Madelaine McMasters

Einsman, I think you are expressing a frustration with those technologies that are most apparent to you, either because they are still crude or are poorly designed. I'm simultaneously a technologist and a closet Luddite (one who shuns technology). I design complex medical instruments but don't own a TV. I get frustrated several times a year when my 90 year old neighbor calls to say "Maddy, my TV is yelling at me in Spanish again, make it stop!". If I'd ever owned a VCR, I'm sure it would have been flashing "12:00". These technologies will stop frustrating us as they improve or are displaced, but those frustrations are nothing compared to advances we've made since wielding our first club (which, as Ishy points out, was a technological advance). If you want to know what life would be like without technology, look at wild animals. There are a few crude tool users in that lot, but nothing like us. Some will point out that millions of people are suffering on this planet every day, some as the result of technology. But as a percentage of the whole, and in absolute terms (lifespan), suffering has been on the decline for a very long time, and that decline in suffering has correlated very strongly with the rise of technology. That is not an accident. While locally (both in time and location) you may not see it, we are making progress. I share your frustration over bad design and misapplication, but I'm so very thankful for technology. Without it we'd not be here to complain.

Perrie Juran wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: I prefer omniscience myself, it's less taxing and I don't feel so bloaty. And don't forget omnipotence, that's my favorite! /me casually checks "Mark all as read" and goes back to doing her nails.

Hi MrGrin, for particles to flow from an avatar towards you or another prim, that avatar must be wearing an object that contains a particle emitting script that targets you or the other object. You've already got that part working, you simply need to get someone else to wear the thing you've made. Or you could script your object to follow another avatar. Worn objects will TP with the avatar, following objects will not. Following objects may also not keep up with the avatar due to lag.

Carole Franizzi wrote: May I be so bold as to point out that, in order for one human being to personally witness every single event occurring within SL, he would require the gift of omnipresence, which is, as far as I know, still the domain of the Almighty. I prefer omniscience myself, it's less taxing and I don't feel so bloaty. And don't forget omnipotence, that's my favorite!

DQ Darwin wrote: Hugs to all. Wow lots of activity in here today. It's funny when you think we all have jobs too. Lia welcome back girl - Hugs Maddy I wanted to update you on the boys so far 2 of 13(?) have shown up. I thought you were coming by to get them. Had to take them home last night, sigh. I got sidetracked on the way home. Tune the TV to that Sponge Pants guy, that'll keep 'em busy until I get there. It'll also rot their li'l brains, as recently discovered by researchers... http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/is-spongebob-squarepants-bad-for-children/

Dillon Levenque wrote: I saw that, too, Melita. One thing I thought was really interesting was a comment from one of the creators of the 'game' software (Foldit). He said, "People have spatial reasoning skills, something computers are not yet good at.". That kind of suprised me; I'd have thought a computer would be more adept at dealing with spatial concepts, given it can keep all the points involved stored for quick access. Isn't that why people use software like AutoCad? I grant you that it may not be reasoning but I'd have thought it would suffice. It would be nice if someone could explain that; I'm sure there are people on this forum who could. Dillon, the unfolding done by those gamers is not unlike trying to untangle an extension cord. We have an exquisite ability to think spatially, as that's necessary for our survival. We can see that you can't pull the cord this way or that because another bit of the cord blocks the way. A computer must tediously follow an algorithm we've designed to try to replicate what our brains do (and we don't really know what our brains do, so we guess at it), searching down long trees of numbers looking for collisions and trying to figure out which way to pull to avoid them. We just "do it". Chess is another example of a spatial problem that's been difficult to "teach" to computers, though we've done it. Given the simple rules of chess (the complexity comes from the depth of the moves), I wonder if winning against Kasparov wasnt' easier than trying to untangle an extension cord ;-) For some years now, researchers (and perhaps now companies) have been co-opting people online to solve thorny problems like this. There have been games where people compete to name all the objects contained in photographs. The result is a library of images with very good keywords attached to them. Computers are currently only able to recognize the most basic objects in photos. By making such "jobs" pleasant for people to solve online, we can leverage the intelligence of everyday people to solve problems that are currently well beyond the fastest computers running the best algorithms.

Hippie Bowman wrote: HEHEHE Maddy! I would like my Wellington boots medium well please! Peace! One medium well Wellie, coming right up!

Lia Abbot wrote: /me hugs Maddy and wonders what the crunching sound is. Care for some ribs? I seem to have a few broken ones.

Good morning Kids! Breakfast is on me, in the tradition of the Irish Jubilee. We'll have... Clam chowder, chowder crackers, crackers and cheese, cheesecloth Hot dogs, dog chow, Chow Mein, Mein Kampf Baked Alaska, Alaskan king crab, crab cakes, caked on grime Fried chicken, chicken soup, soup bones, boned corsets Lemon grass, grass fed beef, Beef Wellington, Wellington boots Raspberry tarts, tart apples, apple cobbler, cobblestones Bon appetit!

Randall Ahren wrote: If I had the pills, I think I would have to take them. I saw Limitless and I thought it was great. The pills must operate to keep the person in the inspired state 97% of the time, instead of just 3%. I'm confused about Up. That's the animation produced by Pixar correct? I don't recall the five minutes of silent film, it must have been a scene at the beginning where the protagonist was recalling his younger life with his wife? Would you want to be the only one with the pills? Would you want to live in a world where everyone had the pills? I haven't seen the movie, but those questions pop to mind right away. Yes, I'm referring to Carl's recollection of his entire life with Ellie, packed into five beautlful, silent minutes. I look forward to Andrew Stanton's next work, "John Carter". I met him briefly a few years ago. I'm glad it was briefly too. I have this fear of meeting the creators of works I love, only to discover they're not superhuman. Were that to happen, I'd have a harder time explaining to myself why I haven't done better ;-)

I jumped in-world last week, to take a quick snapshot of my current self for the similar "Avatar Evolution" thread. So this repost is a bit of a cheat. I don't much like being the subject of a photograph. I'd rather an image convey a feeling or tell a story. The first snapshot is from my second day in SL, April '08. It is the only picture I have from my first go-round in SL. It was taken by a woman who gave me $250 to purchase some hair (a favor I've passed on many times over the years). Her reward for doing so was to watch me learn how to dress myself. The second picture is what happens when the camera is in my hands. Time has changed my perspective as well as my look.

DQ Darwin wrote: Okay Maddy I have done that. Oh he mentioned something about Dave 4 and washroom, I didn't get it all he was stuck to the window sticking his beak out. ooops /waves Oh dear. Dave 4 loves to soap up his tentacles, close his beak, pinch his nose and exhale... hard. I never should have let the kids watch Lawrence Welk clips on YouTube. I'm so sorry, Dee. I'll bring towels.

DQ Darwin wrote: Maddy if this is yours you can pick it up at the front desk. Says he is Dave 3 whatever that means? Yeah Dee, that li'l rascal is mine. Would you kindly direct him to the reception area and have him read magazines (I hope you have many, he reads them four at a time) until I pick him up? Oh, and tell him "No clinging to the windows!" He loves to stick his beak out at passersby. Thanks so much!

Lillie Woodells wrote: Great video Dee! Yeah, you came away with a little something alright... I'm still holding my breath waiting to find out what devious plans you have! Hahahah hugs and love you! We may take this to page 200 today! Wooohoo! @Hippie I'm glad you're chompers are fully functioning. I'll make you a nice steak for lunch. @ Everyone else! Big hugs!!! Keep Dee busy, Lillie. That'll give me time to sneak in a hug from Jenn. While Hippie might make a nice steak for lunch, that sounds a li'l gruesome, and more my style than yours. Maybe you could feed him a nice steak for lunch? @Val, my boss has been in an awful mood for 41 years. Have you tried ignoring? Good morning, Kids!

Dillon Levenque wrote: Persephone Emerald wrote: Considering absolutes, when each of us chooses an avatar or body shape in SL, are we not also asked if we are to be male or female? Well, of course, you might say, what else could we be? The Victorian Steampunk styled, text-based, turn-based game Echo Bazaar has a third option however. You may be a Lady, a Gentleman, or "A Person of Indeterminate Gender". Couldn't Second Life also offer an option of Other? That's an interesting idea, but I personally like the SL options the way they are. I've always felt that Second Life is a mirror of real life. I grant you I don't look very masculine in Second Life but I am still a male. True transexuals (a discussion I had with Dagmar earlier in this thread relates to that) can actually with a single click become female, or become 'post-op'. People like me, who are usually classed as 'transgendered', can exist in SL almost as they would in RL overlooking the obvious fact that we tend to have avatars that look WAY more feminine than we do in RL at our best. I like having that information 'known'. It means that when I interact with someone they know exactly who/what I am. Isn't the selection of male or female only visible at time of avatar creation? I don't recall seeing anything in my profile to indicate gender. If I've picked a suitably androgynous name, what cues would anyone have to my gender beyond the appearance of my avatar, which is completely under my control?

I'll guess that the rotation update to the prim gets stalled by each prim update. At 20/second you notice it. Maybe you can put the title on an invisible prim that's linked into the set?

Oooh, I like this explanation.

Domitan Redenblack wrote: llSleep( ) seems to slow down llTargetOmega( ) - huh? I thought targetOmega ran in the local client machine, so should not be affected by llSleep( ) - yes? Yep, llTargetOmega() is executed in the viewer. Is it being called repeatedly by something involving llSleep()? If so, you may be seeing stutter as the viewer restarts the rotation. Can you give a more detailed description of what's happening?

Deltango Vale wrote: Del, do we want the pill, or simply to remember Henry Ford who said... Whether you think you can or whether think you can't, you are absolutely right. ? If I had a bottle of those pills, maybe I'd pour them in the ocean and hope there's something to homeopathy after all.

Charolotte Caxton wrote: Up is perhaps one of my most favorite movies ever. The backstory at the beginning of love found, life shared and the sadness of loss is possibly one of the most touching I have ever witnessed. I'll agree. That is, I think, the most powerful five minutes of silent film I've ever seen.

Dillon Levenque wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Carole, I'm gonna toot my own horn here. You and Ima are right, but I used fewer words to say it!  Scylla Rhiadra wrote: It's one's performance, not one's labels, that interest me. And I replied: Yep but, as in the Olympics, shouldn't degree of difficulty figure into the score? Bragger. Might I be pretending?

Hippie Bowman wrote: Wow! I am late today! Happy Sunday Everyone! Peace! Sunday? Sunday?! Sunday!!! Sunday

Carole Franizzi wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Carole, I'm gonna toot my own horn here. You and Ima are right, but I used fewer words to say it!  Scylla Rhiadra wrote: It's one's performance, not one's labels, that interest me. And I replied: Yep but, as in the Olympics, shouldn't degree of difficulty figure into the score? Oh, hey. You were being waaaaay too metaphorical for me. I only understand Haikunese these days. Had you written it like this, then maybe I’d have got it. I do not come here To make life easy for you I come here to be I learned at the TooDeeLoo Caribou School of Haiku, you?

Carole, I'm gonna toot my own horn here. You and Ima are right, but I used fewer words to say it!  Scylla Rhiadra wrote: It's one's performance, not one's labels, that interest me. And I replied: Yep but, as in the Olympics, shouldn't degree of difficulty figure into the score?

Void Singer wrote: a letter on a card helps determine the size or presence of a "pistol"? I'm not sure which is more impressive, the leap of illogic or the failure of the metal detector. and when (or where) did they start allowing "typical" photos for ID? last I checked they all required largely unadorned headshots, current at the time of issue. And head shots aren't all that useful at identifying heads either, it seems... http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/334420/title/Same_face%2C_different_person