Hugsy Penguin

Freya Mokusei wrote: --- wrote: the information is not there for a viewer to display, the whole transaction happens server side. sensors are "old technology" for security scripts too, newer ones use llGetAgentList for more flexibility. To be fair, that's a quote of ObviousAltIsObvious.

Freya Mokusei wrote: Hmmmm~! Hugsy's idea plus some lines from Dresden gave me an idea! Dresden Ceriano wrote: get rid of tier-paying resident's security systems, for which they'd have paid good money, in order to replace them with what would, no doubt, be a solution without even half the features and functionality Clearly right that this is the largest hurdle will be changing existing functionality. Soooo~ What if llSensor's could show a 'bubble' or 'orb' - in the same way that Lightsources can do by toggling a setting in Build. This would probably be a similar optional view which pilots, cat burglers and SEAL Team Six can enable at will. This way security systems would work entirely in the same way, but pilots could detect possible orbs more easily. For bonus points, TPV developers could make the orbs flash bright red or barber-shop stripes for specific applications. Like Dolphin used'a have, for sailors. Dunno, I'm still sleepy. It seems better that the viewer changes than LSL functionality. Showing a llSensor bubble may be useful for some, and maybe somewhat useful for explorers/vehicle users. One issue would be false positives. I'm sure orbs aren't the only scripts which use the function. Also, the bubble wouldn't show until the prim containing the script was rezzed which may be too late.

Dresden Ceriano wrote: I think you're completely underestimating the breadth and depth of the uproar which would be unleashed upon LL from across the grid, should they decide to, all of a sudden, get rid of tier-paying resident's security systems, for which they'd have paid good money, in order to replace them with what would, no doubt, be a solution without even half the features and functionality of that which they were meant to replace. Sorry, I know you've put some thought into this, but I honestly just don't think it would ever fly (no pun intended). ...Dres History has shown that if the right person at LL wants a feature change, then it's going to happen no matter the uproar. I don't use security orbs so I figured that defining a top, bottom, and parcel boundary for the sides along with white and black lists would be the simplest and easiest way to keep friends in and intruders out. But, I'm not a luddite. If these orbs really do contain must-have options, then tell the server where the orb is covering (but don't put up banlines) so it can be shown on the map. ETA: I should also mention, that if orbs are outlawed, the entire script doesn't have to be thrown out - just the part the auto-detects and ejects with no human intervention. Everything else is fine. Also, a benefit to land owners is that they'll now be able to uncheck "Avatars on other parcels can see and chat with avatars on this parcel." So, they can that privacy in their skyboxes.

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Hugsy Penguin wrote I propose this: Allow land owners to define the top and bottom of the privacy zone. This eliminates the need for security orbs, therefore, they'll be banned. Also, display on the map/mini-map where the privacy zones are. This gives vehicle users no excuse for crashing into ban lines. This is the most sensible solution to this debate I have seen. Kudos to you. You should start a JIRA on this. Thanks. I had thought of doing that. A concern is that this plan says that security orb use is to be made a TOS violation. If that happens, it will cause much gnashing of teeth by the orb makers, as well as, the people who don't pay attention to TOS updates and all of a sudden find their orbs removed by LL. If they don't outlaw security orbs, then it will be very difficult to get people to actually remove their orbs and fix their privacy zone. It would also allow land owners to basically grief people by marking a volume of their land explicitly open-to-the-public and then sending home everyone who shows up. Even with the potential issues surrounding security orbs, I would love to see this implemented.

Perrie Juran wrote: Having been listening to the debates for years I concluded long ago that their is no solution that can make everyone happy. I agree but I think they may come close: To me, the best solution is to let land owners secure their land while letting others see the secure zones from a distance (i.e., on the map/mini-map). Right now on mainland, we have a what I'll call a 'privacy zone'. It extends from ground level to 50 meters above ground and is enabled when you turn off public access. If you want privacy above that, you need a security orb. I propose this: Allow land owners to define the top and bottom of the privacy zone. This eliminates the need for security orbs, therefore, they'll be banned. Also, display on the map/mini-map where the privacy zones are. This gives vehicle users no excuse for crashing into ban lines.

If you're seeing "What is Second Life?" then you're not logged in. The link is in the upper right. Once you're logged in, you'll see your dashboard. It's the same username/password as logging in-world and here in the forums but it's a different session if you will. You can be logged into the forums but not into your dashboard and vice versa.

Pussycat pointed out the Buy L$. Frankly, that's the quickest, easiest, and most financially sensible way to get L$ in-world. If, for some reason, you don't want to go that route, you can try the camping and whatnot that Pussycat mentioned, but I believe that will be rather time consuming. Pussycat also mentioned building up a skill. Again that would be time consuming and not worth it for one thing, but, at least you could parlay that skill into making more money. There's also a group in-world called Job World. I've never taken a job through there, but maybe it's something to look into.

Perrie Juran wrote: Despite LL's warning that InvisiPrims were not supported and could get broken, everyone started using them. I wish there was a way for them to bring back invisiprims regardless of your settings. The ability to cancel the display of water was a nice feature. The moles made an interesting "Hole in the Sea" which can still be found here: http://slurl.com/secondlife/Twogood/129/128/20

Go to your Dashboard (surf to the top level secondlife.com site and login if needed) On the left there will be Home, Account, Events, Shop, Land Manager. Click the icon after Account to expand a list. Towards the bottom of the list click Billing Information. You should be able to add PayPal or a credit card.

Welcome back and Congrats! :matte-motes-big-grin:

I have no idea what you're talking about. Honestly, I don't. I must have missed a thread or something. Anyway, I recently had reason to do a search and the following video seems relevant here: The quote in the link was obtained from YouTube commenter Sanguiluna (i.e., I didn't write it but I thought it was funny). :-D

I'm going to a web site that has a card game on it. Right-clicking multiple cards selects multiple cards for play. This works fine when playing the game on a normal web browser. I now have the game displayed on a prim in-world. When I go to right-click the cards, the viewer's right-click menu appears and the cards don't get selected. How do I get the viewer to NOT display the viewer right-click menu, but rather send the right-click event to the web site?

Dillon Levenque wrote: I was going to ask if that group is open enrollment, but I just checked online and it is. I'm a very infrequent flyer but I see there's a gridflight section through my neighborhood (Corsica) the first week of February and it looks like something that might be fun to watch. I don't remember seeing an airstrip in my travels, either, so it would be nice to learn where it is. Thanks for posting that! A day or two before the grid flight, they send a notecard detailing all the airports and the exact flight path. Also, you can find airports here: Second Life Airport Information

Perrie Juran wrote: It sounds like someone is going to need to do some careful testing and possibly edit either that Wiki entry or this one: "Maximum "NO ENTRY" ban line height: is for all options 80 meter. Only the option 'Banned Residents' (named) has a 5020 meter ban line high, which is visible up to a high of 800 meter above the terrain mesh." http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Limits I have no idea what they're talking about with the 80 meter limit. To test, I found a parcel on a slope. The lowest ground is at ~140m and the highest ground at ~160m. No public access. Ban lines are displayed and effective to 50m AGL. Fly over the low end at ~190m and you can get over the land. Then fly towards the high end and you bounce off the ban area when the ground slopes up.

Maelstrom Janus wrote: we never see aircraft flying in sl any more..... Join the group: SL Gridflight Take part in their SLGF Historic Kessel Run Challenge January 15th, 17th, and 18th 2014.

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: So I did some research on this and ban lines and found, contrary to what is stated in other posts here, go to the height of 4096 now, per this wiki entry. From the link you provided: "If the parcel is simply not pubic access or restricted to certain Residents/groups, then the lines go up to 50 m above the terrain mesh." These are the most common ban lines that you'll find. My neighbor has this type of ban lines and I can fly over them all day long. I can also get out of any vehicle, fly my avatar over their parcel, press F to turn off fly mode, and trampoline on an invisible field. It's the explicit named bans that go up higher. IIRC, they used to only go to about 800 meters. Today, I believe they actually go to about 5000 meters. She may have some people banned by name, but for everyone else, the lines stop at 50m AGL. The ban lines this land owner is using are not only doing absolutely nothing to protect her skybox, they could actually be driving curious people into the sky to figure out why there's ban lines on the ground protecting empty land.

The stated reason for the ban lines was: "I don't want people in my sky box." She didn't say anything about blocking air travel. It's entirely possible she doesn't mind the airplanes. Or, and I say this as both a land owner and flyer/explorer, if she doesn't like the air traffic, then, yes, it's her right to keep the ban lines. Regardless, she thinks the ban lines are protecting her skybox. It would be helpful if someone informed her that that's not the way they work.

The land owner is being stupid. Turning of public access has always created ban lines to 50 meters above ground. Perhaps someone should politely explain this to this person.

Starting a new thread to help keep the other on topic. Perrie Juran wrote: ObviousAltIsObvious wrote: Perrie Juran wrote:I've read also that they charged for the TP's on the telehubs????? They weren't that mean! The telehub system was a free replacement for paid direct teleports. Lindens really wanted people to slow down and mingle, but they never found a great way to make it happen. Thanks. I remember now what/where I had read. http://secondlife.wikia.com/wiki/Telehubs I really don't want to take this thread on a tangent but I've always found this comment there very interesting: "A side benefit Linden Lab had hoped would be that telehubs would help in "urban development", creating more commercial centers around them, and leaving the outskirts of land further away from the "hubs" for residential-type land." IIRC, that's sort of what happened. Land around telehubs was expensive and usually contained shops although there were shops in the outlying areas too. When LL announced their plans to implement point-to-point teleporting, these land owners when ballistic (especially the one's who just bought “telehub land”). They were angry because their highly sought after and expensive land would become no more valuable than anywhere else. Also, today's no-public-access ban lines that only go to 50m above ground is a carry-over from telehubs. People needed to fly over other people's land to get to where they wanted to go. In addition, blacklist bans only went to about 800m I believe. And, you could only build up to 768m; the sky was all clear above that.

Krueger wrote: Wow: there are some really old avs here. I wish I could have been around SL in the early years. Does anyone have any stories of what it used to be like? Or screenshots? Actually, we didn't like it. We complained quite a bit and while LL was slow to react (yeah, that never changed) telehubs were done away with for what we have now. Also, you could get a direct TP but you'd have to get someone who was already there to offer you a TP. If you couldn't, welcome to the up arrow key. :-)

This one. Created June 18, 2005. Age as of today: 8 years 6 months 23 days.

"5 O'Clock Charlie" is back tonight. I didn't check all forums, but the first post in General Discussion I see is 01-09-2014 01:44 AM EST (UTC -5). Maybe we should start a poll. When will our inept North Korean flyer drop on us tomorrow night? I say he will be a bit late and drop on GD at 01-10-2014 01:46 AM EST (UTC -5). ETA: Do'h! Forgot to bump the day to the 10th.

Yeah, I never reported every single one either. I've reported multiple before though. I figure more reports draws more attention to the Mods. It depends on my mood though. Sometimes multiple. Sometimes just one. Occasionally fed up and just page next to get to the real posts.

I report it when I see it, but, I can't be bothered to report every single post. It's getting to be like "5 O'clock Charlie" from M*A*S*H. So, it's 2am ET. Yup, there's the spam.

Canoro Philipp wrote: i love the complexity and intensity of dubstep, its fun how the author of the video made the sounds into text, it really fits them. I agree. I don't have time to watch the whole thing right now, but did watch about the first 10 minutes. I liked what I was hearing and seeing. Dubstep isn't for everyone though LOL: