Jump to content

Innula Zenovka

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Innula Zenovka

  1. You can identify particular object meshes (rather than instances of them) with llList2String(llGetObjectDetails(id,[OBJECT_CREATION_TIME]),0).     So something like this might be helpful

    string strMcGuffinCreationTime;
    integer iMcGuffinChannel;
    	listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message){
    		string strTimestamp = llList2String(llGetObjectDetails(id,[OBJECT_CREATION_TIME]),0);
    			//then the message is from a McGuffin of some sort
    			if(llGetOwnerKey(id) == llGetOwner()){
    					//then it's from a McGuffin belonging to my owner.

    Also, since any object you're wearing (or sitting on), and only those objects, will receive messages sent via llRegionSayTo, you can be pretty sure that llRegionSayTo(id, McGuffinChannel, message) will reach only the McGuffin that id is wearing, and no one else's.     


  2. 30 minutes ago, Taliro said:

    Hello everyone.

    I use llSetPrimMediaParams for setting some parameters on the fly


    but trying to completely remove the bar for when someone hovers on the prim.
    The above doest work. I tried 1 and 0.

    Any help please?


    			PRIM_MEDIA_PERMS_CONTROL,PRIM_MEDIA_PERM_NONE,//hides control bar completely


    • Thanks 2
  3. As a scripter, I've come to realise that, when I work directly with animators, it's often so helpful to be able to ask them how many frames each animation contains, and its frame rate, so I know exactly how long it lasts and can thus more readily synchronise things.

    I don't buy animations myself, but my impression is that people who sell animations don't routinely include this kind of information, and it occurs to me that at least some people would use it if it were available.   It would certainly make it easier to explore AvSitter's and nPose's "scenes" features, which I think could be more widely used, and I certainly find it invaluable when working with animesh.

    Certainly in the Scripting forum people regularly ask they can know when an animation ends, and at the moment, the answer may well involve the stopwatch feature on your phone, which isn't really optimal.

    Is there a reason not to provide this data?   Probably few people would use it, but those who do would be very grateful for it, I suspect.

    • Like 3
  4. 16 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

    But, if the Soul Stealer owner deletes the copy of the HUD he's wearing and gets a fresh copy from his inventory, THAT one will still have permission to animate you.

    I don't think you can actually delete a HUD while you're wearing it, can you?   

    Permission to animate an avatar is granted to a particular instance of a script, so if I have two copies of a HUD in my inventory, one which I'm wearing (HUD A) and one which I'm not (HUD B), and  you grant HUD A permission to animate you,  then I can remove  HUD A and replace it and, if I've scripted it in a certain way, it will retain permission to animate you the next time I wear it.    

    However, if I wear HUD B,  although the script it contains is apparently identical to that in HUD A, it won't have the same animation permissions, so I can use it to animate you only if you've separately granted animation permissions to HUD B too.

    I may be missing something but I can't immediately see a way to copy or transfer animation permissions between different instances of the same script, so that I can obtain permission for one instance of the HUD to animate you, remove and delete it, and then use a separate copy of the HUD (as opposed to the one I've just deleted and then retrieved from Trash) to animate you without first obtaining animation permissions for that script too.

    These exploits work only if the two avatars are on the same region, so my advice to people against whom they are used is always to avoid the person griefing you,  and the regions they hang out on, and to AR them for harassment every time they try to use their gadget.    They'll soon get bored.

    • Like 2
  5. 4 minutes ago, TDD123 said:

    @Innula Zenovka : Watch out for roaming crazed anti-linux Catznip-devs : apparantly rms stole their lunchmoney in highschool or something and they seem quite unforgiving .. :|

    @Nick0678 : Where to get this viewer you are using ? What is it ?


    I used OpenSUSE years ago for a while, and liked it, but eventually it was too much hassle keeping track of what was compatible and what wasn't, and what worked well and what didn't, that I gave up.   

    If Linux can't now be used to run either the Official viewer or Catznip, it's not going to be much use to me, I think, though obviously my SL isn't much like most people's. 

  6. 4 hours ago, Sid Nagy said:

    At those prices the new lastnames should really have a bit more class and style.
    I don't think the Lab spend more than 30 seconds to come up with those Halloween names.

    I was underwhelmed by the names too, but then I thought that, since there are no circumstances in which I can imagine spending US$39.99 to change my (or any of my alts') last names to anything, this must mean I'm probably not the target market LL can have in mind when they devise them.


    • Thanks 1
  7. 2 hours ago, Blaise Glendevon said:

    It's a medical procedure, administered by a physician. Why shouldn't it be covered by health insurance or Medicaid or any potential universal health care option that might become available in the United States in the future? Just like any other outpatient procedure. Just like contraception should be covered, with no intrusion from the employer or outside forces.

    As it is in the UK, and many other places too.   

    • Like 3
  8. 47 minutes ago, roseelvira said:

    SO we are at another question overlapping, question of the event of the beginning of a person as you stated another question and people have different views on it .

    Yes, and I think that's the problem.    I mean, I regard the foetal heartbeat test as not terribly useful, since if a heart transplant donor isn't dead before their still-beating  and perfectly healthy heart is removed for transplant, they certainly are afterwards, which must mean a murder has been committed at some point.

    For myself, I'd rather use similar criteria to determine when life begins to those we use to determine when it ends (and patients are certified as being dead and their vital organs therefore available for transplant, if that was what they wanted), and ask when the organised electrical activity in the foetus' developing brain becomes recognisably that of a living human being, as it begins to regulate its own automatic bodily processes and chemistry (that's some time in the seventh month, I believe).

    I'm not saying that's the best test, but at least I can justify my reasoning with reference to something other than theology and the question of at what point the body becomes ensouled.

    That's why I'm so uncomfortable arguing about abortion -- so often, it comes down to an argument about religion, and I don't think that courts, legislatures or this forum are particularly good places to conduct such debates.



    • Like 4
  9. I'm sorry, but I don't quite see why the fact a particular woman might later come to regret her decision to have an abortion is any sort of argument for restricting that right.

    After all, plenty of people certainly also come to regret having children for whatever reason,  and certainly plenty of people later come to regret all sorts of decisions, whether it's getting married, joining the army, voting for a particular political candidate or buying a particular house or other major purchase.

    The fact someone may later come to regret a particular decision is no reason for their government to try to stop her taking it.    




    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
  10. 7 hours ago, Finite said:

    I think it's contentious because issues like this in the US can have ramifications that last decades. Comparing US politics to other parts of the world is like comparing apples to oranges. US regions and some states are the size of some countries. 

    It's the fact that it's politically contentious at all, though, and that it's still contentious after 30 years, that's surprising.    In the UK, it's always been treated as an "issue of conscience" (meaning that the parliamentary parties don't whip their MPs to vote one or way or another, and there's a free vote on it) and attempts seriously to restrict women's reproductive rights have never gained traction here.   

    Some individual politicians, often quite senior ones, have expressed their opposition to abortion, but every parliamentary vote on restricting the time limits always goes the same way, and that's not likely to change.   

    That's what I meant -- the fact people are still arguing about abortion in the US seems strange to many outsiders, as does the fact it's become so political an issue.

  11. On 10/2/2021 at 2:05 AM, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

    I was in a group chat and someone was looking for something and I said it was on display on their region. The person asked where and could I send a LM and I said "just use area search and you should find it"  Someone else chimed in and said "well that's not helpful at all". 

    Someone using the Official Viewer wouldn't find that advice particularly helpful (though if they could return it, they could probably find it with Region Objects or Top Scripts).    

  12. Abortion is obviously a highly contentious subject about which many people have completely irreconcilable views and which raises potentially extremely personal, and sometimes painful, memories for many people. 

    It's also a subject that, for whatever reasons, preoccupies people in the US far more than it does in many other countries, who look on with bafflement at the obsession in some parts of the US with a subject that's hardly on the political radar anywhere else.

    So I'm really not sure it's a wise topic for these forums -- there are plenty of other places, more appropriate in my view, to discuss topics like this, and I don't see the benefit in discussing it here, too, since it's inevitably going to turn into a fight, and that's not what most of us are here for.

    I'm out, anyway.   




    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1
    • Sad 1
  13. 35 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

    Good point.  I forget my phone half the time too.   Still, he makes a fairly good argument.  These days, most people in the US and many other parts of the world do have mobile phones (and remember to carry them), so the norm makes it easier all the time to know where the average person is.  It would be silly to go to all the trouble and cost of injecting chips into people instead of tracking chips that most people these days buy for themselves. Even if the NSA misses a few people like you and me, the phone option is cheaper.

    Maybe it's just me, but I'm finding it so inconvenient not to have my smartphone with me that I won't now leave home without it, any more than I'll leave without my keys, cards and a wallet or purse.     It's not that I might want to communicate with someone when I'm out, but there are so many things I may want to use it for, and so many things it's a lot easier to do using it than by alternative means, that I don't want to be without it if I'm going further than the local convenience store.

    • Sad 1
  14. 6 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

    Wow, that is a really profound thought there.

    It's also quite true.

    For a society to exist, there has to be some sort of functioning state with a body of rules about how the society works and a means of enforcing them.

    The law is that body of rules.   They may be horrible, unjust, unfair laws,  and the courts may be biased and corrupt, but if you're going to have  a state, you need some rules.    That's the law and that's its function.     To be  a vital component of a state.

    • Like 1
  15. 3 hours ago, Maitimo said:

    It amuses me that the warning on packets of nuts (at least in the UK) doesn't say "Warning, contains nuts."  It says "Warning, may contain traces of nuts". 

    Like it might only possibly contain a trace of the product you actually paid for?

    I wondered about this when first I saw that, but then I thought about it for a while.

    I want to write some regulations about food labelling, with the intention of providing people who are allergic to nuts with a clear and easily understandable indication of whether they can safely consume this product.

    Because inadvertently consuming even small amounts of some nuts and nut-based products can easily be fatal, I need to be able to warn people not only when a product contains nuts but also when it may inadvertently have been contaminated with nuts during the production process.    

    Meanwhile, if I'm allergic to nuts, I'm not so much concerned to know whether or not nuts are part of the recipe but whether I can safely eat whatever it is, so I want to be sure it was produced in a safe environment, too.

    So "May contain traces of nuts" seems to me the correct warning to give. 

    "If the product is safe for someone who is allergic to nuts to eat, put this on the label.   If it's not, then use this wording, instead."    Since the product is either safe or it isn't, why bother going into any more detail, if you're writing a product labelling regulation?

    This is serious stuff -- get it wrong and people may die, and if they do, then quite apart from any civil actions for damages, other people may be at risk of prosecution (and probable imprisonment if convicted) for manslaughter, at least in my country. 


    • Like 1
  16. 8 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

    Yeah that's more like what I was seeing in a news report -- row after row of empty shelves in stores.  I mean it looked Apocalyptic. 

    We're used to a just-in-time delivery system.    Supermarkets are designed and stocked on that principle, and the shelves are supposed to be full all the time.    

    They're having problems with deliveries at the moment, so that's leading to temporarily empty shelves when deliveries don't turn up as expected.     At present, it's no more than an inconvenience, which I'm remedying by using home delivery  rather than risk having a wasted ten minute walk to the supermarket, only to find they're out of half of what I want.   If I have to put up with some substitutions so I don't get exactly what I wanted,  that's hardly the end of the world and I can always send stuff back.

    It's exacerbated by Brexit, certainly, and also Covid  has disrupted both tests and training for new HGV drivers to replace people leaving the the industry and also, because of particular Covid-related problems at the national Driver and Vehicle Licencing Agency, the re-issue of licences after they've been temporarily suspended for medical reasons.

    However, the problem is world-wide:


    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  17. 20 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

    Yesterday, CNBC aired a story "Why It’s Impossible To Put Tracking Microchips In Covid Vaccines"

    It's a sad commentary on us that CNBC felt it was necessary. It's even sadder to realize that the people who don't need this information are the only ones who'll watch it.

    It's an interesting exploration, though, of why otherwise apparently intelligent and rational people are prepared to believe such nonsense.


    • Like 3
  18. 51 minutes ago, gwenavive said:


    Hope someone can make some suggestions.

    I'm using AVSitter to add prop items to the avi on sit and everything works perfectly except, it keeps asking for permissions each time. I've added the AVSitter to the parcel experiences from the maker. 

    I've also tried both the latest version from Github and an older version i had but each time anyone sits on it, it asks for permissions to attach the props.

    Any help would be great.

    The script needs to set to the AvSitter experience.    Even though it's full perms, if you've edited it and saved it, it will no longer be set to the right experience and some features won't work.

    Either set the script to your own experience (and enable that on the parcel) or you'll need, I think, a paid-for version of AvSitter if you want to use their experience.

  19. 35 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

    Well since media stereotypes are in my thread title, I've been curious about something in the UK as to whether it's a stereotype.

    In much of the media in the U.S. Brexit has been portrayed as having a very bad effect on the UK -- is that truly the case?

    I'm sorry, but that's too big a question to answer here.     Certainly some of Brexit's immediate effects were indubitably bad (and some will continue to be) for particular people, businesses and industries.   

    However, as to the all the other effects it's had, some are good and some are bad, depending on who you ask and, in general, it's not that easy to sort of what's Brexit, what's Covid, what's mismanagement and poor planning in government departments and private businesses, and what's systemic problems in particular sectors (e.g. transport and logistics) that had hitherto been mitigated by the resilience afforded by freedom of movement but which are now having to be tackled head on. 


    • Thanks 1
  20. 23 hours ago, Quistess Alpha said:

    Maybe someone else has a better grasp of the TOS than I, but I'm pretty sure swastikas are allowed. Especially on Adult land.

    Unless you argue they violate:


    I was always under the impression swastikas are banned in SL in pretty much any circumstance, other  (possibly) on  bona fide WW2 military rp regions.  

    That's what Jo Yardley seems to have been told back in 2011, and I don't think LL's position has changed since.

    • Like 1
  21. Morality doesn't come into it.

    We have laws not so that we can impose morality on people but  so that we can enjoy the advantages of living in anything other than very small communities, because once a community grows to any size you rapidly find you need a way of resolving disputes that the parties can't amicably resolve between themselves which doesn't involve the various people involved in the dispute (and their friends, supporters and hired security) settling it the hard way.

    There may be all sorts of good reasons for breaking a law, but, unless they're a legal defence or the court can lawfully take them into account at the sentencing phase of the trial, that's not really relevant in court.    Relevant to you,  your friends, family and supporters, possibly, but not to the court.




    • Like 1
  22. 4 minutes ago, Orwar said:

       I think you failed to recognise my overt sarcasm. 

    No, your sarcasm was pretty obvious. 

    To my mind, though, it was also misdirected, and I meant to indicate that I thought you were parodying a position he had not, in fact, taken.

    But one way or the other, let's drop it, please.    It's not at all important.

    • Haha 1
  • Create New...