Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
WhiteStar Magic

llRequestAgenData(uuid,DATA_ONLINE) changes resulting from Privacy Policy

116 posts in this topic

Quite possibly the problem doesn't exist on OpenSim.    

However, that is not a great deal of help if you are trying to deliver objects in SL, where the problem most certainly exists.

Try it yourself in SL -- make sure your IMs are set to go to email, drop this in a prim along with a copy/transfer object,  touch the object and log out for 10 minutes or so.   Then log back in and see how many objects it's managed to deliver, as compared with the emails you've received:

 

integer counter;key query;key id;string object;default{	state_entry()	{	}	touch_start(integer total_number)	{		id = llDetectedKey(0);		llSetTimerEvent(300.0);	}	timer()	{		query = llRequestAgentData(id,DATA_ONLINE);	}	dataserver(key requested, string data)	{		if(requested == query){			if((integer)data ==FALSE){				object = llGetInventoryName(INVENTORY_OBJECT,0);				llSetTimerEvent(0.0);				while(counter<30){					llGiveInventory(id,object);					llInstantMessage(id,"Sending object #"+(string)counter);					counter++					}			}		}	}}

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Innula Zenovka has wroten
"However, that is not a great deal of help if
you are trying to deliver objects in SL,
where the problem most certainly exists."

But the cap is on the function llgiveinventory . There is no link with llrequestagentdata .
To check if this someone is online by llrequestagentdata is wrong.
Because if you log off in an another sim , you will be online for the other sims
while 10 minutes .
So you can loose inventory too.

Zanara Zenovka has wroten
"Maybe try some item deliveries in SL using various methods
and get back to us."
But there are some existing .
For instance , a client-server method where the client contacts
by http the server , and gives the uuid of the avatar .
The server answers and gives the inventory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Limits

"Capped- Maximum number of offline messages (involving IMs, inventory offers, group notices and group invitations) received before messages get capped is 25."

https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlGiveInventory

"If destination is an avatar that refuses to accept it (by manual decline or muting), is in busy mode, or is offline with instant messages capped, it is not returned to the prim's inventory; it is deleted.

  • It is not returned to the owner. It does not show up in their lost and found or any other inventory folder.
  • It is not put in the target's trash folder."

That is, if a scripted object -- be it a vendor sending an item as a gift to someone else, or a subscribeomatic sending out notecards -- sends something to someone whose IMs are capped, then the item simply vanishes.

There's no way to know, when the avatar is offline, if his or her IMs have been capped.   So it's far safer to wait until you know the avatar is online before attempting to deliver the item, since if the avatar is online, then you don't have to worry about their messages being capped.

That's why a lot of subscribeomatics and MM boards (and vendors, if the destination isn't the purchaser) check to make sure people are online before trying to deliver stuff.   It greatly reduces -- though by no means avoids -- the danger of stuff getting lost in transit.

It's an imperfect workround for a very real problem.   I'll be delighted when we don't have to use it any more, but the fact of the matter is, at the moment we do need to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is true that there is a delay with this function of up to a half hour for online status change to be detected, but it is usually much faster (mostly within five or ten minutes).  Even in the case of a half hour it is not a problem for delivery because most people do not seem to cap in the first half hour after they log out unless something is rapidly sending them things (like the test script) so the delivery should get there under the wire.  The delay is even a help when it comes to delivering things on login since it gives the customer a little time to start clearing messages before dumping more on them. 

In the case of the help person on duty thing (assuming that it is the typical setup) the problem is not with them starting the 'on duty' cycle since they usually touch the prim to start it, it is in making sure that they are still online afterwards in case they have to go offlline in a hurry or get dumped offline by connection problems or whatever.  For that it is not practical for the person to go back and go off duty at the prim itself.  I have also heard of systems where there is no touch start, the help person simply logs in and the script detects them (or an attachment sends the base script a message to put them on duty) so the person would not even be going to the online help kiosk or whatever to log in.  In both of those help desk duty tracking situations the logout detect delay is not much of a problem since the chances of someone hitting the help button in the small window are low enough, and the delay in detecting login can actually be a good thing in the second case because it gives the helper time to get organized before possible help requests start coming in.

Overall the delay in llRequestAgenData information update is not a problem for most legitimate uses so the function is not "made useless by the delay". 

I am not sure how that http method mentioned earlier in the thread is supposed to work, i have avoided anything that requires a private website to work so i have ignored the http functions in LSL, but if that function requires an offgrid database or other non-SL web site to work then it would not have a very high acceptance.  Many merchants in SL are artistic types not technical people and setting up external sites to work with LSL scripts is not something they want to deal with for a hobby, many do not even have any presence on the web at all except for maybe a facebook page or deviant art page or something like that much less a scriptable site somewhere.  I personally am very wary of things on the web, and something that requires registration on a private site offgrid somewhere is a definite no-go for me for example.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this , but you read the half of words

"If destination is an avatar that refuses to accept it (by manual decline or muting), is in busy mode, or is offline with instant messages capped, it is not returned to the prim's inventory; it is deleted."

So your method to give inventory in checking if they are online by llrequestagentdata is wrong .

Because people can be busy and it will fail

Because the refresh of the status online has not been done , and it will fail

And if you want to ckeck the busy status , the script needs to be in the same prim that the avatar

 

A better and sure method is that user requests explicitelly ( by script , hud, attachemen,manually  or else )  he wants the new item  , so you don t need llrequestagendata.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me try again.

I want to buy a present for my friend from a vendor.   My friend is not online.   The objects are only sold copy/mod, so I can't buy one and give it to him later.   He is offline, and I don't know when he and I will next be online at the same time.

If I buy it from the vendor and the vendor tries to send it to him right away, there is a danger that his IMs are capped and the present will be deleted, so it makes sense for the vendor to check whether he's online or not before trying to deliver the item.

Certainly, there's a risk that the gift still won't make it, because my friend might refuse it, or might go into busy mode as soon as he logs in, but at least the vendor has removed one main cause of deliveries failing by making sure he's online (and, in consequence, his IMs aren't capped).  

I don't know if you have ever either made vendors or use them extensively in the course of your SL business.   I have scripted them, and my business partner have vendors all over the place in SL, and I assure you that checking on people's online status before trying to deliver things, if the recipient is not the person paying for the item, is a basic precaution.

I was delighted to hear Oz say that LL are working on ways to improve delivery systems so we don't have to do these checks, but until I don't have to worry about items being lost because messages are capped, they're very necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad instance .

 

Firstly , in your instance , the seller knows who is the buyer and who would be the receiver .

If the object is copy/mod/no transfert , he can easily and without risk resend his item if it fails . Indeed , what is the difference between the case where the receiver receives the gift and does a copy , and between where the receiver receives the gift twice ? None .

The selloe has necessary some logs about the transaction and about the name of the avatar who must receives the gift . Do the seller can verify if there is complain , that someone doesn t try to earn a gift without have paid it.

The problem is only for no copy / no transfert iterms . These items are less frequent  because they interest less the users

 

 

Secondly, your instance is unrreal . Never someone will spend money to make a gift to someone when the other is offline .

Why ? Because the receiver , when he will log in , and if his hims are not capped , will receive the object without message certificating that this object is sure .  The message is "nameof object wants to give you nameoftheobjectgifted". The name of the sender object may be easily modified by a giefer to tell "the super hipy shop wants to give you the super object 10000l$ worth value" 

And this risk that the reciever will refuse your item , is higher and more frequent that to have his ims capped

And, because  the receiver can t trust to accept items from people he doesn t know , he will refuse . So the buyer won t  take the risk to give a gift when the other is offline . By my experience , i have never seen around me someone giving a gift when the other is offline ( except noobs ) Always the gifts were online

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL ...:smileyvery-happy:  I told myself that I wasn't going to make any more replies in this pointless thread, but I can't resist......

Secondly, your instance is unrreal .
Never someone will spend money to make a gift to someone when the other is offline .

@Nickel -- You have obviously (a) never sold anything in SL (b) never read the hundreds of complaints in our forums from people who have failed to receive items -- including gifts -- because they were not in world when the items were delivered.  The situation that Innula described is very common indeed.  People buy and send gifts whenever they like, often without knowing whether the recipient is logged in.  Most people who receive gifts or their own purchases when they are not in world have no trouble at all. Very few end up refusing them when they log in. However, if they have received more than 25 IMs, group notices, group invitations, notecards, and objects while they were logged out, those items are never delivered.

OK, now I really am done.  :smileytongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It never ceases to amaze me how some will cling to their own theory of correctness without any actual experience in the matter...

Just remember:

"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."

- Yogi Berra


eta: yes my reply is listed as reply to Rolig, but we know who i'm directing that at ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it has much to do with it except for maybe a general panic reaction to any government legislation involving the internet that could be warped into an unrecognizable monster by opposition cliques before it actually sees daylight as a law and bite the industry as a result.

Nothing about the function seems to be directly applicable to the legislation as it stands now, LL does not collect and save online data using it, especially not in a personally identifiable way.  While others could possibly use it to record avatars online hours it really is not very accurate in that role and it does not give any personal information about the person it is used on.  It is more like a cell phone, the towers know whether a person is in the network whether they choose to answer it or not, and it makes little difference whether the network tells the caller the other phone is not being answered or if it is not found on the network at the moment (which some of them do, or at least did).

The only way someone could use it for ferreting out RL data would be if they could somehow compare avatar online status with account login and logout times, and LL is not likely to give out account logs.  Even if someone could hack in and get them the delay of up to a half hour or so in the functions update would mean that tens of thousands of false positives would be generated by that method, rendering it unpractical if not completely useless.

In its role of increasing the chances that someone can receive an item or message without capping problems it is useful, as a precision tool for tracking online status for nefarious purposes like breaking personal security it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I have a serious problem with is that this post will show in a google search if I search on my avatar name.  My avatar first name is a real life location and so just searching on that location will cause this post to show up in a real life search.   So the privacy issure takes on a whole new aspect.  I do not want my forum posts nor my jira to be in the real world public.  I have to log in to post to this forum and the jira but it can be found in a google search.  I fail to see the reason for the log in.  I think the cross polination between rl and sl is a serious one that needs to be fixed.  So it seems rediculous that I can't see the on line status of someone but can read their post if they posted here through a google search.   Am I speaking clear enough here that my issue is understood?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Darkie Minotaur wrote:

That can easily be helped: Don't write posts. :smileywink:

And don't choose a name that includes information that is a dead giveaway to your RL identity.  (I know, it's a little late to think of that now .... :smileyhappy:  )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Login to post on a public forum is the normal thing, it helps keep spammers out.  Also one should not put things in them that one does not want everyone to see, since the point of public forums is to publicly discuss things.

Login to browse forums are usually very annoying to use since normal search does not work on them and their built in search is usually usless which makes finding something you need on it a long boreing process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0