Jump to content

Da5id Weatherwax

Resident
  • Content Count

    314
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Da5id Weatherwax

  1. As security manager for a SL club I can tell you for sure that would get my entire team ARing you and, since it's also a violation of the club rules, get you promptly booted and banned - and you'd probably collect an estate-ban too as soon as we notified the owner to protect any other venues on the estate. You'd be bad for their business.
  2. HTT? asks the guy who is actually acknowledged as clergy by two different religions IRL (stretching the definition of "interfaith minister" until the seams creak) Actually, scratch that.. some of the most UNholy folks I've ever met have also been clergy in their own right.......
  3. I know you said the HUD was a linkset, which is certainly the easiest way to build one, but have you considered making it a planar mesh, either using different materials assigned to faces that act as placeholders for your buttons and llDetectedFace to determine which one was clicked or using a single face with llDetectedTouchST or llDetectedTouchUV to determine arbitrary regions of the face or texture that can be buttons or not depending on the context in the script? Then hiding a button is just a matter of changing a texture and having whether clicking there actually does anything or not totally under the control of the script. Personally I've found one of these approaches to offer greater flexibility when the HUD has to "change context" in normal operation, albeit requiring a little more care in scripting it. When hiding the entire HUD, of course a rotated planar mesh will occupy zero area on teh screen and be totally invisible. (and unclickable, but a tiny face at right angles to the rest of it will give you a very small "click to bring it back" area)
  4. The transaction_result event in response to a successful llTransferLindenDollars() call will even give the script the transaction id - so if that's reported you can link that directly to your account history. If the transfer failed the result will tell the script exactly why, and the script can decide whether to retry the transfer or report to the intended recipient that "so-and-so owes you X in tip shares that failed to transfer...."
  5. 3 years ago I went looking for venues where their online profile indicated that they (even occasionally) featured my particular genre of music or that they made a point of taking on newer performers - a "tech refresh" on my gear had led to it being possible for me to stream as well as perform IRL. I attended a few sets at them, particularly noting if their calendar was active at a SL time where my RL TZ would permit me to perform, then politely IMed the host at one of those sets asking who to contact if I wanted to be considered to play at their venue.... That got me my first regular set, during those a couple of other venue owners contacted me and a couple of other artists suggested places to contact and it built from there. Since then, there has been a little turnover in the places I play regularly, some have closed, some have shifted genres such that I no longer fit... When that happens and I have a gap in my calendar I start looking all over again, following the same methodology. It's not too unlike the RL music scene, contact several before you get to audition and several auditions before you get a booking with word-of-mouth the icing on the cake that "pays off" more frequently....
  6. I suspect that a lot of the tipjar scripts with a split that "don't work" or give errors are using the basic (and older) llGiveMoney function. This has no way of telling if the transaction succeeded or not and therefore no way of gracefully handling errors. Using llTransferLindenDollars, and properly handling the asynchronous result of that transaction is marginally more complex but still hardly rocket science, particularly if the person getting the tips and who they are splitting it with are static rather than the object being a club tipjar that several performers might log in to. Handling that latter case would take more code and potential error-handling of course but not really that much - certainly still a task that smells a little cheesy to be claiming it's such a "work of programming art" that it deserves to be more than a free script in a library somewhere. If I get a couple of idle hours I might even create one and post it in the appropriate section of these forums.
  7. ToS is, as Lucia pointed out, something that we may try to read with common sense but the LL Governance team are the "supreme court" where that is concerned - it means what they say it means. I can see one or two in the "laundry list" that I suspect they might raise an eyebrow or two at, but that's just my opinion and of marginally less significance than spitting in the Atlantic. If you think you're even skating close to the limits of the ToS then all you can do is try and get their answer to a ticket in advance or risk making it and see if they slap you for it. In general, reverse engineering an API, as an act in itself, cannot fall foul of any IP protection. IP laws, whether patent, copyright, trademark or any other variant thereof, do not - and cannot - protect knowledge. That's what secrecy laws and NDAs within contracts are for. IP laws protect the expression of it, as creative or artistic works or particular methods and mechanisms applying that knowledge. Provided you use no tools that are otherwise prohibited - an SL example would be a hacked viewer - reverse engineering itself is fine. Even if you do use a "prohibited tool" to do it, it is the use of the tool that would attract a sanction not the acquisition of the knowledge. It is only in making use of what you learn in that process you need to consider whether you're crossing any IP lines, whether or not you are making use of an IP resource you do not own in a way that you are not permitted to.
  8. I love performing, but also will "honor the booking" and, for both these reasons, give the best performance I can even if my host couldn't get online and the place is empty. I might get lucky and snag somebody who just happens to log back in at their last location or stops by sim-hopping into sticking around for a song or two.Somebody not even in-world could pick up the stream. I'm not going to lie, any tips are "income" for me and contribute to gear maintenance, stream rental, spare strings etc, but if anyone is going to understand where you're at being short of (real or virtual) cash from time to time it's a musician! For the most part we don't have a "financially secure" existence. Should you be in the same boat that's no reason not to share the music with you anyway and it is a lot more fun if you're there. The music is what it's about. If I can entertain you and send you away feeling like you haven't wasted your time listening, that's the real reward.
  9. Valid use-cases that violate neither the ToS nor anyone's IP: You have multiple HUD-controlled items from different creators. You want to make a single HUD that controls a subset of those items functionality for your own use - you'll still use the supplied HUDs for other functions but most of the time you will only be wearing your stripped-down (and less laggy) version to control the lot. You have multiple scripted items, each with their own APIs and you are attempting to coordinate their actions. Clean reverse-engineering (ie, without circumventing permissions, without reading any of the creators script code etc) is NOT an IP infringement under the protections that apply to LSL scripts and you just need to do it using tools that do not violate the ToS. Things like detecting script/anim UUIDs that you're not "supposed to have" and using them usually is a violation so while this is actually easier than reverse engineering an API and just issuing the right commands, the latter is the "legal" way to do it.
  10. As a performer, I get a bit peeved when hosts/staff/scripts are too spammy with "encouragement" to tip - it detracts from my performance. My tip jar will thank them politely in one line of chat if/when they do, no silly unicode or ascii art and will emphatically not poof particles everywhere, make noise or do anything else distracting or lag-inducing. Fortunately I'm lucky enough to usually work with regular hosts at the venues I play at and I've only had to actually ask them to dial it back a couple of times - we work out what works best for us both and, because we're working together every week, that tends to stick. Now, I have been grumbled at by both venue staff and punters for not thanking folks personally, but usually only once and it stops after I point out the practicalities... Firstly, my hands are on my guitar, not my keyboard (even slapping a "key" to trigger the next lighting or anim cue is done via a USB-connected footswitch) so typing is out of the question, even between songs. (Have you ever tried using a keyboard while standing with a guitar slung around your neck and not have it bounce off the screen, your mic stand or whatever the keyboard is resting on?) Responding on-mic is a possibility between songs but there's at least 20 seconds buffering on the stream. I'm probably already singing the next one by now and won't be talking again until it's done. If the timing works out I will thank you personally on-mic but 9 times out of 10 it just doesn't.
  11. And maybe you need to bear in mind that the word "you" can be used in both a personal and a general context. You (personal) have got all bent out of shape over me saying - rephrasing - "if you (general) blame stuff on disgruntled folks then you(general) are doing something wrong because they shouldn't be disgruntled with you(general)" which may have been prompted by your(personal) comment, which was why it was quoted, but was not DIRECTED at you(personal) Or I could have put a plum in my mouth and got all snooty and phrased it as " When one's customers are disgruntled.... " but I aint no royalty or any better than any jack on the street so "Och, Nae!"
  12. It always blows my mind when things are blamed on "disgruntled ${CATEGORY}" These are your customers! If they are "disgruntled" you are not doing good business.
  13. Yeah, I should have phrased the line where I said "If they choose to release it to the public domain, you have permission" as "If they choose to release it to the public domain or it has passed into the public domain because of age or other special cases in the law, you have permission" Not the first time something has been left out through oversimplification, but at least I erred on the side of non-violation, which is the side you want to err on, if you err at all, in making stuff for SL .
  14. I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I have worked in several roles where an understanding of IP laws was required so here's my 0.02 in the simplest possible terms... If you do not own the copyright and do not have permission from the person or entity who does, do not use it. At all. "Permission" from the owner can come in more ways than them telling you personally that you may use it. If they choose to release it to the public domain, you have permission. If they license the work in a way that permits its use in SL for your purposes, you have permission so long as you fulfil any conditions attached to that license such as crediting the original etc. If you're in any doubt whether the terms give you permission or not, assume they do not and do not use it.
  15. Wish they were just 3 hours earlier, because this is an event I'd love to join in with.... Midnight my timezone, sadly, just doesn't work
  16. I'm in Scotland and I spend most of my SL time either streaming live music or looking for new venues to potentially play at. Timezones are very much a factor - most venues operate their schedule to US zones but I can't perform after 2pm SLT out of consideration for the neighbors - even if I kill the monitors and exclusively use cans playing an instrument and singing still makes noise! Of venue owners that specifically do cater to our timezone, our Dutch and French friends, in particular, seem to be strongly represented among those venues operators.
  17. Let's face it - TTITDH. We're agreed on that at least, right? (for those that aint been around forever, "The Tier is Too 'darn' High" was, at one point, almost a meme on here )
  18. The "assumptions" were inferences drawn from a rational analysis of the arguments you advanced, since they do correlate with almost perfect exactitude with teh sources I cited. However, I accept your word that they were incorrect. I meant it when I said "with the greatest respect" - even though we apparently disagree.
  19. With the greatest respect, Tolya - I'm afraid your view of the european experiment mirrors your view of the American experiment. Having lived in both, those "talking points" ring as hollow as the PACs and think tanks that spawned them. I suggest you explore other news sources than Fox. Australian oligarchs probably aint the ones you want to tell you what to think.
  20. On that latter point I'm with you even as a remainer... That directive was such a piece of crap it should never have seen the light of day. I think the EU is a bit of a victim of its own success. There are nations in the EU who clearly have a vision of a "federal Europe" - which COULD work but it would need to be something that the members signed up to with open eyes. That wasn't the case with the "creeping federalism" that happened as the EU grew out of the EEC. That wasn't what a lot of countries signed up for - including the UK. It's probable that if that had been stated up front as the intended end-state that the UK would not have joined when it did, but possible that it might have subsequently joined. Either way though, whether it did or not, the whole Brexit issue would be moot because we would be getting what we signed up for. As it stands, the progress towards that end goal has justifiably alienated a lot of people - and that alienation boiled over into Brexit, which I personally believe (my own opinion, so counts for about as much as a fart in a tornado) is going to be worse for the UK than either of "what we signed up for" or "what we got"
  21. That's a perfectly valid opinion. Of course it carries with it that by rejecting those disadvantages of EU membership you are also surrendering the advantages. Those upsides and downsides are so evenly balanced it's not surprising the same is true of opinions on which to prioritize. I personally think there's a real danger in choosing a course with such long-term consequences as EU membership or not by a simple majority when opinion is so evenly divided. Most organizations that have any kind of membership vote mechanism in place set decisions of comparable magnitude as requiring a supermajority - usually 2/3 of those voting - to change the status quo. This prevents erratic policy changes in areas where such would be more damaging than either of the two competing policies. It's also far from unknown in the governance of nations too, for exactly the same reason. And that's why I think Brexit should not have happened this time around. If the benefits of getting out of the EU were clear-cut enough to sway 2/3, then even the losing side would accept it. If there isn't a majority large enough for that to be the case, it shouldn't have happened. For me personally, Brexit has made me an SNP member, but I would argue to my fellow members that the 2/3 rule should apply to any vote for splitting the union too - even though, under current circumstances, it is a course I would favor and there aren't the votes (yet) to reach that threshold.
  22. If the GBP tanks against the USD as a result of Brexit, my tips for performing will be worth more. As it stands, my SL existence pays for itself plus a little bit. If the exchange rate against the USD goes through the floor as a result of Brexit I'll accept that changing to "pays for itself plus a little bit more." Brexit is going to be disaster enough that I'll take any tiny sliver of a silver lining I can get.
  23. The history IS relevant, and is not a matter of opinion - the facts I presented to you can be confirmed by several others on here if they wished to devote the time to it. Maybe you've been around online long enough to remember this... Plonk.
  24. Lass, I've spent more years working in cybersecurity than Brian Krebs. He's brilliant, yes, and probably a better counter-hacker than I am but wasn't it only 2000 or 2001 when he started specializing in it after an encounter with a worm program? I think that was the time, and it was only shortly after that I started to see his name on the program of conferences I'd been attending for years. He's also a really cool guy to have had a beer with at those early-days conferences. Smart as heck and witty too. "back when (the internet) was Lexus/Nexus" ??? - It never was. The internet existed when that was a specialized standalone network and it joined the internet, it did not become it. You are quite right that companies and agencies have historically done "not enough" to protect the data they hold. There were no laws or regulations setting any standards at the start and so they did the bare minimum - or nothing at all - and everyone from Crunch to Rob Morris had a field day. We were ALL hackers back then, when the worst that was likely to happen if somebody cracked your system was they'd leave an email for the sysadmin - from himself - snarking about the security hole he's left open. I remember working through the night on efforts to contain the Morris worm when it hit the university I was working at. Then the crooks moved in. Companies and agencies were still not doing enough, because it wasn't seen as a priority. Even when the first standards were circulated they still had no force of law so companies saved on the bottom line by only paying lip-service to them. This was in spite of the advice of IT folks, we were still seen as "back office geeks" and not properly understood by management. It took some pretty horrible breaches before laws were written to hold companies liable for not following the standards. Even then there were all these legacy systems that were full of holes and the attackers had read the standards too and the "arms race" was in full swing. Of course I "mind" living in a surveillance society. But toothpaste doesn't go back into the tube pretty easily. Once the can of worms is open the only way you'll get them back in is to use a much bigger can. Fortunately for me, and for others that have been around as long as I have and knew - even before the big breaches started being disclosed - that there was no more privacy on an email than on an old-fashioned postcard, that everything you did or said on the 'net was there forever, that the interconnection of data sets would enable a panopticon for a sufficiently capable organization, we recognized that you didn;t protect yourself by trying to not put the data out there (not unless you were intending to live off-grid in an earthship somewhere in the desert) but instead by mitigating the risks of it being seen.
×
×
  • Create New...