Jump to content

ChinRey

Advisor
  • Content Count

    6,479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,480 Excellent

About ChinRey

  • Rank
    Lag fighter

Recent Profile Visitors

4,050 profile views
  1. Oh, it has nothing to do with Sansar directly. Gayngel posted a link to an article about Sansar and that's where I got this. So I never read that article.
  2. No, i'm usually too preoccupied with my own "clever" replies to notice such things.
  3. No, they can't. Even the total transaction volume on MP is considerably smaller than LL's tier income and they'll have to let the merchants keep a little bit too. They've already sqeezed the MP fees as far as they can and unless they make a serious upgrade to the whole thing, there's no way they can justify or risk increasing them even more. As for a more populated grid, dream on. There is nothing in the foreseeable future that can cause SL to collapse, that's true, but nor is there any plan I've heard of, neither from LL or from users, that could possibly give it a significant popularity boost outside its established clientelle. Or to put it another way: SL isn't going anywhere but it isn't going anywhere either.
  4. Actually, that blog post worried me quite a bit when I first read it and still does, because there seems to be nor eason advertise so loudly something as obvious as that. I mean, hiring six developers, programmers and QA people for five years is a "multi-million dollar investment" and I really hope and believe they're putting quite a bit more into it than that.
  5. No it isn't. Linden Lab is clearly working hard to keep their revenue but there's nothing that suggests the situation is critical. That's not outsourcing, just a practical restructuring. They split the money transaction part of their activities into a separate company but TIlia is still 100% owned and run by Linden Lab. (The name is a hint there btw, Tilia is the latin name for Linden.)
  6. All this too keep people away from a tree... that's one of the most beautiful pieces of ove-engineering I've ever seen!
  7. Come to think of it, you can use a physics prim to create a "restricted area" of any size. Then a simple little script to turn it phantom (or shrink away) whenever somebody who is supposed to have access tries to enter.
  8. Yes, that's the literal meaning of the OP's question but I don't think you can make a security orb with that small a range (and if you coudl it dwould be just as small range vertically too) and you can't partition off a pracel less tha 4x4 m of course.
  9. But trees are made for walking and lounging under, Rolig! Assuming this is a mesh tree, there are three possible explanations for this. --- The easiest one to check and fix is that the physics of the tree may have been accidentally been changed to convex hull at some point. Right click on the tree, select "Edit" and then click on the "Feautres" tab in the edit window. Check that Physics Shape Type is set to "Prim", not "Convex Hull": Convex Hull is only for meshes thay only need very simple physics and should never be used for trees. --- If that doesn't work, the creator has made a mistake. Everybody does that every now and then. If it's a skilled mesh plant maker who knows how to make workable physics models, contact them and I'm sure they will fix it, send you a corrected tree and probably even thank you for bringing their attention to the issue. --- If it wasn't made by a skilled mesh plant maker, there may still be a solution. It's hardly ideal and it only works if the tree is modifiable (it shold be). In the edit window, select the "object tab" and set the tree to phantom: That switches physics off completely for the tree so you can walk under it as much as you like. Unfortuantely it also means you can walk straight through it so it's not really a good solution. However, there is a hack that many unskilled mesh maker use when they can't figure out how to make physics model: a "physics prim". Set the tree to phantom as described above, then rez a prim and change its size and postiion to roughly match the tree trunk: It doesn't have to match the shape of the trunk precisely and it doesn't have to very far up. SL physics isn't that precise anyway. Then set the transparency of the prim to 100% so you don't see it: As I said, this is a hack and it's not something any serious mesh plant maker would do. But if it's a tree you didn't make yourself, it may be the only reasonably acceptable way.
  10. I'm glad to ehar this was sorted out but in case others with the same problem read this, the problem is what I marked with red here. Checking the "Allow group" checkbox will always block public access even if "Anyone can visit" is switched on.
  11. Sure. Look at this for example: Well, it probably doesn't look too good with a placeholder texture and no objects on it but it's a full sim mesh ground with no visible seams anywhere. There are two challenges to this. One is to avoid visible gaps between the elements. The solution is precise positioning of the vertices along the joints and precise overall sizes for each element to avoid rounding errors and ther inaccuracies both in Blender (or whatever 3D software you use) and in SL. The other challenge is to avoid misaligned normals along the joints. There are two solutions to this. The simple one that I prefer is to add the joints in places where you don't get any angles over them. The more complex solution - the one I used for this landscape but usually try to avoid - is to use custom normals. Edit: I probably shuld have mentioned, the uploader will scale any 64 m mesh down to 63.9 m - and all other dimensions porportionally. That's not a problem at all, just remember to scale it up after uploading.
  12. Reducing the size of the keyword field will probably do more harm than good. For a start there are perfectly legitmate reasons why merchants woud want to fill up the field to capcaity and more with perfectly legitimate and relevant keywords. There are also so many ways for cheaters to work around it. I used to do website search optimization before Google and Fast came along and changed the game. The early search engines often tried to reduce the significance of the keyword meta tag because of all the keyword spamming in them. They always gave it up because it only meant the cheaters started spamming other searchable parts of their web pages instead. The MP search engine is very much in the style of the old web search engines like Alta Vista and HotBot. Those companies never found a real solution to keyword spamming even though they had far more resources than LL and a far stronger incentive to try. One possible remedy would be to add a tag cloud with the keywords on the listing pages. One of the reasons why keyword spamming is so popular among the less hoenst merchants, is that the regular buyer can't see them so they don't know why all those non-matches turn up in search. Displaying the keywords on the listing pages (but clearly separated from the text body) should help a lot discouraging merchants from keyword spamming.
  13. Now I really have reason to complain. Where in the TOS did I give LL permission to read my mind and steal ideas I've never shared with anybody else???
  14. Yes and that's why I referred to what Lindens themselves have said throughout my post. Read the Ebbe quote again. Do you realise what it means when somebody in his position and with his experience says something like that in that context? Translated to plain English with all the cotton removed it means: "this thing is so f***ed up we see no point in repairing it so we'll try to make something new from scratch instead." Not recognising this would actually implicitly be rather harsh criticism of LL because so much of what they have done since then would have made little or no sense if the SL software had been in the shape it should have been in back in 2014.
×
×
  • Create New...