Scylla Rhiadra

I agree in general with everything you say, and feel your pain, although of course the main issue is that avatar customization (and most innovations in that regard, the singular exception that I can think of being BOM) has been driven not by the platform (and LL) itself, but by individual creators, all creating their own standards and approaches. From what I understand, LL didn't even intend, initially, that mesh should be applied to avatar bodies and (eventually) heads, and were caught a little by surprise when that started to happen. There are two slightly conflicting goals here: the first is, as you say, to make customization as easy as possible for noobs within their first hour in SL. For that something like the centralized, well-organized, and intuitive "character creation screen" that you see at the beginning of so many games is obviously the route to go. I don't know how difficult that would be to add to the viewer code, but I'd imagine it wouldn't be easy. BUT you could produce a sort of cheat version using well-designed HUDs, I think. Think of the inventory and wardrobe organization system that's quite popular -- I've forgotten what it's called. Something like that, except simpler to use. The system would never become universal, because a well-designed HUD that allows you to change your appearance comprehensively likely wouldn't be adopted by creators who are making only one element in that appearance. LeLutka is not going to design a system that allows you to easily and intuitively change your hair, for instance. And the idea of creators here standardizing is frankly pretty laughable: they're too busy trying to one-up each other with sparkly new innovations. But the second goal, teaching noobs how to use the systems and mechanisms that are in practice already "standard" in SL requires an instructional approach that doesn't provide a single, simple, and intuitive system because, as you note, that's not how customization actually works in SL. A simple customization system at the beginning does nothing to prepare them for the grim realities of actually using commercially-available parts and elements. Maybe something like a two-level approach might work? Provide them with the option of using a simple system straight off, or of learning how customization works "in the wild" through a more complicated, but hopefully well-explained, approach?

Wow, really. When you say "other places in Belli," do you mean public spaces -- or the houses of friends, etc.? That's a bit disturbing if so, and stupid: surely they want to showcase Belli for non-Premium users? ETA: It's lovely to see you posting again, Kali. 🙂

I think, personally, that there are three clear aims for the Senra bodies. 1) Give noobs something that doesn't look too obviously "noobish" or awful out of the box, so that they can start exploring and finding things to do with some confidence that they aren't going to stand out like a sore thumb. Part of that is ensuring that they don't all need to look exactly the same (i.e., not part of a small army of lady with dog in bag) as other noobs. 2) Provide noobs with a body and clothing that are, functionally and mechanically speaking, close enough to current avatar customization practices that it is providing an early tutorial on how to use mesh bodies and heads, BOM, HUDs, etc. 3) Give them something serviceable enough that they can improve their looks through purchases (freebie or otherwise) in a gradual fashion, building on what the Senra bodies already provide. Instead of having to drop obscene amounts all at once just to get started on going mesh, they should be able to build a better looking avatar gradually, piece-by-piece: a few new clothes, then new hair, then skins, then maybe a new mesh head . . . etc. From what I've seen having tried it out, the Senra body moves in the right direction on all of these, but with only partial success. 1) Looking good and enabling customization out of the box: I'd give the Senra avis a grade of "B" on this. They look . . . ok. In fact, I've seen people with expensive LeLu EvoX heads that managed to make them look worse than the default shape for the Jaime. The fact that they have some styling choices immediately should ensure, in theory, that they needn't look like every other noob popping into a club (assuming they can find a club that will allow them in). 2) Provide a kind of a tutorial on mesh in SL: at most, I'd award them a "C" on this. As others have noted, there are some pretty non-standard elements to these avatars, and the single "HUD" provided is woefully inadequate as a sample and teaching guide. I had to struggle a bit working out how to use the hair and hair bases -- and I ain't a noob. This could be relatively easily improved, and they really need to add simple, well-written, and easily accessed instructional material on customizing and using these. I'd actually favour something built into the view, but at least an illustrated manual that could be attached unobtrusively to, say, the right side of the screen. 3) Provide a base upon which to gradually build future customization using commercial products. I think that this is a solid "A." The Jaime body, the feet issue notwithstanding, is really not terrible (it's the skins that are the biggest issue), and it will support commercial skins available now. A great deal will depend, obviously, on the provision of new clothing for these avis, but older, standard-sizing stuff will certainly work, as will skins mapped according to the old standards and hair. I can easily imagine slowly building a pretty nice looking avi using the foundation that this provides. For me, the big issue, then, is B) -- making these easily usable and understandable in a way that will serve noobs well when they start delving into commercially-available clothing, skins, heads, AOs, etc. And well-put together documentation and instruction is absolutely essential, or these will actually make things worse for noobs, because they'll be faced with an incredibly opaque and complicated customization system straight from the get-go.

True enough. I was trying to find mid-heels last week, in fact. It was not so easy.

I do think that the foot shape thing is going to be an issue, but LL is, I'm sure, walking a pretty precarious line between creating a body that is sufficiently nice to last a noob for, as you imply, at least a couple of months, and it being so nice that they feel no need to invest in something better. And LL will want people to eventually invest in something commercial: they want to keep the SL economy humming, and don't (in this instance anyway) want to compete with Maitreya, Ebody, Legacy, et al. And if there is anything like a reasonably good take-up of the creation of clothing rigged for these bodies, that's an issue. So, it's a question of being just good enough, but not too good. I do wonder, in the context of that, if the absence of feet for heels isn't a case of planned obsolescence? Because, really, the Jaime body (from what I saw of it, playing around with it) is otherwise really not too bad. You wouldn't want to wander around a nude beach wearing it, but under clothing? It's just fine.

No, you need different foot shapes built into the body. Most have flat, lot, mid, and high. Ballet (en pointe) is also now pretty common.

Because all women in SL be like . . , I actually do agree that this is a problem but . . . I mean, personally, I wear flats more often than heels. SOOOOO much more comfortable.

Kink shaming? HERE?

Yeah, just checked. The stuff I actually tried on and that got saved to my inventory is still there, but everything in my Senra library folders is now gone again. “Forward, the Light Brigade!” Was there a man dismayed? Not though the soldier knew Someone had blundered. Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die. Into the valley of Death Rode the six hundred. Oops.

This is a point that hadn't occurred to me. You're right. Maybe some enterprising soul will produce add-on feet, a la Slink.

A quickie edit of the shape (#2 I think), with library skins, hair, and clothing. https://gyazo.com/41bcde7a275ff7c90405b8c73df3689b Not great. Now, re-edited shape, but with Session skins and Magika hair https://gyazo.com/e9c9ae8e839b45bad95a7879b3c81209 These are not great out of the box, but as starters to which you can slowly add stuff, they're quite usable. I haven't checked out Blake, but Jaime's body is really not half bad.

Excellent choices! The Garden would be particularly interesting (for me, anyway). I am trying to think if I've ever explicitly referenced PJ in a photo. I don't think so, but "The Dress" was in the back of my mind for one pic I did ages ago. AND I know that I've had White Chalk on my wish list of themes I'd like to tackle: I love the relationship between landscape, memory, and self -- and I WANT THAT DRESS.

OMG, Polly Jean is just about my favourite artist of all time! And yeah, she is really complicated and challenging. What a perfect recreation of room 509! LOVE LOVE LOVE! (Now do Angelene, my favourite song on that album!)

I am not really "anti-AI" or "anti-bot." I used to amuse myself on occasion by having conversations with Google's old chatbot -- whatever that was called, I can't remember now. And I can certainly see contexts in which AI-run bots or NPCs in SL would be useful and an enhancement. An AI "helper" for instance, or an AI bartender. It could be a real boon for some forms of RP? But I want to know that I'm talking to a bot NPC. And if I find them proliferating in places or contexts where I expect and want to engage with real humans, I'm going to start getting very busy with my Block/Ignore function.

Yeah, this -- or these -- is/are exactly what I foresee happening. In a best case scenario, everything will become homogenized. Presumably the software engineers are on it . . . but they're going to need to find a way to detect AI-generated art and chatter.

Rules that apply to code, Love! Not to you or I! But yes, I am of course a very well-known rebel, breaking ALL the rule EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME! Just look at me rebelliously not ending this sentence with a period

They can join the Hollywood actors and screenwriters on the picket lines!

Yes, this, exactly. I suspect that we're playing with fire a bit, here: the full implications of this, even if they have been explored in scientific literature and fiction, are by no means evident yet. And, personally, I don't think humanity is well served by being told how to live as humans by algorithms.

Absolutely, although we've begun to see instances of things like ChatGPT producing results that were not foreseen (or likely to be approved of) by its programmers. I think it's an incredibly complicated series of mechanisms operating this . . . and control over AI is unquestionably one, but only one, of the biggest issues.

Yes, of course they do -- although in reconstructing them, they produce new variations (like the woman with six fingers I mentioned above). They aren't just "sources of information" like an encyclopedia entry: they synthesize and rework, and they simulate analysis and logic. And the key word here is "simulate." Uh huh . . . 🙄 Does this anecdote have a point, Arielle? One of my best friends in SL is an ex-Texas cop who votes Republican (or did, until Trump). So what?

I've seen it suggested that AI bots -- built from ChatGPT, or using Midjourney or whatever -- are already starting to essentially reproduce themselves because they are harvesting their own "products." So, AI "art" based not on RL art, but on . . . other AI art. Opinions or information built from the opinions and information of other AI machines. I suppose it'll be a bit like a game of telephone, because AI now tends to introduce a degree of noise into anything it reproduces: subtle or not-so-subtle errors ("Why does that woman have six fingers!") and biases that will, I suppose, become hardened through reproduction and repetition. The ultimate echo chamber, but one empty of human witness, and that resounds with increasingly distorted screaming . . . If an AI-driven bot falls in a forest . . . does it matter?

i am implying no such thing. A perspective, whether left, right, or centrist, is not "real" if it's being delivered to us by an algorithm, because a bot is incapable of having a "perspective" at all. The issue isn't the particular ideological flavour: it's just as possible (and in fact, does of course happen) to have algorithms serve up left wing opinions as right wing ones. The issue is whether that opinion is derived from real lived experience and human thought, as opposed to constructed by a literally non-living, non-thinking bundle of code. This is not, I'd submit, a new phenomenon, per se. We just have a new means at our disposal to avoid real people.

Oh, I'm pretty sure that there will be bots designed to prefer sh*t-flavoured ice cream. Which, again, whatevs. And a whole lot of flavours that are probably illegal in some countries. O Brave New World!

Well I suppose arguably the entire notion of "consent" becomes rather moot in the context of a bot. Which is another interesting point. Until we reach the moment of The Singularity, of course -- at which point we're all probably dead anyway! 😏 I have known people in SL who treat others as though they were disposable NPCs. For that matter, in RL I've seen people treat cashiers as though they were vending machines, or someone holding a door open for them as though they were an electronic door-opener, so . . . Personally, yeah, I'd like to see a mechanism for consent built into a sex bot engaged in CNC -- not because it is necessary (the bot being in any case incapable of consenting) but simply to reinforce the point that consent is a vital component of human interactions -- which, of course, sex with a bot is simulating. But whatevs. So long as people are well-educated about and aware of the importance of consent, it probably doesn't matter too much.

Interesting! And maybe a little disquieting. To be clear, I have zero moral qualms about the use of AI to produce "realistic" partners for virtual sex. I mean, for me, sex is only meaningful -- and by that, I mean "a turn on" -- if I know that I'm engaged with a real person, but pornography has always been about fantasy, and doesn't involve real engagement either. One area of concern might be that sexbots are simply reproducing particular toxic social attitudes about sex and gender (for instance, reinforcing r*pe myths), but so long as the person using them knows that they are engaged with a programmed entity rather than a real person, that's not much different in effect than RP. What I find disquieting is the possibility that our engagement with AI bots is going to gradually displace our interactions with real people. That's disturbing on two counts: first, that we are no longer going to be exposed to the real perspectives, views, and experiences of actual people, and second, that such bots can be used (as they are now on platforms such as Twitter) to push particular ideologies or perspectives, whether through misinformation or not. I'll lay aside the second of these for the moment, as it's a larger issue relating to social media and online information in general. My first named concern is maybe more subtle, but in some ways more potentially worrisome. We learn from our interactions with others. It teaches us that there are other perspectives, it gives us access to new insights that might not otherwise be available to us, and it trains us in empathy and tolerance. And an AI can only provide a simulacrum of such an experience. We're all familiar with the idea of the "filter bubble": that algorithms tend to feed us more of what we already believe or like, rather than disrupting and questioning our biases and beliefs through exposure to difference. Someone here, a while ago, actually suggested that it would be a great thing if we could produce SL bots who reflected our own likes and dislikes -- who would, it was literally suggested, be exactly like ourselves. What a "perfect friend" that would be! Like talking to a mirror . . . And because AI harvests its "ideas" and "attitudes" and discourse from the most visible and popular existing online sources, it's always going to reflect the "status quo" in terms of perspective. This is a recipe for personal and social stagnation. My best friend in SL is someone who is, in most regards, entirely unlike me. I'm trained in the humanities, and she's an engineer. I'm straight; she's gay. I'm "vanilla," and she's a Domme. Her popular culture references tend to be from the 40s and 50s, while mine are more current. She has told me that no one sends her scurrying to Google Search more than I do, and the same is true on my side: I have learned so much from her. And the reason I have is because she is so very different than I am in many respects. Why would I want to exchange her, and her insights and perspectives (not to mention her very human warmth and personality) for a programmed entity that feeds me what I want to hear? Our bot overlords aren't going to rule over us in some sort of obviously authoritarian manner. They are going to be our best friends, our lovers, our "teachers" -- and they are going to oppress us by keeping us comfortably cocooned in unchallenged and unchallenging "truisms" that reflect the world, not as it is, but as we'd secretly like it to be.