Sassy Romano

Welcome, I hope you enjoy your visit. Remember to look right when crossing the road but you can cross anywhere you like, there's no jaywalking law.

Ok, he didn't, I am asking why. Convince me as to why it's a good thing... What have I missed that's convincing, the *must* be something?!

Again, I didn't suggest anything, merely described what's possible. Having said that, you need to reread the definition of theft. This isn't it. You may also want to campaign about the way the viewer works, creature a JIRA etc. It puts textures on the client, what happens next is beyond your control.

First point, the texture is there, what people do with it is up to them. I didn't suggest it, I said it's an option. Subtle difference. Yes the maps have value to the creator of the texture but my question wasn't answered. If the item is unique and they're only a match for that creation, if the merchant had no interest in making a change, I'm asking why not allow the customer? They have value to a customer, even a monetary value if desired. No demand here, the question is simple and genuine. "Because I don't want to", while an answer, isn't particularly convincing and while I accept that there doesn't need to be any reason whatsoever, it's much easier to be less perplexed when there's a really good explanation. I love good explanations with well thought out reasoning because I learn something that I might not have previously considered. Right now though, over got that perplexed "huh?!" kinda look.

Well, one option would be to save the supplied texture from cache, since the viewer will have ever so nicely downloaded it. That provides an instant reference for both UV and AO shading. But let me ask this, why not offer the UV and AO maps anyway?! If the mesh is truly unique, then they have no value to anything else anyway. If the mesh is template (and readily available), the modding inclined customer will seek the original FP mesh if it's that important and get the maps that way and not buy the no mod item in the first place. I accept that people selling template mesh will likely not have the rights to include the AO and UV maps so just point the now non customer to the source of template mesh and move on.

didn't we used to be able to delete our own posts when making an accidental double post? Oh well, it has been a while.

I'm a little late to this thread but I always took a different approach. Along with offering the item as modify, I include the AO map and UV map for the mesh clothing that I created and where possible, detailed instructions for modifying and scripts for injecting those custom textures into a complex item. Textures were never my excitement and I knew that most of my customers liked to play around by linking items (yes even rigged mesh has a reason for linking items), adding scripts and so on. As to someone making my stuff look like complete garbage, there's an opposite to this. If by me providing the resources, someone then made a great texture and made my item look great, that surely helped sales right? (This was never my thought process but it is as valid as the notion that someone changing the item ruins it and thus devalues the brand.) Yes I saw a few solid black items and wondered how the purchaser reasoned that it looked good but it was their choice, just someone can go and purchase a classic work of art painting and cover it in white emulsion and then call it impressionist or whatever. To each their own and this is the topic that just keeps giving. Ultimately, SL provides a permissions system and it's up to both parties to determine the combination that provides the solution desired. My advice is to always ask if there's something alternate that the item creator may be willing to do. In some cases, they will on a case by case basis and on others it opens the biggest can of dramafest laden catfighting imaginable. I've been on the receiving end of both camps but as a creator was always willing to try to help although in some cases the requested outcome cannot be delivered for various reasons. Just as in RL, offer for sale = invitation to treat. If the product as offered isn't appropriate, determine the possible outcomes prior to payment. Undesired outcome = don't buy.

It's going to be a complete hoot, I know i've got knives out for a handful of select companies from whom i'll be extracting my pound of flesh! This is good: Companies being required to respond about the data which is held about a data subject at no charge. Presently there's provision for an admin fee to find out what data is held in DPA, superceded by GDPR removes this charge. This is not: Best of all and frankly the most ridiculous is that a data subject can have a passing conversation with a toilet cleaner, a canteen worker, a pond cleaner etc. and say "please remove all my data" and that can form a perfectly legitimate request for fully qualified action on the part of the organisation and it must be actioned within 30 days or they would have to justify the delay. There's no prescribed standard phrase, no requirement to do it in writing and no requirement to request it of a specific part or person/office within the organisation. An absolutely reckless bit of legislation and they'll wonder why this cause headaches and problems.

I can't identify a data subject from a marketplace receipt. Avatar, date time, product, L$. Where's the data that relates to a naturally identifiable person that a merchant can use?

I would suggest that Casper's text is somewhat too broad. Specifically, from the regulation:- For the purposes of this Regulation: ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person; Things like IP addresses can sometimes be construed as personal data, particularly when other data is aggregated. An IP address by itself would not necessarily be classed as personal data. Similarly, I doubt that merchants can identify a natural person by an avatar name even along with an IP address. LL on the other hand clearly have a much better opportunity where they have payment info on file but as far as I read GDPR, if a data subject cannot be tied to a natural person, then it seems a bit of a leap to suggest that a list of unidentifiable pseudonyms somehow constitutes personal data, when there are no natural persons who can be identified. Seek your own legal advice though, there are plenty of opinions and "experts" out there offering consultancy before any of this is even tested in court. Basically, it's all a bit of a minefield and going to be a fun ride.

Noooo Innula, YOU need to ask VM for your money back since they clearly delayed you by 2 seconds compared with me!

Well what an unhelpful bunch on this forum since nobody has actually answered your question! The answer as to why is because of poor bandwidth between the server hosting the download and you. Now, I just downloaded it in 8 seconds and benchmarked my speed (between me and the nearest speed test server) at 378Mbps, this isn't the full answer though because that doesn't test the speed all the way to the Firestorm server but it would give me an idea as to whether the issue is within my control. Go to https://www.speedtest.net and see what result you get but clearly "They" have nothing to fix since it seems that only you have reported an issue so far but it could still be anywhere between you and the rest of the path to the Firestorm download server.

Others have given plenty, my main advice is simple:- "Do what makes you happy!"

I won, took me nearly ten years but I found the exit.

There's your problem! You own two niche phones with small overall market penetration. Next time perhaps choose a device which has the dominant operating system.