Wulfie Reanimator

Allow me to illustrate, using BOM on a regular prim cube: https://giant.gfycat.com/HoarseDefenselessGoose.webm What you see in the above video, is the script I used to apply BOM onto a regular cube. On the cube, you can see my torso texture. In the edit window, you can see that I have applied an orange texture (as an example) as the material of the prim. I have also set up a light so the reflection is clearly visible. You can see that the prim that has BOM applied on all sides also has materials on it. BOM 👏 works 👏 with 👏 materials 👏 without 👏 onion 👏 layers.

When you say "bot," people usually think of an automated viewer -- an avatar. Is that what you're talking about? A simple script can do all of your basic security needs. Either way, yes there's a way to do it. I'd link my MP product but it only tells you who visited, without security features.

You 👏 can 👏 have 👏 BOM 👏 with 👏 materials. Say it with me now.

Or using pictures of a certain personality with her own business, to roleplay some pretty dark things...

@ChinRey I have used enhancements before. End users see ads, the end users aren't paying for ANY ad experience, they simply receive one (a very limited one). When I said that people are specifically paying for that experience, I am discussing the MERCHANT experience. I was also talking strictly from the merchant's point of view. At no point did I speak from the consumer's point of view. When you said "you see ads on other sites multiple times because that's what merchants are paying for," I responded with "how do you know people aren't supposed to be seeing the same ads multiple times on MP?" I can't be bothered to get in another hamster wheel with people who don't understand that we're on the same page. Bye.

The point here is that the big guys are moving towards SL's niche. This is both an opportunity and a threat for Linden Lab management. They might be moving towards SL's niche, but SL's niche is such a small target that Epic can't hit without a lot of collateral. (Meaning, Epic will have to make some risky decisions to get on SL's level.) Basically, while Epic can create a virtual platform, it won't have the same appeals as SL. That's not to say that they can't succeed -- I'd be almost surprised if they didn't -- it's just not going to draw a large chunk of users from SL because of the things it'll do better. Metaverse will probably even be bigger than SL from day one, but not because of anything LL could learn from. (Mainly the vast userbase and mainstream visibility.)

Funny that you say that... https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/21/18234980/fortnite-marshmello-concert-viewer-numbers

Ah yes, Fortnite, the true competitor for Second Life.

I don't either, I must've misread something. Sorry about that. But you are going on about LL's supposed algorithm that supposedly doesn't work as it should because it supposedly doesn't do things exactly the way you think it should... supposedly. "The ads you see on many websites, when you see the same ad repeatedly... is by design. People are specifically paying for that ad experience." Where do you get the idea that you aren't paying for "that ad experience" on MP? Sounds more like a problem with your own expectations, because I haven't found anything from LL indicating that the "MP ad experience" would be any different. "I never said showing it only once to a person is effective." "Also, I never stated that seeing the same ad multiple times is necessarily a problem in and of itself." It was quite strongly implied by your phrasing of the issue, but okay. "Unique impressions are important though, they should play a very big role in things and should exist in the algorithm, but often don't... and yes THAT is an outdated methodology." I tend to agree that unique impressions are important, but what you said implies that you know exactly how the algorithm works, which you don't, as you said. Even if "unique impressions played a very big role," (which is a very vague way of defining how things should be different, btw) people would see the same ads. What exactly would you suggest to change? Because as things are now, I don't see issue with showing the same ad to the same person multiple times, because I know that to be more effective than "avoiding" it. "Just because other companies, websites, programming... use that method too, doesn't make it a good idea." No, but you were implying that this was some kind of old and deprecated way of doing things, which it is clearly not. "However, using tech that shows the ad to the person PAYING for it, is ineffective, ridiculous, a waste of money, and, well, friggen stupid (and by today's standards, not a current method, most algorithms account for that). People shouldn't be seeing their own ads on the MP." Happy to agree. "I answered Prok when it was said that my experience of seeing the same ad multiple times per session was not universal. It very much IS universal and not just my experience, it's by design, it's how the bit of code works." And I don't disagree with this. It's how I expected it to work. "The main problem with it is that unique impressions play almost no role whatsoever, which, again, is not a current standard." Can you cite some sort of source or comparison for this? Because right now you're just repeating the word "standard" without showing any sort of examples. There's no way for you to figure out how big of a role "uniques" have right now because you don't get that in the report. (You should be able to see that, I agree.) "For the MP and how very small it actually is, this CAN prove to be problematic for some merchants who may take ages to get their enhanced listings seen by anyone at all, much less their target audience." Sure, there don't seem to be any tools for us to advertise to a specific group of residents. This is a valid criticism and I hope one day(tm) it'll be possible. "The MP isn't the same as many other websites, in that it needs some unique things, code, programming, methods, whatever have you that is specifically geared towards sl residents (merchants and consumers alike) and the sl experiences that go along with that. Using off the shelf, or out of the box solutions for something like the MP, is a bad road to go down...but it's one LL is holding firm to....for reasons I will never understand, and they will never share." MP works pretty much identical to any other big online storefront. You can track the searching and spending habits of each individual avatar and give them advertisements based on that. I don't believe SL residents to interact with MP any different than they would any other online store. I suspect LL might even do this already, because most of the things I see in Featured Items tend to have something in common with what I've bought in the past, and it's different between my alts (my "male alt" sees way more male items). None of them interest me, but they're technically close enough.

This has a minor problem at the cutoff point, where it will turn any multi-byte character into the either the "non-displaying" or "unrecognized" symbol. string display_name = "I, the Alpha and Omega Ω"; // 23 + 3 bytes llOwnerSay(display_name); string truncated = llBase64ToString(llGetSubString(llStringToBase64(display_name), 0, 31)); llOwnerSay(truncated); Object: I, the Alpha and Omega Ω Object: I, the Alpha and Omega ? The least significant byte of Ω (which is left after truncating) is 166, which is the extended-ASCII character ¦, which isn't in my viewer font's character map so I get an error symbol (could be other symbols like ☐, ☒, �). Other characters might get cut off in a way that displays normal-looking characters that weren't actually there. This really only matters if you're comparing the button name directly with something, or trying to use it to find information about the avatar, because the two strings no longer match. That's a neat way of getting around the problem though.

That's kind of correct, but it's a little more nuanced. If an avatar changes from using onion layers (assuming every layer has a unique texture on it) to onion layers (same textures) + BOM for skin, there's no difference. Once you begin adding tattoos and makeup with BOM, the value of that feature goes up even if it still takes "as many textures as before" to render you. The body is now displaying more detail that it wasn't able to before, but without any additional cost to anyone's viewer. One of the (I think) two main goals of BOM was to reduce texture load. As long as people are using BOM with more than one layer, that's achieved. The other main goal was to reduce onion layers, but that's going to take longer to achieve because it relies on creators removing backwards-compatibility or maintaining multiple versions of mesh bodies which takes more work. Reposting from another thread.

If you own the land or pushing is disabled, you can get a list of all avatars with llGetAgentList and then apply a strong downward force on them if they are flying. Or if you want to be more extreme, rez a hollow box around them with the bottom cut out, so their movement is limited besides falling down. Or if you really just hate people, you can eject them from the parcel. But remember that TOS is a thing. If you do any of these things (especially if you don't own the place directly), you run the risk of getting suspended for abuse.

The two problems you've brought up is that the same person gets the same ad multiple times, and that the ads aren't category specific. But when I log out of Youtube (because I have Youtube Premium which prevents ads), go to a whatever random video I see on the front page and start refreshing the video page, I'll get the same ads over and over (About 15 times total). I saw an ad for a Finnish grocery store sale 3 times and another ad for Finnair tickets 5 times on the same video, which wasn't about food or flying and I don't travel or look up travel prices. Does this mean Youtube is also using out of date tech from the 00s? I don't think you realize how ineffective advertising is if you only show it once to every unique person, or what the benefits are for repeating the ad. Also, the listing enhancements are category-specific. You get to choose the exact category you want your product advertised in.

In short: unfortunately no. Welcome to Second Life, where no client is properly optimized.

I don't recall any site that hasn't shown me the same ad multiple times. (YouTube did this constantly.) It's not uncommon that I even see the same ad multiple times on the same page at the same time. This, of course, only happens on computers that aren't mine and prevent me from installing ad blockers.

The explanation is a little technical, but in short: Almost any "exotic" (non-ASCII) character runs the risk of causing this error. Dialog buttons aren't limited to 12 characters, but 24 bytes of memory. Any ASCII character will take up one byte. (Look at the three columns on the right side of that table.) Any non-ASCII character will take between 2 and 4 bytes. This means that, if someone has just 7 high characters from the UTF-8 character format (which is what dialog buttons use), your script will crash. This means that if you want to be absolutely safe, you should not use more than 6 characters from display names. Check yourself.

.

That's kind of correct, but it's a little more nuanced. If an avatar changes from using onion layers (assuming every layer has a unique texture on it) to onion layers (same textures) + BOM for skin, there's no difference. Once you begin adding tattoos and makeup with BOM, the value of that feature goes up even if it still takes "as many textures as before" to render you. The body is now displaying more detail that it wasn't able to before, but without any additional cost to anyone's viewer. One of the (I think) two main goals of BOM was to reduce texture load. As long as people are using BOM with more than one layer, that's achieved. The other main goal was to reduce onion layers, but that's going to take longer to achieve because it relies on creators removing backwards-compatibility or maintaining multiple versions of mesh bodies which takes more work.

If there was/is, it would almost definitely be turned down. Imagine a scenario where a script gains permission and is then moved to another sim from the avatar. The avatar then requests to revoke permissions from "any scripts." Now, the sim the avatar is on needs to process that request and pass it to all other sims/assets that may or may not be in-world, and revoke whatever permissions they have. I can't imagine what LL would even begin to fix before that can be implemented.

"Those two." /s

This is done with scripts. Generally speaking, the script would use the touch_start event to figure out which part of the user is trying to interact with and the touch event to figure out where the user is dragging. The specific details about the code are very dependent on how the HUD was built. If you don't know how to write LSL scripts, you should post in the Wanted or Inworld Employment sections.

You 👏 can 👏 apply 👏 normals 👏 and 👏 speculars 👏 onto 👏 BOM 👏 enabled 👏 mesh. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise, many people seem to have this misconception. Also, BOM works just fine with makeup. The SL body UV has a texture for the entire head and BOM can blend partially transparent textures, just like with tattoos. I never said materials are the reason. I didn't mean that either, I'm just bad with words. Mismatching materials are the last and least likely reason you're going to get a seam, because at that point there's a bunch of other problems that have to have been solved.

It's impossible (cost/time/tech prohibitive) to support every platform in perpetuity, especially a platform everybody knows to be off life-support. Do you demand Windows XP support as well? If not, why the heck not?

Isn't the reason why there's a seam between two pieces of mesh because their verts and/or vertex normals and/or UV don't line up? I mean sure, if one has materials and the other doesn't, there's going to be a noticeable seam under certain lighting, but that's not the main reason because you can still have materials on a BOM surface.

Trust me, I know. I also preach the "if it's free, you're the product" line. I'm dubious on the ad thing though, I've never seen an ad on my OS. Bloatware games that you can uninstall? Yes.