Dresden Ceriano

Cameleon Lethecus wrote: Dresden Ceriano, To clarify, the post "how much online privacy is worth to you" has no relation to my job post for a GUI expert. These are two completely separate posts with two completely separate motives. With this post, I am interested in hearing the view of Second Life Residents on the information they are making available, and just how far they are willing to go, to get what they want. With the other post, it was for a product I am working on at the present moment in real life with my team of programmers from my University, and I wanted to make the GUI position available to a Second Life Resident, because I owe a lot to Second Life and understand the extreme talent that it holds. In the future, there will be "Free" services made available to residents of Second Life, but it will come at a cost of your information. I know the people working on these services have read this post, and have seen the feedback I have gotten. I hope they take it into account, when devloping these services, that privacy is a very cherished thing and that the method in which they design these services should include a helathy balance between data collection and conservation. Cam Are you kidding me? The last paragraph of this reply completely contradicts the first one. Forgive me if I don't believe for a second that you started this thread for any other purpose than market research. All one has to do is glance at your past thread creation history to see that this isn't the first time you've done this very thing. Honestly, I really couldn't care less about you posting threads for this purpose, but trying to deny it is rather futile, considering how very obvious it is. ...Dres

Interesting... according to this blog post (link), Anya wasn't a SL designer, but her real life mentor, Meiling Couturier of Meiling Couture was. Apparently, Meiling did base her SL clothing on her RL clothing line, at least in part. I had no idea about their RL connection. Oh and btw, the reason why you can't include the name of that show is because of the "Watch this show" spam we used to get here. There's a good number of shows we aren't allowed to mention because of it. ...Dres

Theresa Tennyson wrote: Grown-Up Theresa? What the... when did that happen? :matte-motes-wink-tongue: ...Dres

I don't know about him wanting to be a proxie, but I think it's safe to say that this is definitely market research for his newest product. Which, according to this post (link) is as follows: Cameleon Lethecus wrote: - Real Life - Targeted at B-Schools acrossed the country (starting in Buffalo, New York) - A finacial simulation using real elements as components of the game play - A revolutionary idea that is both engaging and educational ...Dres

Mandika Bookmite wrote: Dres: If you spent money on things that don't fit, you'd be angy to. But since it looks like you have the perfect factory-made male AV you don't see the problem women who are different in in Second Life are having. Mesh is just another gimic to try to keep vendors interested. Also just another thing that will make everyone the same in Second Life. For many of us it's nothing but horrible. What makes you think that you're the only one who has difficulty finding mesh clothing which fits? Upon the establishment of standard sizing, I had the choice of reconfiguring my shape to fit one of those sizes. But since I was rather partial to the shape which I'd created, then tweaked to perfection over the course of years, I decided to live with the inconvenience of having most mesh clothing not fit me out of the box. What I don't do is blame mesh clothing creators or LL for that decision... and I certainly don't get angry because I've bought something that doesn't fit. You see, I don't buy things unless there's a demo and if the demo doesn't fit, I don't buy it. It's what called being a responsible shopper and if you're being irresponsible by not trying on demos before you spend your money on things, you have no one at whom to be angry but yourself. ...Dres

It seems rather idiotic to me that anyone would create a hud which uses those particular bindings. If I were you, I'd try to change them in the hud and leave the viewer bindings alone. If this isn't possible, I'd contact the creator or simply stop using the hud. ...Dres

Now that you mention it, I believe you're right. I just IMed him and corrected my advice. ...Dres (My memory isn't quite what it used to be.)

Tytia wrote: I realize that just sharing factual news. Wondering why SL has increasingly become so unstable? This initial info sort of clears that up. SL hasn't become any more unstable than it ever has been. ...Dres (Its users are another story entirely.)

Okay, so I got the scoop. It appears as though Tehran's customer was alarmed because someone was using a profile pic capture script to display their profile pic on a prim at their establishment. As such, among other things, I advised him that this was not a legally actionable offense. ...Dres

Phil Deakins wrote: Just a curiosity... Unless you've left a bit out of the LL quote, it's wrong. It says that "Any game of skill that offers a Linden Dollar payout is subject to this policy.", but that's not true. Such a game would also need to be capable of accepting payment to play. This is the exact type of inconsistency which people, such as Sorina, use to muddle the waters. Brace yourself, sweety... this isn't just a semi-colon issue. Any minute now, we're going to start feeling the earth shattering beneath our feet. ...Dres

Nope... sorry... you'll need at least two more meows before they can garner the excitement level which dictates the need of a hooray. ...Dres

Sorina Garrigus wrote: "If the table has an option to pay to play, even if you have it set for free to play, it is illegal even though it is in a private home" That is false but you already knew that. Within the wording of the policy, it's made perfectly clear that LL considers a game which you pay a $L, then instantly get it back, to be a free to play game... not a pay to play game. This fact is illustrated perfectly within the excerpt which you yourself quoted in your previous post. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with you pointing out the distinction between a pay to activate game and an actual pay to play game. But, it's entirely disingenuous of you to do so in order to accuse someone of handing out bad advice. If that's what it takes for you to feel better about yourself, then go right ahead. But you can't stop people from calling you out on your nefarious tactics once you've deployed them. ...Dres

Treycee Melody wrote: I tried all that was suggested Are you sure? Specifically, are you sure you tried this... link... which suggest setting PhysX to CPU? To do this, in the Nvidia Control Panel, go to 3D Settings/Configure Surround, PhysX; under PhysX settings, where it says Processor:, click the drop-down menu and select CPU; then click Apply. ...Dres

Sorina Garrigus wrote: Amethyst Jetaime wrote: If the table does NOT have a pay to play option you are legal. If the table has an option to pay to play, even if you have it set for free to play, it is illegal even though it is in a private home. The creator must be licensed to create skill games, the game itself must be licensed and located on a gaming sim and the owner must be licensed as an operator. On November 1, LL will start enforcing the policy. They may remove it, and possibly suspend or ban your account if your game is illegal and you are not a licensed operator. No one knows how they will go about enforcing the policy. They could just do it by responding to an AR, or they could be actively looking for illegal games on the grid. If I were you I wouldn't take a chance if the table has a pay to play option. I would remove it from your home. You may want to contact the creator to see if they have updated the card table and removed the pay to play option from it. Whether the update will be free or not is up to the creator. This is false. read the FAQ. I would agree with contacting the owner on updating a game but the FAQ makes it clear freeplay is fine even with pay to start options. Also LL has approved very illegal games already. Nothing that Amethyst wrote in the post which you've quoted was inaccurate. Games which you trigger by paying a $L that's instantly returned to you, are considered free to play. While there's nothing wrong with pointing out that distinction, you could have done so without disingenuously claiming that what Amethyst wrote was false. ...Dres

Oh, that's rich... someone who purposely bases their virtual world shape on their real world shape is complaining about a virtual world becoming too much like the real world. ...Dres

Joining the inworld support group, as Heart has suggested, is a good idea... but before you do this, you might want to work through what it tells you to try on this page... link... or, more specifically, the pages to which that page links. I say this because I'm pretty sure that it'll be the first page to which support will send you. ...Dres

Michaelatv Destiny wrote: LL effectively has made second Life a closed shop really, and closed loop holes to any recourse, which I think is depolarable. It's really quite simple. If you didn't like the terms to which you agreed prior to using their services, you shouldn't have agree to them and, instead, went about finding someone else who's terms you do like to provide you those services. ...Dres

Michaelatv Destiny wrote: Interesting post, But in the UK, money made in a virtual world is taxable by the UK HM and customs. Many UK sellers, on the market Place and for that matter Ebay, have to tread very lightly, as its very easy for HM tax and revenue to find out through a variety of means if your recieving income, from an online business model. Any moneys made has to be declared in a tax return form, and if you make money from Ebay or Second life while recieving benefits, in this country if you dont declare that fact, you can be in trouble with the DWP lawyers, who see this as fraud, by unlawfully claiming benefits while recieving an income. The only time you have to pay taxes on what you've earned in SL is when you cash out, thereby changing lindens into RL money. It's really no different than if you were to buy a plant, make clippings, then sell the new plants for cash. You're supposed to pay taxes on the cash which you've made doing so, but that doesn't mean that those plants were ever considered legal currency. ...Dres

Michaelatv Destiny wrote: yes but on this occasion your being forced to leave town, because you have no option. LL will close down the town, but in RL, you can take your stock with you and set up in another town, But in SL2 Town, SL1 Town will keep all your poccessions, because it reckons you dont own them, even though you paid RL cash from paypal for them. You don't own them... what you paid for is a license to use those assets in SL. If you want to use them in "another town", you'll have to pay for a license to do so or make some sort of deal with the person you purchased the license from in SL. ...Dres

I'll be the first to admit that I know virtually nothing about money markets and such, but it seems to me that what you're actually talking about is the conversion rate between GBP and USD, which is entirely out of LL's control and, as such, plays little part in the actual operation of SL's micro-economy. ...Dres

So, pedos and racists now, huh? Wonderful. If I were you, I'd destroy my computer and never get online again. ...Dres

I apologize for my hyperbole. Having a clearer head today, I realize I need not have gone there. Pussycat Catnap wrote: There's no financial loss to LLs if they take back your land - you are still paying for your tier. If you leave the service but keep paying that should be on you - other people should gain the ability to take that land once you are no longer using it. Someone who is no longer a part of the community should not have any power over it. I believe that under certain extreme circumstances, it does become necessary for the good of a community to trump the rights of an individual. Nothing you, nor anyone else, has said here has convinced me that inactive groups remaining in existence rises to a level which necessitates the actions of which you suggest. Pussycat Catnap wrote: Groups should not exist for land, letters above the name, and advertising - there are better tools for this anyway. The group bonus should be folded into tier by default, "titles" should be folded into the display name system, and there are many other methods that could and should take up the slack of spam-groups. Groups should be re-tooled to be... groups. I agree... not only should groups be re-tooled, but they should never have been set up the way they were in the first place. The fact that they were and have yet to be re-tooled, means we have no choice but to work with them as they are. And, as they are, there are better ways to deal with the problems you seem to think are so pressing, than disbanding them or handing them over to some random member. I think lowering inactive groups' ranking in search is a pretty good idea, but that still begs the question of what exactly constitutes an inactive group. That being said, I don't think we'll be seeing much work done on either search or group functionality, now that LL's developmental focus has shifted to the new platform... wherein I'm hoping LL gets groups right from the start. ...Dres

irihapeti wrote: is not like anyone has to belong to a group. Can leave a group anytime we like. So what do it matter really i have joined some really ancient groups sometimes that nobody owns anymore just bc I like the tag over my head At least someone understands my point of view. ...Dres

Bobbie Faulds wrote: I believe the OP was talking more about ones that the owner has left the group and didn't pass on the ownership to anyone else. So, no one owns the group, if there are no officers with powers, no one can monitor the group or grant other priviledges. Groups like that, It would be nice to have them dissolved. I know of 2 groups that were sim grous we have like that where I RP that the owner died suddenly before he added other owners. We had to create new ones and made sure there were other owners besides the creator. It matters not that there's no actual owner of the group... those who belong to the group get to decide whether or not they want to remain members. Who the hell are you, or anyone else, to decide for them? Join the groups you want to, leave the groups you don't like, but don't take it upon yourself to dictate what groups with whom anyone else wishes to belong. ...Dres

My carrot slants to the left, as do my political affiliations... which means that I'm probably as unbalanced as most people think I am. ...Dres