161488303349

Dillon Levenque wrote: 16 wrote: the peering over the glasses thing is not actual in the librarian manual of standards and deceny. is coy and unbecoming in young ladies is that peering thing and same for old lady librarians to do. bc all the coy got rubbed out of them already ages ago. they old battle axes by then. and is nothing coy about them at all by then. except when they are. and is horrible to watch when they do that so no. is not in librarian manual that part at all jejejeje (: Having been peered at by a librarian on more than one occasion (and by more than one librarian, too, but that would take me too far afield) I don't care whether it's in the manual or not. I liked it. ;-) you are defo so doomed you know. they going to put your picture up in in the library if you not careful (: and in the Librarians Gazette as well. in the o.m.g!!! section. altho i heard rumors that they going to remove that section from the Gazette. bc seems some people been treating it as some kinda kinky dating service. dunno how true that is tho. is just what i heard jjejeejejejeje (:

i add the tl;dr version + if was me then i would not make a avatar 2.0 and impose on the world. i would make avatar 2.0 tools. so people can make whatever avatars they want. however they want i think linden are going to do this

my observation of watching linden since SL started has led me to a conclusion. dunno if is right or wrong. just seems like to me in the linden company is a philosophical tenet that everything they do is founded on. a tenet that Philip Linden established in the beginning. the tenet is that art direction of SL is the preogative of the users. is for the users only to determine this. the company will only provide tools. since Rodvik came then the company has moved back to this core philosophy at times the company staff tear themselves apart over this down the years. leading to resignations. sackings even sometimes + the lack of direction provided by the company is often portrayed/seen by us as a codey versus director battle. is the wrong portrayal i think. the difference is philosophical and goes to the core of SL. to uphold the philosophical tenet then linden as a company dont choose any direction for the art that we might make what we can make is determined by the tools. what we do make is determinded by us. if linden start to make tools that are directed by them to achieve a particular art outcome then the company is now deciding the art. not us the residents is why the company staff tear themselves apart sometimes. the division in the company is between them that want to influence the art direction of SL and them that want to leave this in our hands i think that we never going to get a linden avatar 2.0. i think they going to just keep on giving us better tools to make our own. so that we can take the avatars we make in any direction we want. bc of the core philosophical tenet of the linden company if linden do start directing then SL will just end up like any other game. like predetermined boxes. levels. and grinding it according to a linden directed game/design/art plan

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: A female librarian should wear a skirt that's well below the knee and preferably tweed, and a blouse that's buttoned either to the top or to one button down from the top. She must never wear high heels. Flat, or nearly flat shoes are a must, of course, and preferably brown or black. I hope that helps, Trinity You forgot the glasses, they must be a bit pointy... and the librarian strap that dangles from them when worn and that they dangle from when not. It's all about the glasses, Phil. Oh, and the eyes! There is the "peer over" which is necessary for people who cough more than once, and the "glare at" for people who talk above a whisper. It's all about the glasses and the eyes. And maybe a pearl necklace if she's a hottie. Yeah, it's all about the glasses, and the eyes, and the pearl necklace. ... goes off to fan herself. well! actually the glasses with the straps are practical. they not fashion statements ok. ok !! is same with the skirt and the flat shoes and the button up top flat shoes bc you on your feet most of the day. putting books away. skirt need to be below the knee and pleated. bc have to climb up ladders. and the pleats give you leg room to go up the rungs. if is to short then can give pensioners heart attacks when climbing up ladders same with the button up blouse. like schoolboys not get any reading work done if they cant see the pages in their books bc of the eye magnets + is all very proper and practical is the librarian dress code + the peering over the glasses thing is not actual in the librarian manual of standards and deceny. is coy and unbecoming in young ladies is that peering thing and same for old lady librarians to do. bc all the coy got rubbed out of them already ages ago. they old battle axes by then. and is nothing coy about them at all by then. except when they are. and is horrible to watch when they do that so no. is not in librarian manual that part at all jejejeje (:

what linden did do on the Realms was to put in some extra killers to deal to bots and scripted speed enhancers. if you go to fast or are flying then the cloud killers get you and send you home so that's kinda slowed the bots down. the ones still doing it you can now compete against. bc they cant out run you now as they did before. if they try then the clouds kill them and send to their home sim. not just to the portals on the sim + about siccing monstas onto bots. can do the standard way. like you get a monsta to chase you and then run at the bot. at the last second sideslip the bot so you not bump into it yourself. the monsta will slam straight into the bot and death for them (: + also not every avatar what is efficient is a bot. i am pretty efficient at sweeping the Realms myself. like i know where is all the blue and green crystals and the big fields of orange. i know which lines to run to sweep them all up pretty quickly and not ever have to worry about the monstas i also know the most important thing. if have swept the blue and greens then i know what time they are going to reappear am not the only one what knows these things. is lots of people work all this out as well

Dz Delicioso wrote: The problem has already been identified experimentally as an event buffer overflow caused by a timer value that is too small. Why would you solve that by ADDING a State change ( which FLUSHes the event buffer) to the mix? LSL State info sez... On state change: All listens are released. The event queue is cleared. (see Notes for a partial workaround) Adding a state change in the manner you have suggested might seem to keep the object flickering, but at the cost of (probably) dumping other events awaiting processing. The O.P. suggested the object also did pathfinding. This suggestion most likely would result in pathfinding events getting tossed and break that functionality in obscure ways. You do NOT need to make the script as complicated as these last 2 examples... The solution is making display processing as fast as possible and increase the time between events.. Change your timer value from 0.08 to 0.2 and see if the problem remains. Reduce the timer value in increments until the problem returns, and then bump it back up to give yourself some headroom when the object is in a sim that might be a little slow. sorry. I not mean to upset anyone i only mention proper way bc LSL is a state engine by design. so was just give example of how events are handled by state engines OP say has this problem and makes a example script. so out of this has comes 3 alternatives ways to think about how to make a solution 1) lengthen the timer interval 2) stop the clock 3) use states one of the things inherent to state engines is that each state take and release resources as it needs them. so is only in the design sense is it proper can make a single state and do all in that one state which have the advantage of lending itself to linear/top down style programming. which is what many people are comfortable with programming wise but it do introduce other factors. like having to recreate/replicate in code the concept of state and in this example finding the optimal timer interval the main difficulty in doing the one state way is actual estimating what is the optimum timer interval for the next script process. when estimating this then also have to factor in what is the competition in the runtime environment where the script is competing for resources with other scripts. some sims environments light loaded. others heavy. etc. so in critical situations we then end up writing code that check sim stats before executing the next script process. and so on which is what you mention also. so we agree on that is ok to do this way tho but the main consideration/drawback is that can often end up with heaps of LSL code that recreate/replicate the functionality of the builtin state engine + with things like pathfinding and listens etc then can look at the design purpose of state engines. the design is such to allow multiple processes to run simultaneously. the LSL state engine was designed with this in mind like if need to add a listen to this example object then by design we put it in a separate script. not in this script. this script just do the alpha change thing. consistently over and over without having to factor in other things that might be going on in the scripted object. and also works nicely together with everything else running on the simulator in the state engine design, llListen being for another purpose goes in another script. pathfinding in another and so on. the scripts pass messages to each other when they have to is when we start to try do all in one script then can sometimes end up fighting against the state engine itself and end up also writing lots of complicated code uneccessarily sometimes + am just chatting about state engines here now. like how they work and that. why they designed like they are. what is their point. just so people can consider and think about lots of little scripts doing one thing each is better for a state engine simulator overall performance than fewer scripts executing their own state engine interpreters. in this case coded in LSL can see with OP example how is a state engine already been created in LSL code. the use of a running flag. like based on the state of a global flag then do this or do that the use of the global running flag is quite a bit different from the use of the global side variable. the side variable is a data store. the running flag is directing script execution flow based on state

altho (: if was me then I probably have 3 states. to avoid flicker in this case and add a teeny tiny bit of more efficient by not apply ALL_SIDES on every timer having a main state separate from the default state means that can have a initialise section for script start and a separate one for your runtime. e.g: integer side = 0;default{ state_entry() { llSetAlpha(.0, ALL_SIDES); llSetAlpha(1., side); state main }}state main{ state_entry() { llSetTimerEvent(.08); } timer() { state alpha; } } state alpha{ state_entry() { llSetAlpha(.0, side); ++side; if(side == 7) side = 0; llSetAlpha(1., side); state main; }} edit add the above is not actual total code safe. so I add the safety part below. is to turn off the timer in main state_exit state main{ state_entry() { llSetTimerEvent(.08); } timer() { state alpha; } state_exit() { llSetTimerEvent(.0); } }

Charolotte Caxton wrote: I think eventually creators will make complete avatars to wear over the existing avatar. For example, that guy on the left, if someone made him you could just wear it over your current avatar and look just like that, minus all the copyright infringement issues. At first there would only be limited things that avatar could wear, but with enough time I think businesses could make avatars along with corresponding clothing and accessories. Much like the petites. They are an avatar that you wear over your existing avatar and there are many fashions and accessories made by different creators you can buy for them, aos work with them and stuff like that. Almost everything in SL is user created anyways. At first there would not be much diversity, but given enough time I think there would be more. Also, I am not sure how it works, but some sliders do affect mesh shapes, like the petites you can lengthen their arms torso legs and widen them and such, maybe if done right, enough of the facial sliders could be rigged so those would work also, but I am just guessing. eta: or even if the sliders couldn't work, the avatar creator could make options, such as several different noses, eyes, cheeks, chins, lips, ears, etc so different combinations would make different faces so people could still be unique. I agree is the future for SL. like you say is going to take time but we already starting to see some things. like mesh feet mesh hands mesh breasts and even mesh heads now. will take a while for the creators/designers to work out some standards but in time they all going to be mix n match pretty much. with skins to match/blend

Phil Deakins wrote: Charolotte Caxton wrote: Who is that? You must have skipped that thread sorry Charolotte. I couldnt help it (: was Phils fault tho q; (: he was going on about Mr Holding and Mr Willy in this other thread about cricket. they are cricketers + edit add: look he doing it again here

if is a tiny timer issue then can maybe try like float TIME_BETWEEN_DO = .08;state_entry(){ llSetTimerEvent(TIME_BETWEEN_DO); //start}timer(){ llSetTimerEvent(.0); //stop // do big long stuff ... llSetTimerEvent(TIME_BETWEEN_DO); //continue} other one is can do a statechange in the timer. so to suspend the defaulttimer until the statechange is finished. this the proper way to do it. but the way above is ok if more used to linear/topdown style programming statechange something like integer running;integer count;integer side;default{ state_entry() { if(!running) llSetTimerEvent(.08); else llSetTimerEvent(.0); running = !running; } timer() { state alpha; } }state alpha{ state_entry() { ++count; if (count == 7) count = 1; if (count == 1) side = 0; else if (count == 2) side = 1; else if (count == 3) side = 2; else if (count == 4) side = 3; else if (count == 5) side = 4; else if (count == 6) side = 5; else if (count == 7) side = 6; llSetAlpha(0, ALL_SIDES); llSetAlpha(100, side); state default; }} edit add: just say that don't need the running flag in this state way. can just go in the default state_entry state_entry() { llSetTimerEvent(.08) }; and thats it a complete example would be something like integer side = 0;default{ state_entry() { llSetTimerEvent(.08); } timer() { state alpha; } }state alpha{ state_entry() { llSetAlpha(.0, ALL_SIDES); llSetAlpha(1., side); ++side; if(side == 7) side = 0; state default; }}

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Phil, I think I know the version by Nina and Frederik, but can't find it online. :-( cant find it either. but I find a pic of the original demo record

I thought the vid was going to be about Mr Willy Holding and how he been affected

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Are bots tacky? only the ones that not in vogue

how much money did you lose on the Starlust project Charli?

Penny Patton wrote: 16 wrote: Penny Patton wrote: One comparison people should be making is how does paying for a sim stack up to paying for the equivailent amount of server space with a web hosting provider? that a starting point. then have to add a margin on for the development of the SL world. straight out web hosting provider don't carry that kinda additional dev overhead I agree, but I'm not certain the sheer amount of cost SL hosting has over web hosting can be entirely justified by development costs. Then there's also the issue that LL seems intent on wasting most of their develment budget. They refuse to hire people like an art director or an experience designer, both of whom are absolutely vital for LL to make informed development decisions, and they throw away an obscene amount of money on projects that prove to be, to the surprise of no one except LL, entirely useless, promising new features that get dropped without explanation, or half-finished, poorly developed features that get tossed to us broken. If they hired an art director and an experience designer, gave them some authority and followed their recommendations, they might be able to better manage their development resources and do more with less overhead and waste in the long term. i think that the linden solution to this is mesh. and is going to be up to us to make/interpret/imagine the inworld same as ever we starting to see mesh avatars now. whole and parts. we will get more and more of them as well bc of tools like avastar. if linden do anything big next on avatars i think is going to be in that direction like custom bones better rigging stuff like that. i think the deformer been stalled bc of this. rather than try fit a deformer onto what is by todays standards quite a primitive shape then how can deformation be done in the context of custom shapes. if that is the thinking then i would actual support that + sometimes people point to things like LDPW as linden getting involved in content control/building/standards. is kinda true but only if look at from the Estate Manager pov. like mainland is their estate and so they compelled to put some money into their estate from that pov if linden thought they could then then i think they would flick the mainland continents to the Estate Barons and withdraw even further from the day to day running of the inworld. just be a world/experience platform builder and farm out everything else

Czari Zenovka wrote: "How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood." or ..... !!! (: how much wood would a woodchuck chuck up if a woodchuck could upchuck wood

can be caused by the tattoo layer with tattoo layer I find is best to put them on last. like dress from outer layers in. dunno why it goes better that way. it just does on my computer

Penny Patton wrote: One comparison people should be making is how does paying for a sim stack up to paying for the equivailent amount of server space with a web hosting provider? that a starting point. then have to add a margin on for the development of the SL world. straight out web hosting provider don't carry that kinda additional dev overhead

Ceka Cianci wrote: best selling search changes from day to day.. what may be on there today will be different tomorrow.. yes have noticed that. I like to sort by best selling. firstly and mostly just to see what other people are buying at the moment. I don't use the other sorts much anymore after I set up my filters then just flick thru the pages. when I see something I like then click into the shop and see what else they got. sometimes like quite often end up getting something else instead of the one I first clicked on mostly bc I not want to go somewhere and end up looking at someone else with same outfit on who done same as me same time. lol shame that (:

Qie Niangao wrote: 16 wrote: no it doesn't. it generates pages and pages of stuff you search for. you going to all kinds of risqué stuff on any keyword if you don't filter/moderate. is same google and bing image search if you don't filter/moderate on them Not even close. I believe they're still using a stock version of Lucene for Marketplace and haven't bothered with relevance (or have overridden it with some other silly metric) to rank-order the results. This is the kind of result one would get with Google if Page Rank were never invented. i dont understand when i read claims about full of slutwear like pages and pages if i want a dress then i go: Search in: Apparel Maturity: General Keywords: dress Sort by: Best Selling Filter: \ Women's \ Women's Dresses \ Casual Dresses (or kind am looking for) Price: however much money i want to spend when i do this then is pages and pages of normal ordinary dresses that i can see in any G rated RL fashion mag

Charli Infinity wrote: better hate in second life than hate in real life better to not hate at all

Qie Niangao wrote: Marketplace, however, is a different story. There I think the OP's point is well-taken. I hate searching for anything on Marketplace because most any query generates pages and pages of slutwear with separate listings for every tint in the spectrum. Although the merchants seem to spam every popular keyword, they fortunately are forced to choose a single listing category, so it's possible to screen out the worst of the noise with a category search -- unless, of course, the category is any kind of apparel, for which Marketplace shopping is just dreadful. no it doesn't. it generates pages and pages of stuff you search for. you going to all kinds of risqué stuff on any keyword if you don't filter/moderate. is same google and bing image search if you don't filter/moderate on them

Charli Infinity wrote: I simply asked if anyone can relate. Not that I don't like SL but I just find it embarassing to admit in real life. ok you are embarrassed. can understand now why you been going on and on. saying the same thing over and over like we the other people in SL embarrass you by how we look. how we dress. what we do. what we say. how we act. how we conduct ourselves. how you think others outside of SL view us. what they might think or say about your involvement with us if you admit to it you not only embarrassed you also ashamed. ashamed of us and ashamed of yourself for being with us. like somehow we are your dirty tacky little secret and this ashames you is nothing we can do about this for you. if your feelings are going to change then will have to come from within yourself

Charli Infinity wrote: You will never see lola type boobs on Vogue nor those jersey shore cheap dresses. Those belong maybe on men's magazines where clothes don't matter. The presentation is completely different. The marketplace is tacky and not the fashion kind of tack but jersey shore type of tack. vogue magazine is a G rated publication. if you filter your market place searches on G then you will find the same maybe you not know how to use the search very well. some people are like that if so then can try the SL fashion feeds. can start with http://iheartsl.com/ is one of the many SL fashion feeds. is heaps of others as well

Charli Infinity wrote: Where's the tacky in those covers you show? They're all well done unlike the vulgar in your face jersey show look of SL. you don't know anything about fashion do you. or even Vogue magazine. you just pulled that name out of fresh air. appears the name on the label is blinding you. you not even looking at the pics critically by the same measure you actual don't even shop on SL market place either. if you did then you would know what is best selling and what is not best selling is the easy way to proof what you saying is actual wrong try: search keyword: dress. general. apparel. womens. dresses. best selling. then flick thru the covers and compare to the Vogue covers and categorise in the same way like I said tho way back at the top of this thread. we get what we look for