Jump to content

Chetar Ruby

Resident
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Less of a question, more an observation and call to action: Chat repeaters. I'm seeing these used more frequently in large clubs claiming their clubs are too large for the standard 20 meter chat range of local chat. I'm of course of the opinion, if you need a chat repeater, you're probably doing something wrong. But that's besides the point, my personal opinion doesnt affect the abuse these objects are permitting. Chat repeaters are considered to be the user who owns them, not whomever is actually speaking and being repeated for those outside of normal chat range. What does that mean? It basically means, if I block someone, and they speak outside of chat range, I'm going to see their speech in local, despite having blocked them. In short, these objects are allowing people to circumvent being blocked. I consider this a serious exploit and abuse of scripting privileges. This would not be allowed under any other circumstance. I'm asking Linden Labs to take action against these objects due their abusive nature. Thanks for your attention.
  2. Innula Zenovka wrote: I don't want to derail this into a discussion of the best way to make RLV cages, but, for the sake of accuracy, as far as I'm concerned, while I know a lot of cages do use llRequestAgentData periodically to check, should the prisoner log out while still a captive, to see if they've logged back on another sim (if they have, you infer they don't want to play any more, so forget about them and prepare the cage for use by another captive), it's not -- or shouldn't be -- vital to the cage's operation since you'll anyway want to set a limit for how long the cage should wait for someone to log back in, so you don't have the cage sitting there for a week or so with no one else able to use it. So, to my mind, while it will certainly be a nuisance for some cage-makers and owners if llRequestAgentData(id,DATA_ONLINE) stops working, it shouldn't actually break anything. In contrast, lots of stuff is going to be well and truly broken by the change -- I'm particularly worried about vendors that check to see if the recipient is online before sending the item out if you buy it as a gift for a friend and about subscribeomatics and similar systems. If you've got a large mailing list, it's far better (and more grid-friendly) for all sorts of reasons (which I can explain if necessary) to send out notecards and suchlike as and when people come online rather than try to send them out all at once, and that's just not going to work any more if the changes go through as planned. Yeah, you are right, it won't really *BREAK* them, it'll just make them less functional. They'll need to rely on other means of keep themselves in a 'sane' state, not stuck waiting for someone that probably won't come back, to come back. But really, as I've said already, the reasons for NOT breaking llRequestAgentData are numerious. Some are trivial and can be worked around, others not so trivial and some have NO WORK AROUND whatsoever. Not to mention, I imagine these 'work arounds' will end up being less efficient, more computationally expensive in the long run. So more lag for all. The real question is this.. Is it REALLY worth breaking this function in the name of hiding people's online status, especially given, this is NOT the only way to tell if someone is online, so at the end of the day when llRequestAgentData is broken, no body seems to be really getting anything, or winning. You can still easily figure out if someone is online (just not from a script.) So why is this being considered? Why not go after all the other ways of telling someone is online that won't break anything, first.
  3. I really liked the idea of "Let's fix TPV's to not show this so obviously, sit back and see what happens." Look, in my many many years of playing on MUDs, you could hide from programs on those things (similiar to LSL scritps) but you could never ever TRUELY mask your presnse (connection) to the world from others. This seemed fair to me. You were not notified when a hiding player logs in and out, you could only actively look for their presense with another command that shows who's online. Right now, we kind of have this same, IMHO, fair balance. By default, even with Firestorm/Phoenix, if you want to know if a particular user who is not on your friends list (or actively hiding their presense) is actually online, you have to actively look. IE: Open their profile, use llRequestAgentData, or other means to peek. We've already determined there's a myrriad of ways of peek, actively. So stopping one way of peeking really just doesn't do a darn thing. Just makes people use the other methods of peeking. Now someone else pointed out griefing, LL's inability to stop it, not being proactive. Well pal, THEY ARE BEING QUITE A BIT OVERLY PROACTIVE right now with this planned change to functionality ot the grid. Now I'm really sorry about this part, but I totally fail to see how its 'griefing' to know if someone is online or not. Does it hurt to know that others might know? How is this related to griefing, exactly? Does knowing you're online make it possible to get around a mute? No... does it tell them where you are on the grid? No. So how does knowing yer online grief you? And lastly, for those who wave the 'But all my friends distract me when i log in!' flag around. Well get some friends who respect 'Go away I'm busy.' Sorry, I don't see why I should have to suffer loss of grid function because you're being distracted by your friends. As I said above, use RLV to intensionally shut down IMs if you don't want to be bothered.
  4. Innula Zenovka wrote: I still don't really understand why you say an RLV trap needs to check online status....[snip] It's really not important. What is important is there is perfectly legit uses for this function to work as it was originally designed. Changing it will break content and achieve ABSOLUTELY nothing what so ever other than break it for.. what? As I said, unless you plug about a dozen more 'holes' in online presense hiding, its utterly pointless to plug one.
  5. Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Chetar Ruby wrote: WHAT IS EVEN THE POINT OF LOGGING IN IF YOU DONT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW? The ability to work on something without distraction and interruption is a big point. It doesn't cut out all of it, as there are other ways to tell your on line if some one really wants to know, but it can tone it down quite a bit. Its like a lock. A really determined person can still get in, but it will deter the 'honest' people and people that just don't want to do the work of breaking in. Busy mode is only so effective and prevents you from receiving things that you may want/need, such as a MP purchase. So use an alt? Or even more drastic (I like this one), use a RLV viewer and restrict your own ability to receive IM's. This'll letcha still get MP purchases, but anyone IM'ing you just gets "It's been blocked, try again later." Insta-privacy and no distractions. You get what you want and nothing has to get broken along the way.
  6. Pussycat Catnap wrote: Why should RLV be able to override people cheating anyway? If someone gives up on the RP and decides to break it, they've given up on the RP. They've left the game as it were. Rather than force them to 'play' - boot em out of the game's RP zone. Missing the point. RLV can't stop people from cheating. Duh? Just turn it off and yer free to go. The reasons for needing that information (someone being connected or not) are numerious, some of them more warranted than others. But it doesn't matter how warranted they are. That they ARE warranted, legitimate and responcible uses of that information is. Look, if LL is going to go in there and trash llGetAgentData (can someone here tell me the point of this function after it's been buthered? To see if the owner of an object is online and that's it? Gee, that's useful!) then I insist they fix every other way to tell someone if who's hiding is really online. You can't have it both ways. FIX THEM ALL or GTFO. Cuz fixing one and smiling 'It's fixed guys!' is really stupid. You got groups to tactle (online status is shown in group), you need to fix SL from telling people thing like 'User offline - your message has been saved', and 'User offline - inventory has been saved.' and every other way to tell someone is there or not needs to be fixed. Don't just fix one and say you'll fix the rest later, do it all right now, cuz with only one, or only three, if you don't get them all it's all pointless. I'd personally just prefer it be left alone. It's not some godforsaken invasion of privacy to know if someone is conneted or not. I've already covered this. WHAT IS EVEN THE POINT OF LOGGING IN IF YOU DONT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW?
  7. Feldspar Millgrove wrote: Can't the furniture detect that the avatar is no longer there, just by scanning for them in the appropriate radius? Also, you can still tell if the avatar is in the sim(s) you are interested in. I'm sure you simply don't understand the nature of the devices in question. Devices which recapture avatars if they try to get away by logging off. I'm sure you won't understand the demand/need for this sort of thing, that's irrelevant. What is relevant, is a device needs to be freed up for someone else to use if the person cheats and teleports away, or logs in at a different location to escape. The only way to know is by checking if they're online now and then. It's also important to know, and this is why sensoring is worthless, if they just logged out when script catches an unsit. That way the device can set up for recapture. Bottom line is, there's legitimate usage for probing if a user is online or not. I really fail to see why the 'privacy' flag has to be waved around about this. If you don't want someone knowing yer logged in, DON'T LOG IN. Easy. There are plenty of tools, including telling people to LEAVE YOU ALONE for omitting unwanted content (ie, other players.) Why privacy has to be guarded about your presense on the grid is beyond me. Sometimes, some things just need to be known, in order to function properly. As for reference to JIRA? Forget it. I don't even know if posting here is productive or read by those with the power. But JIRA's in my experience are really not very effective when it comes to policy decisions regarding the grid and funtionality thereof.
  8. Well, after some clarifications on the what is a 'shared experience' and what that will prohibit in TPV, I'm a little less outraged by these changes. Though I don't think it's any less stupid of a rule to impose on the TPV developers who've brought so much to SL over the years. Yes, not everything has been good, but there's been more good than bad, and in the end, the 'shared experience' balances out. We are talking about a company here that takes upwards of 6 months to remove obviously illegal content from their grid and obvious theft postings to Marketplace. So it's understandable that some bad has crept into the 'shared experience' in the name of improving it, because well, nothing would improve at the rate Linden Labs moves. But onto what still concerns me, which is killing llGetAgentData's ability to see if people are online. A lot of scripting uses this in a responcible useful manner. Another poster pointed out RLV furniture as using it to determine when the victim has dropped offline or teleported away. I'm a RLV scripter too, and this DIRECTLY IMPACTS my work. It's also just a pretty bad idea to break legitimate use of this function because some people just MUST KNOW when some other person is online or not. Is knowing if someone is connected or not *REALLY* so big a deal we must BREAK things to guard it? Puhleeze. Overkill. It's not that big a deal. So what, someone you don't like knows you're online? Is this really a big privacy issue that LL has to go breaking content over?
  9. The new search sucks. Half the time when I search for resident, it comes up with irrelevant results and not the residents name. Bring back the old 1.23 style search that actually works, at the very least for searching for residents. This new thing is nice and all, but when it comes to just searching for a resident's name so you can IM them.. its terrible.
×
×
  • Create New...