Jump to content

The resident who provided the previous content, if any, has replaced it with this generic statement.

Qwalyphi Korpov

By Qwalyphi Korpov,
in General Discussion Forum

 Share
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 4439 days.

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

Recommended Posts

Knowl Paine

Knowl Paine

Posted
Posted

For some time I did believe that the Lab was moving toward being only an ISSLP, (Internet Service Second Life Provider) and that every SL function or feature would be contracted to 3rd parties. The Lab would only act as a Host.

I oppose LLC's (Limited Liability Corporations) because they claim to want to be responsible for a person, place, or thing, but, by their own declaration, they only wish to do so with limited liability or responsibility. This makes no sense to me because it is nonsense. The idea that this business model represents the current pinnacle of Human evolution is very disheartening.

Some of the recently announced changes have changed my perspective. It is possible that additional functions will be announced as exclusive In-house only functions.

 

Are you certain that your hat is made from tin? Tin is about $10 a pound, highly malleable, low toxicity and impervious to many forms of corrosion. I think that production of consumer Tin foil ended sometime in the 1950's.

Aluminum Foil replaced Tin because of the high cost of Tin. Aluminum oxidizes rapidly when exposed to oxygen and is found in the brains of Alzheimers patients. Because the aluminum is so thin, it is malleable; much like the side effect produced with the consumption of it.

You should hold onto that hat if it is Tin. The value of Tin will continue to rise.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pussycat Catnap

Pussycat Catnap

Posted
Posted
Knowl Paine wrote:

I oppose LLC's (Limited Liability Corporations) because they claim to want to be responsible for a person, place, or thing, but, by their own declaration, they only wish to do so with limited liability or responsibility. This makes no sense to me because it is nonsense. The idea that this business model represents the current pinnacle of Human evolution is very disheartening. 

Its the current pinnacle of human exploitation and is, quiet literally, facism. Look up the definition of the word facism: a nation based on control by corporations and military.

The modern 'deregulation model' has led to capitalism morphing into its natural worst child; facism. Where the power of the state is used to enforce the will of corporate masters:

 

pepper.banner.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ansariel Hiller

Ansariel Hiller

Posted
Posted

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:

 

See?  The V1 viewer provides the old pre-Web Profile profiles.  Those contain data that has privacy protection in the LL V3 viewer and on the My.SecondLife.com service.  ("I did not see that coming" says purchaser of former LL V1 viewer)

 

Legacy profiles are perfectly fine - that was explicitly asked for in the TPV. And legacy profiles can only show what the servers delivers. So if there is a privacy violation, it's LL's fault. But we all know that regulary happens also with web profiles if some "cool new feature" is rolled out with privacy setting to the least restrictive available - or existing settings are changed to that as part of a bug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Knowl Paine

Knowl Paine

Posted
Posted

The distribution of the World's wealth and resources (or lack of it) may be proof that the majority of human activity on this planet, is to and for the benefit of the few. With this understanding, one can conclude that the State of the World we have today is the World they want.

The majority of individuals who are "responsible" for politics, healthcare, economics and religion, all have one thing in common. They all attended private Ivy League schools who students are considered to be the "best" humanity has to offer. 

If these schools are so great; why aren't all schools Ivy League? Could it be that two separate curriculums are being taught to the people? One for the Administrators and the other for the servants?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ceka Cianci

Ceka Cianci

Posted
Posted

actually Oz said legacy profiles are fine now until the day they break ..if that ever happens in the future with the changes they make..

what i see that is going on is what LL has wanted for a long time..Philip talked about it as well..

everyone on any viewer having the same second life grid experience..

that's for those that keep updated..

that means if you jump on a firestorm or any other viewer ..that your second life grid experience will be the same..

things that are client side only..like build tools and AO's and personal windlight settings or a kazillion attatch points or bouncy bewbies ect are fine...if anything is showing or happening to other users out in second life..then they want the same experience seen or experienced from any viewer that can see or experience it..if it is just a client side experience..they are not worried about it..

they proabably realized that they will never get everyone on one viewer to have the same exact experience on the grid..so they are making it  to where  all viewers are going to have the same grid experience..

v1's they said those won't be going anywhere until over time when fixes have them so broken that it's pointless pretty much to use them..

one day they will be so broken that  they won't really be useful..

none of this is word for word.. just what i remember  and in my own words..

they are not worried about older viewers..they pretty much said ..those will become outdated over time on their own from updates..they can't do anything about the person that comes to sl and downloads one time and never updates..

this is about the updated viewers from here on out pretty much.

around 75% are on mesh viewers..they are not worried about the v1 viewers at all..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ceka Cianci

Ceka Cianci

Posted
Posted

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:

Ceka Cianci wrote:

actually Oz said legacy profiles are fine now until the day they break ..if that ever happens in the future with the changes they make..

Hmmm...  the TOS says (I'm paraphrasing) that the TOS is the entire agreement between the user and LL.  Stuff you read elsewhere, heard from someone in a meeting and so on don't make no nevermind.

So you tell me OZ says you can ignore the new TPV Policy as it would apply to legacy profiles.  Per the TOS that don't make no nevermind.

I suppose I'll just keep pointing out the disconnect between policy and practice.

(Did u have ur TinFoilHat on when u listened to that meeting?   I ask cuz you're being all reasonable n stuff)

 

 

i'm sure when an outdated viewer has to do a manditory update..they will either have to agree or disagree..

they are not worried about outdated viewers..if their fixes haven't broken it in older viewers then more than likely it's ok..when it breaks they will know hehehe

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lucinda Bulloch

Lucinda Bulloch

Posted
Posted

Logic says that DNA is universal, and that aliens are human and just a bit more intelligent and that the planet is being taken over by a small group of them, but that is logic that the human race here can't face, judging by the actions of these invaders this is not the first time they have done it and are using very old and well tried plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ceka Cianci

Ceka Cianci

Posted
Posted

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:

Ceka Cianci wrote:

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:

Ceka Cianci wrote:

actually Oz said legacy profiles are fine now until the day they break ..if that ever happens in the future with the changes they make..

Hmmm...  the TOS says (I'm paraphrasing) that the TOS is the entire agreement between the user and LL.  Stuff you read elsewhere, heard from someone in a meeting and so on don't make no nevermind.

So you tell me OZ says you can ignore the new TPV Policy as it would apply to legacy profiles.  Per the TOS that don't make no nevermind.

I suppose I'll just keep pointing out the disconnect between policy and practice.

(Did u have ur TinFoilHat on when u listened to that meeting?   I ask cuz you're being all reasonable n stuff)

 

 

i'm sure when an outdated viewer has to do a manditory update..they will either have to agree or disagree..

they are not worried about outdated viewers..if their fixes haven't broken it in older viewers then more than likely it's ok..when it breaks they will know hehe

Perhaps you'd see my point better looking through the other end of the the telescope.

Suppose you were to buy the V1 Viewer from LL.  One day later they ban that viewer from logging on citing various violations of the TPV Policy (including that it puts data with V3 Viewer privacy options on display without regard to the users privacy settings)   You say something like "I did not expect that. OZ said blah blah at some meeting & I have it on tape."  It all ends up in arbitration.  You try to introduce your tape of the meetings.  The arbitrator holds up his/her hand and notes the clear language in the TOS stating that the agreement itself is the only agreement between the parties.  Other documents, statements, etc. do not add to or alter the agreement. 

So - don't go buying the V1 Viewer from LL. 

& if you do - don't come crying to me when they ban it.

i would ask for an update or my money back..and i would get one or the other..that's all..

i'm sure they know the law..

i don't think they would be so stupid as to do that..not without having an update ready.

if i would be crying because they wouldn't give me an update and it went to court..i would be crying all the way to the bank lol

according to California law..hehehehe *winks*

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ceka Cianci

Ceka Cianci

Posted
Posted

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:

Knowl Paine wrote:

I wasn't thinking big enough.

I think you mean sell the entire platform to be run on independent servers, and not for sale as in for use on LL servers; is that what you mean?

Well... at this point I may have confused everyone (including me)

At the start I put on my TinFoilHat.  That helps me think of conspiracies n stuff like that. 

Then I dreamed up this way for the current LL V1 Viewer to become a TPViewer.  That's why I said LL sells the V1 Viewer to a 3rd party.  That lets me play around with the idea of LL's own product suddenly becoming an 'outlaw 3rd party viewer' that violates the revised TPViewer Policy.

My example violation is the legacy profile which the LL V1 Viewer (& many existing TPViewers) provide to the user.  The LL V3 Viewer uses web profiles.  There are privacy setting for the various elements of the web profiles.  When accessed as web profiles using the LL V3 Viewer those privacy settings are respected.  Those using the LL V1 Viewer are fed a somewhat reformatted version of the web profile data.  The web profile privacy settings are ignored by the LL V1 Viewer.

Some would say that there's no need for concern.  They've heard that LL doesn't care that web profile privacy settings are easily bypassed.

Now the TPV Policy does not apply to the LL V1 Viewer because it's not 3rd party.  Some might expect LL to hold itself to the same standard they hold others to.  But it's their football.

Hope that helps.  It's not about a real world sale of the viewer.  Just a thought exercise.

(maybe you weren't thinking tiny enough)

i see what you were doing now..it's like they sold a viewer to me that i could set up for users to use..

not just sel me a viewer so i could log onto their grid lol

so i would become like a phoenix dev so to speak rather than a user on an older LL viewer..

i was looking at it as an ongoing customer of LL's rather than a developer lol

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ceka Cianci

Ceka Cianci

Posted
Posted

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote:

Ceka Cianci wrote:

.... stuf ....

i see what you were doing now..it's like they sold a viewer to me that i could set up for users to use..

not just sel me a viewer so i could log onto their grid lol

so i would become like a phoenix dev so to speak rather than a user on an older LL viewer..

i was looking at it as an ongoing customer of LL's rather than a developer lol

 

Yeah. LOLs.  I kinda threw it out there without making clear that the 3rd party then distributes the viewer to the residents and so on.   So it was confusing... like some of those dream things on TV.

you had me looking up laws N stuff LOL

crying_woman_at_window005.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 4439 days.

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

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...