Phil Deakins

Bump to scroll the spam down.

Bump to scroll the spam down.

Bump to scroll the spam down.

Bump to scroll the spam down.

Kenbro Utu wrote: Does anyone here smell alts besides me? You are not alone.

I can't imagine why you would have thought that Kingdon's departure heralded the demise of SL, or that SL is still here "against all odds". I would have put a lot of money on that bet and I would have seen it as money in the bank - if the person had the means to pay up, that is. Yes, SL will 'survive' until 2014. I predict that I will have gone before then, or at least my store will have gone by then. I may just hang around from time to time.

Masami Kuramoto wrote: Don't get confused by what Mr. Deakins said. OpenSim hosting is just like website hosting. Each running instance of OpenSim comes with its own asset server by default. What Mr. Deakins said is that SL is not a website and an SL viewer is not a browser. You'd said that SL is a website and the viewer is a browser, but Mr. Deakins was absolutely correct and you were absolutely wrong. You're now trying to make a subtle change by making a little switch from 'website' to 'web hosting', as though what Mr. Deakins said was about web hosting. You should know better than to think you can get away with subtle changes like that

Masami Kuramoto wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: So you now disagree with what you previously said No, I don't disagree with what I previously said. Feel free to quote what I previously said, then it might become obvious to you. You gave the impression that LL has not provided the means to make an RL living from SL. This is what you wrote:- "From the creator's point of view, this would be acceptable if LL's platform helped them make a living from the content they upload.". I said they have provided the help to do that, by provoding the means to do it, and I gave an example of someone actually doing it. You agreed that they have provided the means, so your agreement is the opposite of what you said earlier. Perhaps I misunderstood what you wrote and you really meant that LL should hold the creators' hands and lead them into making RL livings from SL by doing the selling for them, or by making users go to their stores in large numbers, or some idiotic thing like that.

Masami Kuramoto wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: I'm curious. Which part of LL's platform does not help [creators] make a living from the content they upload? The platform includes a system for selling stuff for L$, and it has a system for converting L$ to US$, and for cashing out US$. The system has everything for making a living. Technically, the platform is indeed well equipped. The only thing missing is the steady influx of new customers on a level comparable to 2007. That's why SL's land mass is shrinking dramatically and its mainland cheaper than ever before. So you now disagree with what you previously said, and have come round to the right way of thinking. That's good. I'm a creator and, for a long time, I made an RL living from SL, and that only stopped because I chose to stop it and not because it was forced on me in any way. So what part of the platform don't you understand? You don't seem to understand that different parts of the world have different standards of living. In my part of the world, you can make money faster and easier by flipping burgers. SL content creation is something you do when unemployed. In other parts of the world, where the cost of living is lower, a few bucks made in SL may indeed support a family. It's a globalized platform after all. I once heard that most of Anshe's staff is working from China. I do know that different parts of the world have different living standards and greatly different wages. I understand that very well. But I'm in the UK and a living wage here is pretty much the same as it is in the U.S., if not more. And yet SL provided me with a very decent living income for the UK, and for as long as I chose to continue it. So what were you saying?

Masami Kuramoto wrote: >> "A web server isn't a website either" A web server accessible from a network and hosting at least one web page is a website. In this case, the web page is the OpenSim grid login page. The viewer displays it using its built-in WebKit renderer. Technically this makes the viewer a web browser, although its main purpose is obviously something else. Can we leave it at that, Mr. Deakins? Or would you like to bore us a little more? I'd like to bore you a little more. Servers hosting webpages are servers and *not* websites. They store/host the pages of websites but they are not themselves websites. A viewer is not a browser. It's a programme that interacts with an online system that is not a website. We can leave it at that if you like.

Masami Kuramoto wrote: Most of OpenSim's core services communicate via HTTP, and that makes it a web server in my book. I know that some parts of the protocol still use UDP. Anyway, thank you for paying attention. A web server isn't a website either

If you hadn't removed your picture, nobody would have complained about you bumping into them

Masami Kuramoto wrote: Technically, an OpenSim grid is a website, and the viewer is a browser. Nope. Like SL, an OpenSim grid doesn't run on the web so it isn't a website and the viewer isn't a browser. If you don't know the difference between the web and the internet, do some research

Masami Kuramoto wrote: From the creator's point of view, this would be acceptable if LL's platform helped them make a living from the content they upload. I'm curious. Which part of LL's platform does not help [creators] make a living from the content they upload? The platform includes a system for selling stuff for L$, and it has a system for converting L$ to US$, and for cashing out US$. The system has everything for making a living. I'm a creator and, for a long time, I made an RL living from SL, and that only stopped because I chose to stop it and not because it was forced on me in any way. So what part of the platform don't you understand?

13th December. The RL alt of Phil Deakins was born

I can't imagine a skating animation is stationary, so it must move - as you said. In that case, you can probably control its direction with the cursor keys. Perhaps you could go back to the place and try it out when nobody else is there.

I haven't seen any Linden Home type that doesn't look cramped. Also, I haven't seen any layout that looks like a ghetto. The one you posted the screenshot of looks like a very nice RL neighourhood with communal areas. And remember that nobody has to have one of them. They can use their 512 tier and buy land wherever they like. Imo, LL did a very good job with Linden Homes. Given that they were based on the 512 tier-free allowance, they made some nice homes and placed them in such a way that the homes themselves didn't count towards the 512's prims. When you are limited by that constraint, you can't give each home a lot of space around it. What could happen is that LL ups the tier-free allowance to 1024m or more, and then Linden Homes could be layed out more spaciously, but that hasn't happened and so they has to be based on 512m. LL's objective in Linden Homes was to offer something extra to encourage people to buy premium accounts and, at the same time, not be so good that people didn't want to move on. It would be really bad for the private market if Linden Homes were so good that people wanted to stay in them for a long time. They said that the homes weren't intended to be long-term homes for people, and that they expected people to get the feel of having a home and then move on to something better. I think they did a good job of it all. If they made the homes too nice, say with hills and valleys and streams and trees and space around each of them, people wouldn't feel any inclination to move on to the private market because they wouldn't be able to find anything that could compete unless they paid a lot more for it. So I'll repeat roughly what I said earlier. Using mainland for Linden Homes would only be any good if LL did it with whole sims and layed them out something like the existing Linden Homes, and with the same rules.

Unless something has changed that I'm not aware of, the 25 avatars per parcel that you mentioned doesn't exist. Mainland sims can have up to 40 avatars on them, and they can all be on a single parcel on the sim. Private island sims can have up to 100 simultaneously. If your club is listed in search, you could come a cropper with your scripted agent idea. You'll be relying on the dancers complying with your wishes because you can't register them as scripted agents, and you can't see whether they are registered or not. So you could end up on the wrong side of the rules a lot when one or more of them simply can't bothered to register each time. Also, if you intend attracting people to the club, using bots is more likely to turn people away when they discover that there aren't any real people there. Even more so if the bots have tips jars. Who wants to tip a bot? That's why people say that it's a bad idea. On the other hand, using bots that are registered as scripted agents, all ready for people to 'interact' with in adult ways, may attract quite a few people, especially noobs.

Yes, it was artifically affecting traffic counts that was outlawed. Most camping was there for the traffic so that type was no longer allowed, but camping itself wasn't affected. It was exactly the same with bots.

Mircea Lobo wrote: Hypotetically keeping kids from writing fake account settings to see some 3D porn is a good reason to request scanned ID over the internet? Yes.

Perrie Juran wrote: This reminds me of something I saw back in the days when Camping was legal. It was in a very adult oriented location. A person could park their Avatar on a pose ball for anyone who happened by to **bleep**. I don't know if it was more funny or sad, but watching someone **bleep**ing an AFK Avatar has got to be one of the wildest things I have ever witnessed in SL. First: camping IS legal. I have 2 camping chairs in my store and, as everybody know, I wouldn't have them there if they weren't legal Last: When I was new I found myself in a place like that. I actually watched a female av get into a place ready for anyone to have their way with her. At the time, I was new enough to never have heard of camping so I don't know whether or not it was a camping system. If I'd known about camping, and if it was a camping system, I'd have had an alt spend a lot of time there.

I agree completely about it being a mistake to use bots to make a place appear fuller than it actually is. Imo, it's something that the OP ought not to do. However, I don't agree that bots in a club, just dancing and doing nothing else, adds the same amount of workload as normals avs to either the server or to viewers. For one thing, they won't talk. Another thing is that they won't move (change location). Also they won't cam around or do anything to change their view, and they won't change dance animations. In other words, once a real person avatar has got the bot's data, there will be no more data for the server to process, send out, and for the viewer to receive. So, overall, a dancing bot almost certainly causes significantly less work for the server than normal avatars.

Yep. We've digressed somewhat. But you're the OP so it's your fault One last word though. You can always choose not to provide RL information about yourself. It is always entirely your own choice, so you have no valid complaint about it whatsoever.

Mircea Lobo wrote: NOW I don't know if they do any longer... that "age verification" crap seems optional and thankfully barely any sim uses it. Back then, I was notified by Linden Lab that if I don't send my card, my SL account will be deleted. I was lucky to have recently bought a scanner, and I had to send it via email to an address I didn't even know. If a bully asked for my identity card at a street corner, even that would have upset me less. But since then I'm opposed to the concept of requesting such data over the internet entirely... it's just my opinion that it's wrong. Even worse, the verification expired multiple times on this account, so it's not even permanent. And I'm NEVER sending any more data to LL again, even if it means being restricted from some sims. Although I renewed my ID card with the police (due to expiration date) they still have my social number and stuff they should have never pushed me into giving them. [EDIT] Small correction: I remember it's either a scan of your identity card, your bank account, or your drivers license. But I consider either of these private data which internet services shouldn't lure people into sending them. The only time I was ever asked to show scanned evidence of who I am was when I was having LL send thousands of US$ to my bank account. Doing that is a circumstance when I positively want LL to know my RL details, of course. Whe LL started testing that 3rd party verification system that you mentioned (I forget its name) I volunteered to test it. I didn't have to do it but I volunteered. Nobody has ever had to do it. From what Perrie said, and you confirmed, you had to prove your RL id for a very valid reason that nobody would find fault with. Of course, you didn't have to do it. You could have just walked away. It was entirely your choice. Now you can remove that ridiculous signature

Mircea Lobo wrote: Separately @ Phil Deakins: I'm not a privacy freak. Hell, I post videos of myself on Youtube often. But if I'm constrained against my will to take photos of my identity card and send them to strangers over the internet, that crosses the line of what I consider acceptable by far. If some consider this normal, they are free to even post their identity card on Facebook if they feel like it. But I don't want it done with my data thank you. Fair enough. So don't do it. Your problem is solved and you can remove that ridiculous signature of yours