bad idea to break legitimate use of this

Can't the furniture detect that the avatar is no longer there, just by scanning for them in the appropriate radius?  Also, you can still tell if the avatar is in the sim(s) you are interested in.

There's a question of performance with that, though, and it's not trivial.   On the one hand, you won't be hitting the presence server and whatever other back-end processors that llGetAgentData involves.  On the other hand, you'll be sensoring (and maybe doing other work).    But with LL's new focus on supporting gaming environments, perhaps that kind of sensoring will be tuned up to lessen the sim impact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ciaran Laval wrote:

You are however correct to say that IM's and groups will still show the group status, but LL are trying to make it so that a users wishes are respected by their online status.


The obvious solution (as posted in some other thread) is for users to be able to give "show my online status" permission to individual objects.  Right now, that permission is only available for the "Friends & Groups".  However, LL has said that they cannot implement this.  The server architecture is incapable of accomodating that feature.

Maybe in some distant future they will make changes in the architecture (e.g. the presence system) to make this work.  But there don't seem to be any plans for such a major project.

Regarding the fact that you can tell if someone is online by other means than llGetAgentData.  As acknowleged by LL, there are many ways to do this.  However, LL has made it very clear that anyone using those techniques would be in serious violation of the policy and TOS.  "Don't do it" was what they said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have FREAKING got to be KIDDING me that they are going to just break scripts that show online status - there are a lot of legitimate scripts in SL that NEED this.  

As I was saying to someone - why not have that as a preference (I thought we did?)  where "show my online status" can be set off by default, and let residents decide for themselves if they want that or not?  It's not a violation of privacy if they have to go into preferences and specifically set that on. We're all grownups, we can decide that for ourselves instead of LL going all parental and "protecting" our privacy.   Sheesh.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Feldspar Millgrove wrote:

Can't the furniture detect that the avatar is no longer there, just by scanning for them in the appropriate radius?  Also, you can still tell if the avatar is in the sim(s) you are interested in.

 

 

I'm sure you simply don't understand the nature of the devices in question.  Devices which recapture avatars if they try to get away by logging off.  I'm sure you won't understand the demand/need for this sort of thing, that's irrelevant.  What is relevant, is a device needs to be freed up for someone else to use if the person cheats and teleports away, or logs in at a different location to escape.  The only way to know is by checking if they're online now and then.

It's also important to know, and this is why sensoring is worthless, if they just logged out when script catches an unsit.  That way the device can set up for recapture.

Bottom line is, there's legitimate usage for probing if a user is online or not.  I really fail to see why the 'privacy' flag has to be waved around about this.  If you don't want someone knowing yer logged in, DON'T LOG IN.  Easy.  There are plenty of tools, including telling people to LEAVE YOU ALONE for omitting unwanted content (ie, other players.)  Why privacy has to be guarded about your presense on the grid is beyond me.  Sometimes, some things just need to be known, in order to function properly.

As for reference to JIRA?  Forget it.  I don't even know if posting here is productive or read by those with the power.  But JIRA's in my experience are really not very effective when it comes to policy decisions regarding the grid and funtionality thereof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Online and Active are two totally different things.

I think the best way to see if a person is online, is to send them an IM and say "hello". If they respond, they are Online and active. 

I don't want to be probed, sounds invasive.

My experiences with Jira's is limited, but Residents in the past, have not always praised the system. Another thing from the past is, a whole bunch of people who don't work here anymore; maybe things have changed since then.

I don't fully understand how the changes will effect your SL, and I don't have to. The fact that you are being effected is enough for me. I hope that your concerns, and the concerns of others, will be made into considerations by LL.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


iSkye Silverweb wrote:

You have FREAKING got to be KIDDING me that they are going to just break scripts that show online status - there are a lot of legitimate scripts in SL that NEED this.  

As I was saying to someone - why not have that as a preference (I thought we did?)  where "show my online status" can be set off by default, and let residents decide for themselves if they want that or not?  It's not a violation of privacy if they have to go into preferences and specifically set that on. We're all grownups, we can decide that for ourselves instead of LL going all parental and "protecting" our privacy.   Sheesh.

thats in the official viewer..but just for friends list..

they were concerned with viewers that overrid that..that if a user  wants to show themselves off line..that should be respected and not overridden by a viewer..

basically  they said there are 100 different ways to find someones online status..thier concern with this policy is not being able to do it with the viewers when a person sets their status to off line..

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chetar Ruby wrote:

But onto what still concerns me, which is killing llGetAgentData's ability to see if people are online.  A lot of scripting uses this in a responcible useful manner.  Another poster pointed out RLV furniture as using it to determine when the victim has dropped offline or teleported away.  I'm a RLV scripter too, and this DIRECTLY IMPACTS my work.  It's also just a pretty bad idea to break legitimate use of this function because some people just MUST KNOW when some other person is online or not. 

I don't get the RLV problem.   If I don't want my victim to go anywhere, they won't, because I can stop them getting up, tp-ing and so on.   So if the changed event fires, I know they're not logged in, because since I don't want them wandering or teleporting off, I called @unsit=n as soon as they sat down.

If they log back in where the furniture is and they're still using RLV, their relay will ping the furniture and I know to force sit them again, so I don't need to make dataserver calls to handle that.

The only reason I can see I'm going to want to call llRequestAgentData is so that if they cheat and log back in somewhere else, I'll know sooner rather than later to reset the furniture ready for a new victim.   But, in practice, I let the owner set a cut-off time anyway, and a manual over-ride, because if your victim logs out and doesn't re-appear in an hour or so anyway, you'll probably get fed up of waiting, whether the victim's having computer problems, gone to bed for the night, logged in with an alt, or (if they're using RLVa) just said they want to log in somewhere else on the grid.

I can see problems for particular sorts of prison RP, I guess, but I have to say I'm far more upset about the general principle of breaking existing scripts than am I about anything this will do to any RLV stuff I make or that I've bought.   And on a practical level, I'm certainly more worried about what it's going to do to my vendors that need to check if the recipient is online if you try to send someone a gift, and to my subscribeomatic, than am I about what it's going to do to any of the stuff I sell.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Pussycat Catnap wrote:

Why should RLV be able to override people cheating anyway?

If someone gives up on the RP and decides to break it, they've given up on the RP. They've left the game as it were. Rather than force them to 'play' - boot em out of the game's RP zone.

 

Missing the point.  RLV can't stop people from cheating.  Duh?  Just turn it off and yer free to go.

The reasons for needing that information (someone being connected or not) are numerious, some of them more warranted than others.  But it doesn't matter how warranted they are.  That they ARE warranted, legitimate and responcible uses of that information is.

Look, if LL is going to go in there and trash llGetAgentData (can someone here tell me the point of this function after it's been buthered?  To see if the owner of an object is online and that's it?  Gee, that's useful!) then I insist they fix every other way to tell someone if who's hiding is really online.

You can't have it both ways.  FIX THEM ALL or GTFO.  Cuz fixing one and smiling 'It's fixed guys!' is really stupid.  You got groups to tactle (online status is shown in group), you need to fix SL from telling people thing like 'User offline - your message has been saved', and 'User offline - inventory has been saved.' and every other way to tell someone is there or not needs to be fixed.

Don't just fix one and say you'll fix the rest later, do it all right now, cuz with only one, or only three, if you don't get them all it's all pointless.

I'd personally just prefer it be left alone.  It's not some godforsaken invasion of privacy to know if someone is conneted or not.  I've already covered this.  WHAT IS EVEN THE POINT OF LOGGING IN IF YOU DONT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW?

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3157 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...