Jump to content

Infiniview Merit

Resident
  • Content Count

    163
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Infiniview Merit

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. This is actually HUGE news! server side rendering will be a boon to the average user. Nearly all of the lag that we experience is related to bandwidth and client side rendering. Historically most of the lag complaints have not been entirely LL's fault but instead have been related to inadequate clients to handle the demands of SL. This could enable the use of SL on any device from older PCs to smartphones to Google Glasses. OTOY There was a thread in the old SL forums when this company announced this that led to speculation if SL would ever go this way. It was a far off dream back then. Now in retrospect it appears that this step is neccessary to SL's future survival. If it does not do this it will be left behind. Server side rendering will cut down on massive amounts of "unknowns" and serve to make the SL experience far more consistent from one user to the next. In fact it will be super cool if this step leads to the ability to finally upgrade the SL avatars.
  2. I wonder precisely who's idea this was? It sounds completely overreactionary and unworkable in practice. Like using a bomb to scratch an itch on your face.
  3. Excellent news! I cannot wait to try this out.
  4. Thanks Jopsy, I think you just provided an excellent answer to one of the challenges in this hairball. At least for the use of Real Names. Create a parallel SL world for everyone wanting to use their real names. As I mentioned in an earlier post who among us except for a very few wants to use their real names inworld when most others are not? As it seems patently irresponsible to me to invite a new member to use their real names in a world where most others are not without a sufficient number of warnings. Whereas a separate world for people using their real names would be a world that people could do real business in. Also no offense but the only questions that have been "answered" here are the ones that LL have answered. And the repetition of questions that have not been answered by LL are a sign of the concerns that we the residents have over this policy proposal. Part of the problem is that I do not believe we have a clear enough mission statement of what this policy proposal is all about. We are making suggestions to something without having a clear comprehension of what the actual goals are. Thus as has been mentioned above people are resignedly resorting to making suggestions based on "damage control". If we knew which parts of this plan were critical to achieving LL's goals, or if we knew LL's actual goals then it would be much easier to give relevant feedback. As it is the way it is being presented it feels like all of our feedback is going to be irrelevant to any critical part of this proposal because we simply do not have enough information about what all the goals of the proposal are. So all we are being left with in terms of options of feedback are what color of lipstick to put on this pig or to beg LL not to do it at all! And the only way we could possibly convince them not to do it at all is to add about another 6000 posts!
  5. Hi Jopsy, I am replying to your post not for its particular content. But to see what your opinion of this question is. For those who want to use their real names in SL, what is wrong with making an extra av available to everyone? That way it would not be such a mess with double names all over the place? I asked this question earlier but I do not think anyone answered it. And I wanted to see what an argument against extra av's would look like.
  6. If it was just commercial hype the Iphone 3 would not have set sales records. Nor 4 for that matter. Other than the antenna snafu in the Iphone 4. Apple is famous for it's attention to detail not only in function but form as well. Apple or the Iphone is not my particular cup of tea either but the quality and popularity is undeniable. They also created a new paradigm for what a smartphone should be and that is why so many others are copying them. The reason I brought them up in the first place is they are an obvious example of a company that is very focused on their own primary product and vision. Which is what I think LL should be doing, and I actually think that they are. But this display names implementation is definately not an example of that. I also brought up Steve Jobs because he is notoriously intolerant of poor design submissions. I suppose my post was too subtle, for the purpose of my point it had nothing to do with running SL on an Iphone. The point about the low poly avatar mesh is that compared to available present day options of digital figures that run into the millions of polys there are also massively improved low poly human figure mesh designs out there now that put the SL avatar (from a Poser 1 figure) to shame. So a suggestion for a new avatar mesh would not mean a lower poly than the current one. But a much better mesh design that would mostly likely be of a slightly higher poly count than the current SL av, but far superior in design and function. And the reason for my possibly seamingly irrelevant comments is that these endeavors are the kinds of things that would make SL more compelling to New Users which is one of the primary reasons stated for this display names proposal in the first place. Hopefully that clears things up.
  7. Imagine if SL worked on a par with the quality levels of the Iphone! Would that be awesome or what? And with increased content protection. New Users would be beating down the doors trying to get into SL. Add in a new and improved present day low poly Avatar Mesh and New Users will use any name LL tells them to. If this happened within a few years someone will say "Facebook" and others will say: "Oh yeah I still got a page there but I am hardly ever on there anymore. And if all goes well in this universe then we will be able to look back and say: "Remember when LL briefly considered borking the whole grid with that display names nonsense to try and copy Facebook?" "Oh yeah, I am sure glad they decided not to do that!" Could we pleeaaase be more like Apple instead?
  8. I was just reading an article on how 3d printing is becoming set to revolutionize manufacturing. They mention a company called "Shapeways" which allows average people to send them designs which they then create real life physical objects from. A wealth of design software programs, from free applications to the more sophisticated offerings of companies including Alibre and Autodesk, allows a person to concoct a product at home, then send the design to a company like Shapeways, which will print it and mail it back. “We are enabling a class of ordinary people to take their ideas and turn those into physical, real products,” said J. Paul Grayson, Alibre’s chief executive. Mr. Grayson said his customers had designed parts for antique cars, yo-yos and even pieces for DNA analysis machines. “We have a lot of individuals going from personal to commercial,” Mr. Grayson said. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/14/technology/14print.html?_r=1&src=tp As this display name business has been on my mind lately. It just occurred to me that this was a great example of companies that are capitalizing on the great ideas of it's customers. And since the Iphone has been mentioned lately. What do you guys really think Steve Jobs would think of the design implementation of this display names plan? I have never been a huge fan of Apple, a bit too controlling for a tinkerer like me. But on the other hand I have always admired how Steve Jobs does not try to copy the latest trend. Instead he creates it by being the best at what they are trying to do in their primary product focus. And that is exactly what LL should be doing. Mine the talent of your own users to create the best virtual world experience period. Instead of exposing them to outside dataminers.
  9. If that becomes true then I certainly hope that paying members will be blessed with not having to see all that. Incentive to premium perhaps?
  10. Good point. I guess I tend to overestimate. Your solution is straightforward and to the point. Possibly would it not even be easier for them to simply provide an extra av for the real name option? In the event that a name is already taken a small number could be added right after the name in Chat, IM and on objects. But not on the actual floating nametag. This would let people use real names or permanent nicknames on their primary user field. This would preserve exclusivity and avoid borking search and practically all other potentially confusing areas. Voila! no longer will there be a need for double names all over the place. And it eliminates the risk of impersonation. The other thing it would do is avoid the trivialization of existing user names. If a person needs unicode in their name they could set this up during the avatar creation process. Where it would then have to pass approval first thus eliminating the possibility of abuse. The glaring lack of elegance in our names appearing anywhere inworld "first.last" is a sure sign of bad design. If our names need to appear in some kind of code form somewhere to comply with some grander purpose just put all that junk somewhere else out of our view with a pointer from our inworld name to that. So all that leaves out is the idea of some kind of advanced titler. Make it a completely separate function or leave it to scripters. But absolutely do not give people the power to change names on IM, Chat and Objects in so frivolous a manner. The idea of abandoning exclusivity altogether on av identities should be seriously reconsidered. The beauty of the internet is that it was a new world where exclusivity could be maintained. Multiple replications of the same name are a byproduct of the messiness of the real world. I am certain that if they take this whole proposal back to the drawing board and design it this time with our concerns in mind that they could achieve all of their aims as well as adequately address all of our concerns as well. Hopefully they have not committed so many resources to this already that they feel it is too late to redesign. In which case it will be a sure sign that they should have consulted us before doing so. And if this is actually the case then they absolutely should not go through with this as proposed.
  11. This is one of the most important changes I have seen proposed by LL in the entire 4 years that I have been in SL! LL you guys should send out an Email to every single resident of SL pointing to the original and subsequent blogs on this topic. Encouraging everyone to weigh in on this issue. It is a very small percentage of SL residents that even bother to read the blogs as most of the changes Rarely Affect Everyone on the grid! This would be the responsible thing to do! Not only for your current clients/residents but also for you yourself as a business. I know that if I had not heard about it and then it suddenly hit the grid I would be very upset. All name changes should be handled by LL. People should not be given the ability to randomly change their names to anything they want with practically no limitations and especially not unicode. Make it so that any unicode inclusion on a name change be approved by LL before it is to be allowed inworld. This plan as proposed is a convoluted mess. Each of the functions your proposing could be handled separately. Unless there is something else going on behind all this. Could you LL please also confirm or deny the suggestions that this is really about sharing the member database with other companies or organizations? Because if this is what it is really about and this becomes known later it will not be seen as an example of transparency or integrity. As you guys have stated yourselves in one form or another over the years, being upfront with your consumer base is the best policy. As you can see the single major recurring theme over this whole proposal is "Why!" So please adequately explain every bit of the reasoning behind all this. As this implementation plan reminds me of using a jackhammer to install a thumbtack. And if it occurs to any of you that my request for an explanation is from a management perspective "none of our business", I can assure you that is the furthest thing from the truth.
  12. The problem with it as I see it is the design. This implementation is attempting to solve multiple disparate goals with one packaged solution. The goal of allowing a person to use their real name in SL is far different than the goal of allowing a user to play with temporary names for role playing or anything else. IMHO complying with a new directory structure, use of Real Names and use of Temporary Names could have been approached differently. By designing each function into the overall system in the best way for each goal separately. What I mean by "best" is the most elegant and seamless way possible. That is by finding a way to avoid having to check multiple ways to identify someone. As well as multiple names above a person's head. This extra layer of complexity that is externally showing just seems to point out the problems with the design. This combined approach seems to me to be the reason for all of the forced overlap of affects on the users. If you must proceed with this approach perhaps there is good cause for a third category of names such as "Role Play Names". These would be names that a member could change anytime they wanted but would not need to be included IM and Chat. Whereas then Display Names could be a more permanent option per time frame like six months or a year before a member could change it. This could be implemented during the display name creation process options. This would reduce a great deal of clutter and confusion as well as the temptation to impersonate others. By forcing users to commit to the more permanent name for longer time periods. This would make Display Names for more distinct in separating them from the more frivolous and often changing Role Play Names. If a person is using a Role Play Name it would be obvious to others as it would not appear in IM and Chat. I also do not understand the insistence on the non-exclusivity of display names. I really do not think it is inconveniencing people that much to have something whether a middle initial or number after a name to continue the ease of use we currently enjoy in finding people inworld. Quite a few people have suggested that the reason that this feature needs to affect everyone is because of the way it will display information on the internet about SL users? Could you guys confirm if this is true? And if so what precise information will it make available to internet search engines? As if this is the case is it not extremely important to let us know about this in a transparent way? And will we have options for whether we want information to be made available on the internet? Like privacy controls? I am concerned by articles like this one, check link. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5637554/facebook_ipo_its_not_about_stocks_at.html?cat=15 And this one- http://www.allfacebook.com/hacker-publishes-data-2010-07 The problem is that Bowes didn’t have to use his hacking skills to break into the Facebook site to compile his directory – he simply harvested publicly available data from Facebook’s open access directory. The affected users all have one thing in common – they hadn’t changed their privacy settings to make their pages unavailable to search engines. However, visiting an user’s profile from this directory would also allow you to click through to their friends’ profiles, even if the friends had not made their profiles searchable.
×
×
  • Create New...