EliseAnne85

I don't believe those are games either. But, me speaking generally about games, not directed to Love: First of all, people have had differing ideas of what a game or even gambling is in SL. Gambling in America is where there is a loser or gambling means where one can win or one can lose and end up with nothing. That is really what gambling is. You take a gamble - it's a 50/50 chance to win 'something' or lose it all. But, then, in many threads, according to certain posters from Europe on the forums that I read especially said gambling is defined as a game of chance. To me, that is incorrect in correlation with gambling and Gacha because with Gacha you always got 'something', there is no chance to lose it all like in Las Vegas or other places with casinos in real life. Or, even playing poker with friends where one can lose it all. Gacha is like you get something and if you don't like it you could trade it or resell it. It's no different than Pokémon trading cards that are packaged as a mystery or any arcade in America where you get a surprise out of an arcade machine. And, in America these are perfectly legal, even ethical including raffles. Gambling in Las Vegas or Lost Wages as most people in America call it is often viewed as an ethically incorrect decision to do with one's money; to take the chance of gambling it all away. I brought the loss of Gacha up because I see it as no different than the fishing game that is prevalent in SL. In fishing one gets surprise prizes (fish and other misc. items) and may end up with nothing monetarily. Fishing in SL could be set up winner takes all and the rest get none, so it's more like gambling than Gacha is. Or, it's very similar because one gets some fish they can collect or something like that, which I don't have the time for, nor do I want an aquarium with all those prims. I see this decision to do away with Gacha but not fishing lacking in consistency because the two are almost the same in premise. Although with Gacha, one can resell the items they do not want or trade them. Gacha was huge for SL. But, still it's unfair to chastise one but not the other.

Exactly. But, also I am saving my lindens right now for something. I will spend little bits here and there but mostly I'm saving for a large purchase so the lindens just sit there in the viewer. I'd rather move the ones I'm saving into a wallet because I spend my lindens on SL. I only cashed out once into fiat my entire SL. But, those of us who may be saving for a large SL purchase it would be better to put them in a wallet than have them in the viewer. And, what else I am saying is that storing our lindens offline in a wallet could deter anyone from wanting to pull this scam again or a different scam because the lindens are not in the viewers because my thinking is most (businesses anyways) may move their lindens into their wallet until they do want to cash out as each cash out has a fee. But, I don't even want to cash out, I just want to save them until I do want to use them for SL purchases.

No, I think it should be opt-in period. I don't think it should be mandatory. Sorry, if you got that impression. It's been 50 things at once for me today and I still about 35 things to do to go, so I was writing in a rush. As far as those who have qualms about the internet, it's a beast at times. My ex was hacked twice. The first people got his credit card and bought eight beds. My family didn't even have anywhere near eight people in it, let alone a place to store eight beds and all kinds of other weird things they purchased. So, the credit card company reimbursed us. Then, he was hacked again. My ex was never much into computers and really didn't pay attention to what he was doing when he was on it. He was reckless, downloading free music - which I think was part of the problem. I had a different computer. But, with AI, hacking could become stronger. All I can think of about all this stuff with bots and hacking is "Yikes" - this is real money and this has been a headache. However, we discuss these issues but it's getting tiresome now. So, I'll just take it or leave it. I'd rather have my lindens in a place offline from the viewers in a wallet though, tbh.

It's not that easy when one uses a token. It's tedious. Why not one call just direct to my phone with a one-time code when I want to make a purchase? Or, for those who don't want tokens nor phone, what about the Lindens have another password we have to enter to access our linden balance? That sounds fast and easy too. Plus, Love, I'm talking about something else...I'm talking about the lindens not being in the viewer at all but rather in a wallet. A virtual wallet.

I know that's why I put a ? Meaning, there would need to be something else too or instead of because of people who don't have cell phones. But, make it opt-in anyways. I, personally, would love a wallet where (those of us with phones who opt-in) get a call with a one-time code we put in at checkout or spending inworld. It's easy and it's fast and our linden balance would NOT show inworld in any viewer. Since there are so many people who do have phones I was suggesting this could help overall, even those who don't have a wallet because either they don't have a phone nor want a wallet, because (most) lindens would not be stored in the viewers and this might deter hackers/scammers altogether. IOW, most of the SL community might opt-in and scammers wouldn't get much out of trying to get lindens through the viewers. The only other thing I can think of to where our linden balance would not show inworld is that our linden balance has to be accessed by another password. And, then once we put that password in inside the viewer, our linden balance would show. I'd like to have a way to hide my lindens and/or not have them in the viewer at all but not have to cash in and out, in and out, just to hide our lindens.

Sorry, I must not be explaining this right. I said it could send a message to a phone with a one-time code for people who would opt-in and have a phone to do it with. My original thought in my post that I wrote was send a one-time code message...or something? When I wrote or something? (I meant something else not yet known as this is not a real plan - but not a phone as the "or something?" which I meant something else). Anyhow, if you don't understand what I'm suggesting, it's not a big deal because it's not a real plan. It was hypothetical.

I know this is the other problem. That's why my post said send a one-time code to our phone when we want to checkout (spend) lindens...or something? Perhaps there is something else that doesn't involve phones. Plus, make it opt-in. And, perhaps make it so that we need a one-time code sent to our phone when spending over 500 lindens. But, with perhaps many people wanting wallets, it would overall still benefit those who do not have a wallet by bringing down the chance of anyone even wanting to do this scam again because they'd probably think not many lindens are accessible via the viewers.

Well, they had to make a fancy text box to write suggestions and add their name in a guest book. I gather it looks "easier". It also probably gathers usernames via a bot. Dropping in a notecard would suffice, however.

Suggestion box, guest book could be done just like a mailbox with a drop in notecard. But, SL works on the principle that people are either too lazy to learn to work a notecard or too dumb which is unfortunate to view people that way since SL does have a high learning curve and it takes time to learn all this stuff. However, I think it's perhaps better overall to look towards some kind of wallet where we can store our lindens offline. Perhaps a one time code is sent to our phone when we want to check out (spend) lindens, or something....?

Oh really, and most younger people own some kind of crypto to which almost all wallets and/or blockchains except Bitcoin have been hacked. I believe the two other cryptos that were based on the code of Bitcoin were also not hacked. However, not so for all the blockchains not based on Bitcoin's code - all those were hacked. I was thinking LL or, of course, it's subsidiary, Tilia, could offer us a wallet to store our Linden offline from our account - but almost all popular and main wallets on the web have been hacked, as well as all the main blockchains that were other than Bitcoin. Kids fell for that right and left. I don't have a lot of time right now, but forging a path to a safe wallet off of SL viewers is something I'd like to see SL go in the path of, in spite of how many web-based "wallets" have been hacked in the past. That's the past, I'm saying let's go forward and get us as hack-free a wallet as possible where we can store our lindens.

I know, but I see that as the problem, especially with articles I've read about the younger generation. But, I got a life to lead too and don't want to keep going over the same thing I've said already. If people will enable MFA, it's tedious, they are going to have to learn to deal with that.

It's a function for Gift Givers and a function for those who own the object, and others in this thread have said it can be modified (re-written). So, how about a re-write - IIGiftRecipient. And, the other IIOwnerObjectText (or something) If it isn't used for those two purposes only - giving gifts and the owner modifying THEIR object - what other use does it have than to be exploited?

My reason for saying IITextBox should be modified to have text entered by owner only and then have a separate IITextBox no modify script for gifts that is about gift instructions only and cannot be over-ridden by someone writing anything is because SL wants to go into the modern world. The modern world of younger people has changed. The modern world of younger people is that they grew up on the phone and the vast majority are NOT geeks, not to mention perhaps never even owning a computer before should they decide to buy one because they like SL after being on mobile for awhile. And, thus they are totally naive like newborns. If the world changes, why shouldn't components of virtual worlds to avoid a potential catastrophy? Why such defense of a script that could be so easily re-written? Plus, there really isn't a *need* for scripts to be modify. The object can copy and modify fine with no modify scripts. I use only NO MODIFY scripts but my objects are copy/mod. The problem is that it reads no modify in inventory if the object contains no modify scripts. And, that kind of *looks* weird. If someone could put a text box prompt where the people are about to loose their inventory if they don't enter password could be disastrous.

No, no it isn't. This has an official looking box and up top people can write anything such as: Firestorm Needs a Restart, Please Enter Password Before You Lose Your Inventory" or whatever they may come up with that people will think looks legitimate or makes them scared, and then they hit SUBMIT. I don't see why a no modify script for gifts cannot be written where the wording to submit a name for the recipient of the gift is no modify - meaning other words cannot be written there. Then, another script that is no modify to be for the owner to write in the text box only for all other needs. I'm thinking of the future here once SL gets to mobile. This text box where one could write anything could be a ticking time bomb if SL takes off again. I'm thinking that when SL goes mobile and what if many younger generations onboard who have never seen anything like this. Their naivety could be a problem. If a script is no modify, it in no way makes the object a no modify object to the purchaser. I use no modify scripts ALL THE TIME for my copy/mod stuff. The object is copy and mod; the scripts are not.

And, that can never change? I think this one may have a security breach because anything can be written in there. It could get worse.... "Firestorm is Pausing Too Fast, Please Enter Password Before You Lose All Your Information", or things like that. If anything can be written and for people to then hit SUBMIT, that's high risk.

No, I'm saying it would have to be re-written and then made no modify, meaning so one can't change the title to "Firestorm Just Logged You Out, Please Put in Your Password". For gifts, couldn't it be re-written to say "Please Enter Gift Recipients Name and then Hit the SUBMIT Button" which would be no modify and no one could over-ride what it says there. And, the other scripts where the owners write in stuff could perhaps be modified to be "only owner may write in text box" and then that would be no modify. I'm not a professional scripter, so yes what I'm saying was just thrown out there to see if this could be rewritten and then made no modify somehow. Because I never have had use for this probably since Slink feet.

Aside from security orbs, maybe I used it for Slink Feet RGB but I don't even remember how those worked exactly now. But, I've never seen this text box thing in such a long time since someone else works the security on land I share. If they made it no modify, there could be one for gifts only, and one for objects for the owner of the object only. I'm not a good scripter so that's all I could think of. It seems an old fashioned script to me because I was thinking there is no information I will submit to someone else about me other than the middle finger solute. I forgot about the gift thing to but if that is no modify, then it says it's for gifts.

Also, what it sounds like is a text box that mostly the owner of the object needs to write in, except for the gifts - the gift script the owner doesn't write in the text box, the sender of the gift does.

Oh, never mind. I'm tired. It's not the name, it's what they trick one to write into the SUBMIT box if used as a password scammer. Gawd, I never have use for this text box. I do now remember it for security orbs. What irony!

The gift one on Marketplace asks for recipient's first and last name. Maybe a rewrite for inworld gifts needing two names might help as well as security orbs and it must be written out even if resident. Will this help? Anybody know?

Oh, I see. I haven't needed to reset my security orb because I share a land with someone else who does that. I haven't used one in quite awhile. I forgot. So, it could possibly be rewritten to receive a name only in the text box maybe? Or, scripts aren't that intuitive - yet, anyhow? Because password is a name unless they try somehow to rewrite this thing.

Here is a phone number I found by typing in "Second Life Phone Number" in my search engine. I'd say CALL for sure. How do I contact Second Life? Second Life contact info: Phone number: (415) 243-9000 Website: www.secondlife.com What does Second Life do?

You need to file a SUPPORT TICKET to LL. Do you know how to do that? They may be able to retrieve your account but not the Lindens. Though, to me, this text box script seems useless and is dangerous because I'd like to know what this asks people to SUBMIT by writing in that box? Most people in SL don't want to submit anything in there. I cannot see a reason too.

LL should be able to trace your account. They cannot change your username. Even if the crooks deleted part of your account, LL may still be able to retrieve at least part of your account. Did you file a ticket with LL?

I know Mia I read the thread and I am very sorry to hear that! I know you submitted your password but I am wondering what are the general uses would people use this for? If using this in a proper way and the person receives this, they would submit what....? (fill in the blank here). I mean what does this script usually ask people to submit when it's not a scam is what I mean? I'm asking the same question as Mia...what is this script used for? And why submit? Submit what?