Devriv

Perhaps you misunderstood Medhue’s statement. He asks a very important question, one which, remarkably, despite the presence and abundance of assertive commenters in this thread, remains glaringly unanswered. With Medhue’s permission I’ll reword it only slightly: “How about people stand against the [destruction] of these nations, instead of [standing against] a ban on immigration?” The question is so simple, basic and reasonable that it would require a very good education not to ask it. In a free society, it is just the question asked by informed citizens and political commentators. Here, in this thread, it has remained unanswered because the media has not yet provided an answer that someone could safely regurgitate.

Hello Chic :smileyhappy: A few days ago a friend and I visited a clothing store. There were special offers for the store’s group members so she decided to join. For ten minutes, TEN minutes, we looked everywhere in in the store trying to find the sign, finally giving up, and were about to leave when at that very moment my little gray cells returned from their unusually long vacance and I began to zoom in very closely on the walls. Et voila, there it was! The sign was made of tens of small mesh light bulbs forming the letters of “group”, and it obviously had had its lower LODs zeroed, and could only be seen if one were to stand next to it. Another friend was very happy to have finally found a favourite hair style, but having paid for it, she noticed that it disappears from only a few meters away (I wonder how many residents realize that they may be bald in others’ viewers). And yesterday, a pair of very expensive shoes that I’ve been meaning to buy was put on sale for $250L by a very popular designer. There were no demos, so I just bought it (I have other, more recently made shoes from the same store that are perfectly fine). Again, they disappeared when looked at from just a few meters away, so I deleted them from inventory. I could go on and on: Empty “galleries”, people riding invisible mesh cars and bikes, men with distinguished coiffured hair who transform into Telly Savalas at 10 meters distance (I pity those that have to look up the name)…… As you gathered from a previous chat, my viewer LOD is the default of 1.125, but raised to 3 or 4 when taking pictures. One has no choice: the absence of lower LOD’s in mesh (never mind poor LOD’s!) has been transforming SL into an unsightly place for those who, sensibly, leave the setting at default. Whether these residents are the majority I don’t know (I hope that their numbers are growing), but I do know that they must include all the newcomers and visitors! I’ll therefore add to your warning that if they at all care about this world that we all love, they need to make the extra effort. Almost everyone that I’ve come across or know in SL has a low-end computer. My own system, a supercomputer in comparison with theirs, sets the LOD default at 1.125, not 2 as some would expect, and if I were to raise that number there will be a noticeable drop in my frame rates. Imagine the lag that they would experience if they attempted the same! Chic, if you go through the tech section of the forums, you will find complaints here and there about SL failing to take advantage of such technology as SLI (use of multiple graphics cards) or multi-core processors, and I’ve never really seen someone explaining why that is the case. Not being a programmer or an engineer I could be completely wrong, possibly even making a fool of myself, but I think the explanation maybe hinted at by this very conversation: It is to level the playing field, a democratic decision if you will. The idea is this: That all effort should be made to make SL a pleasant experience for all, and not just for those with an endless supply of cash to throw at their computers.

Regarding the memory, the speed (“frequency”) of the RAM will not make much of a difference. As long as you get any one of the speeds specified by the motherboard, which one you choose will have little effect on the performance. That is to say, they all perform well. This is why RAM speed is not mentioned in the system requirements page. As to how much RAM, 4 GB is the minimum. 8 GB would be more than sufficient, even for light multitasking. If you like to be able to perform heavier tasks in the background with ease, such as work with graphics programs like Blender or Gimp, then 16GB. If you do work in Gimp or Blender, more RAM will also let you to increase the number of undos in those programs. Using fewer or more RAM slots will also not affect performance. If you have 4 RAM slots to fill (dual channel memory), you can use 2 sticks (recommended), one for each channel, or all 4 (only for maxing out the 32 or 64GB). Less sticks is less strain on the memory controller and it’s what is usually recommended. “Would Second Life improve in performance while running on an SSD, or will that not matter?” An SSD will improve the SL experience tremendously. It’s the single best upgrade for any system.

I’m certain that Amethyst meant to say the first one. This small chart may help:

Hello Frisco Have a look at this: How to fix Windows 10 Thread Stuck In Device Driver error Since you mention that you contacted Lenovo, I expect that updating your drivers, perhaps even the BIOS, is what they suggested. Keeping the system up to date is good, but may not be the solution to these crashes. The AMD-A10 CPU’s (also referred to as APU’s) have integrated graphics, meaning that the CPU can also function as the “graphics card”. By making the need for a dedicated/discreet graphics card unnecessary, this provides a more affordable solution for users who’d use their computers for very light work like browsing, playing 2D games or watching movies. They can’t handle heavier workload, rely heavily on the system’s RAM, and can crash. I can only guess that your computer does not have a dedicated graphics card. If so, and if it’s a desktop system, you can upgrade this desktop and switch from integrated to discrete graphics by adding a graphics card to its motherboard.

Hello Christin :smileyhappy: Click “About Second Life” under “Help” in the menu bar (Top left hand side of your viewer), then copy and paste the information here. This will give the helpers your computer’s specifications, and they’ll be able to help you better.

Hi You can try this: In the menu bar, go to Develop*, Avatar, Character Test and choose Test Female (or male) You should see yourself immediately, but as a system avatar. Then, simply choose any of your saved outfits as you usually would from the Appearance window. *If you don’t see “Develop” in the menu bar, go to ME, Preferences, Advanced, and check the box next to “Show Develop Menu”.

**Hugs Chic** Chic, There’s nothing wrong with letting the uploader create the lower LODs. Please don’t think for a moment that I’d permit myself to criticize those who do or question their skills. That’s why it’s there, to be used! It was, after all, all I had when I first began building. It’s wonderful that we’re talking about the subject, instead of ignoring it, and that is the very objective of this thread. So again I thank you for it :smileyhappy: The worst one may say about the uploader is that sometimes it tends to do a less than ideal job of making the lower LOD models. In fact, I’d much rather that builders use the uploader’s LOD options than to completely eliminate the lower LODs. Objects coming apart or disappearing when we cam out is my issue, regardless of the methods used. After all, as you very correctly point out, custom LODs do not automatically translate into visually optimal LODs…by any means. Pamela, I understand, and I think everyone here is sympathetic. I’m glad the thread was made a “sticky”. "Hot topic" anyway, hehe

During a following the interview, the designer CubeRepublic made the suggestion that those who make custom LODs should perhaps be rewarded with “better LI” than those who just use the uploader’s LOD options. Paraphrasing Patch…“All I’m going to say is that we’re working on that next…I feel we should be rewarding content creators for creating highly optimized content…Right now the system actually penalizes….” This is another welcome news and will be interesting to see. Not being very techy however I’m wondering what “highly optimized” in general means in terms of LODs. We know for instance that where are concerned, the smaller and fewer the textures, the more optimized the texturing. But in terms of triangles and actual geometry, isn’t the very problem under discussion here in a sense one of “over optimization”? If here too less meant better and more optimized, then objects with zeroed lower LODs would be considered the most optimized!

Thank you for this post Chic I have a small store, but most of the time I’m building for friends or helping them convert their builds into mesh for reasonably lower LI. I’d like to reply then if I may as an amateur builder and regular SL resident. Those with their viewers’ LOD set to 4+ and with powerful computers will probably not buy better LOD/higher LI objects for the greater good of the grid (Nalytha being an exception ). With their viewer LODs set to 4, they will only see differences in the land impacts, and will therefore choose the lower LI, not knowing they’ve perhaps cast aside a build with proper LODs for one with none. But this group of people is a minority. I think that the majority of residents whose viewers’ LOD is set to 4+ do not have powerful systems. These are the people who, having set their viewer LOD to 4 in order to compensate for poor mesh LODs, are additionally rewarded with extra lag. That’s natural of course, because with viewers set to 4, they are likely rendering all mesh object within the radius of their draw distance at their highest level of detail. These people are much more likely, I think, to look for and buy items with proper LOD/higher LI. In an environment where objects have proper LODs, they’d be able to reduce lag by lowering their viewers’ LOD setting to something less taxing on their systems. There are residents of course with computers capable of the LOD setting of 4, but who choose to leave it at default. They want to see what others see, and if builders, they don’t wish to build only for those with powerful computers. The category of people you mention should be conscious of the greater good and feel some responsibility to that end, yes, but the responsibility and obligation ultimately lies with the builders. I also think that the more LODs are discussed (with friends, inworld, while shopping, by bloggers, etc), the more there will be cause for optimism. “If we go the virtuous route and design for LOD1 on an old tablet, are we limiting our sales, hence our revenue and possibly killing our business leading to our journey out the virtual door?” This can be considered the other way too of course: There are those of us who won’t purchase mesh objects with poor or zeroed lower LODs. One quick note on indoor and outdoor mesh. There can be strong arguments against it I’m sure, but I think where an object is assumed to be rezzed is irrelevant, that all or nearly all objects should be ready for use outdoors. Why do I say this? Because I see “indoor” mesh objects that come apart when viewed from across the room they are placed in. A mesh object may be made for indoors, but not every room is 7x7meters!

Rey, below is the link to Designing Worlds's interview with Patch Linden. At 07:50 he actually addresses the LOD issue https://vimeo.com/189520045

So far as the majority of residents are concerned, the inclination toward objects with lower land impact (LI) is not a “trend” but a necessity (You could speak of a trend in economy or thrift and proceed from there, but they too are rooted in necessity). If SL residents had an unlimited amount of prims at their disposal, it’s doubtful that the LI of objects would even be considered, let alone remain the residents’ primary or secondary consideration when purchasing objects. If there is a trend, it is in my opinion one of building practice, one that makes low LI a requirement of every build, large or small, simple or complex (This shouldn’t be confused with a mesh builder’s obligation to optimize his or her builds). Mesh houses may have “much less prims” than prim houses, but that alone hardly qualifies them as the “better” builds. I’m not exaggerating in the least when I say that over 90% of the mesh objects I come across in SL have poor LODs. I walk into stores and see empty rooms and nothing on the walls until I have cammed in. Far from making SL “more beautiful”, mesh appears to have had the opposite effect! I am hoping that the extra prims will be used, and welcomed by all, to allow the residents to acquire better mesh builds, and the builders to not make low LI a requirement that would compromise the integrity of the builds.

Thank you very much Arton. I think I'll redo the physics using box/analyze as I think smooth rotation would be best. An hour or two of extra work but worth it. The entire physics cost of the house was less than 5 LI, and now will probably be 30ish. One tool that Aquila and Drongle spoke about and which I was not at all familiar with was "Navmesh". I told them I'd have to "google" it (hehe), but Drongle explained that, "It's the walkable surface and obstacles...It gives a more accurate physics view than Renderb Metadata/Physics shapes. You are supposed to be able to look at it with Build/Pathfinding/View...." So I'm going to learn more about that. Never heard of it being mentioned before. --------- "Things have been odd over there for months." Chic it's selfish to say but I'm relieved to know that it's not just me then! hehe

Chic, It certainly was a relief, hehe Regarding Aditi, for months I’ve been a cloud (I get all the weird problems!) so last week I finally picked one of the new avatars to look “solid”. I don’t see your wood and glass house, but I’ve seen some of your buildings before. I follow you on Flickr already and inworld I remember looking at the ones you had at Fantasy Faire, and they were truly beautiful. Rey the script actually provided a menu to choose either phantom or solid, and we tested both, and had the same result. I think Arton got it in one, but I sent him the script anyway in case he likes to take a closer look

“And Aquila too. WOW that's service LOL.” Hehe, I’m so grateful. Yes they both came to help. Aquila and Drongle tested everything and it’s fairly certain now that the problem was not the physics of either the door or the building, but an issue with the script I was using. I’ll gift the script to Arton to have a look at as his homework assignment (hehe), as suggested, as he may find it an interesting puzzle. I’ll buy other scripts to try (other scripts that Aquila tested worked normally) but will also direct the maker of my script to this thread, as I haven’t the foggiest idea how to explain it myself! ---------------------------- Arton, just saw your post. Will send you the script as soon as I log in......

Hello everyone, I’m not quite sure why this is happening, but when I put my door script in a door, that door opens and closes as expected, but when I link the door to the mesh building I’m working on, the entire floor underneath it gives way and I sink! I say entire, because I sink into the floor even if standing far away from the door! I’ve used the script often and this is the first time I’m experiencing this physics issue. The door has box (analyze) physics as usual. However, the difference between this house and previous builds is that for this building I’ve used triangle (no-analyze) physics. I could add an extra prim to cover the floor, but I’ll be putting doors on the building’s second floor, where I won’t be able to stretch the prim due to how that floor is designed (there is a large open space). There I’d probably have to use several prims. Does the building need to have box physics in order for the door to function properly? Thank you for your help :) The building and the door will be here: secondlife://Aditi/secondlife/Mesh%20Sandbox%203/21/8/23

Hello Jennifer Your Max # of non-impostor avatars is set to 65. Lower it to 15. This will greatly help in more crowded places. At 65 your graphics card is working hard to fully render everybody. I increase the number only when I'm taking a picture of a crowd, otherwise it stays below 20 or 15. Also, I would lower the LOD for objects and sculpts from 4 to 2, and never above 2. My own is on 1.125 With that number at 4, your computer is rendering many mesh objects within your draw distance at their High and Medium Level of Detail. I hope this helps a little.

Thank you for the reply Rey :catvery-happy: So the show physics feature of the two viewers are identical? I’ve not come across any physics shapes in the official SLViewer that have appeared in any colour other than blue, so far. Henceforth I’ll be mindful of the orange and red shapes Firestorm’s LOD is not set to 4? Sorry FS, I was misinformed. As Ralph Kramden would say, “I’ve got a Big mouth!” They are most definitely not incompetent Rey; some have professional-level knowledge of modeling, texturing, and 3D software and are experts. Even the option of letting the uploader make the LODs is bypassed and the LODs (even Medium ones!) zeroed because they want low LI. This is deliberate choice, not a question of competence. On the other hand some may find making the lower LODs time consuming, which certainly can be, but the more experience one gains the faster that process becomes. Anyway, please understand that I’m speaking as an amateur and based on personal experience and observation as a regular SL resident. :matte-motes-big-grin:

Thank you very much Zed, that’s good to know. The official viewer, the viewer I’ve always used, also allows one to make the physics visible (in blue) but I don’t think it has the other options; I’ll look into it. I actually used it for the circle in question but saw no anomalies. In passing, one aspect of FS that I’m not at all enthusiastic about is its default LOD factor of 4 (or so I was informed some time ago). Yes it can be adjusted and lowered, but it should not have been made the default. One can only hope that those using it, especially builders, are mindful of the fact.

Thank you so much Arton, that made the bump go away :catvery-happy::matte-motes-big-grin: I use triangle physics often, it's very efficient and low LI, but at times it can behave in ways which I'm at a loss to explain...such as this instance And thank you very much Drongle for your help inworld

Hello everyone, :matte-motes-big-grin: I’m working on some pathways and all the pieces work as expected, except a circular one. When I connect any other piece to it, walking onto the surface of the circle produces the pump sound. This would suggest that the surfaces are uneven, but all the pieces are of the same height. In fact, I get the bump sound even when I connect the same circle to its own copy(shown below)! No such problem when the circle is set to convex hull but I need all the pieces to have prim physics. I’ve used triangle (no analyze) physics for all the pieces. I made a lower poly test mesh and have left it in the sandbox below. I used the high LOD for physics to rule out issues with my physics model. I still get the bump sound.  I’m not positive what the solution is. Your suggestions would be appreciated :matte-motes-nerdy: http://www.pasteall.org/blend/42945 secondlife://Aditi/secondlife/Mesh%20Sandbox%203/27/11/23 Thank you in advance

“We are at war with Radical Islam” To put it more accurately, albeit only halfway to the point, you have been at war with those at war with Radical Islam.

Hello Fessy. Try increasing your resolution. If it’s set to 1080p, increase it to 1440p for instance. I’d appreciate it if you could tell me if doing so increased your frame rate.

That laptops are for portability, not performance, is not controversial; Ilithios is perfectly correct. Laptops capable of running SL exist but cost twice their desktop counterparts. But even then they are not equivalent systems: A laptop graphics card like, say, the 980M is slower than the 980 desktop card; a laptop CPU doesn’t have the cooling hardware available to desktop processors…

Hello Aylissa, To go back to Windows 7, go to the Start menu, then Settings, then Update & Security, and then Recovery, where there’s the option to go back to 7. If you don’t see the option, it means that Microsoft thinks you’re no longer eligible --- they give a month after installing 10 to “downgrade”. It may take about an hour, depending on the computer, and you may have to reinstall some programs once it's finished.