Kwakkelde Kwak

Perrie Juran wrote: I did notice today that a Restaurantis now seeking new staff. Could this be the place? I think so, I heard they recently fired the chef for refusing to make mashed potatoes.

Pussycat Catnap wrote: Not the same as saying they eat roaches. They may eat a variety of insects, and some beetles, but a 'cockroach' has a certain intonation to it... Basically, you made a racist joke... Again, I didn't mean to offend someone, but I don't like being offended either. There are plenty of other countries where it is not uncommon to eat cockroaches, so I don't see the problem. Try this link. BTW, "Thai" isn't a race.

Sudoquai Wonder wrote: The question is: What is the asset, what is the base currency and what is the bubble? You cant argue Bitcoin is a Bubble ready to burst based on two articles. If you are absolutely sure, you can open a Forex Account and just Short Sell Bitcoin. If you are right you will make a lot of money with this bet! I wouldnt do that at the moment. Next target is around 10.000$ - like it or not and it will move to this direction. Maybe not tomorrow but it will. My reservations aren't based on two articles. History (short as it may be) shows the bubble effect, remember the 30-2 dollar drop? The 2 dollar is still higher than the "real value" of the asset, which is of course nothing. Short selling by myself won't be very wise, not right now at least, but what if the biggest bitcoin hoarders would do just that? You'd see the value drop from close to 1000 to 0 in a heartbeat. I won't be buying or shortselling anyway. I don't see bitcoins different from any other asset and I don't like to speculate, call me conservative. As the US goverment stopped the gold standard they've opened the possibility to make unlimited dues, which cant be returned. The US government for example has this problem actually NOW at the moment. They would like to decrease the dues, but they cant. Every half year they are increasing the dues together with the oposition and this leads to inflation first and then to hyperinflation or a hair cut. Maybe not this year but it will happen. The reason the gold standard was abandoned, was to prevent hyperinflation. It doesn't rule out the possibility of course. The value of money is based on trust, much like the bitcoin. The big difference is, normal money is regulated much better and like it or not, people have more trust in normal money than in bitcoins. Anyway, here's an article on the gold standard. Particularly this sentence: “Most economists now agree 90 percent of the reason why the U.S. got out of the Great Depression was the break with gold,” said Liaquat Ahamed, author of the book Lords of Finance.

Pussycat Catnap wrote: I suspect your idea of Thai food is somewhat misinformed. Oh did I forget to add a bunch of smileys? You have to be kidding me if you think I was giving a serious answer to a post like that. I don't think the OP was expecting one. If my post offended you somehow, that wasn't my intention, although the Thai certainly eat insects.

IvanTwin Rogers wrote: In many restaurants in second life there are many ants and cockroaches, they do not have good hygiene:matte-motes-angry: But in a Thai restaurant, like the one in question, they could be on the menu. Deep fried of course.

You do understand what an asset bubble is right? I thought this article explained the bitcoin bubble quite well. This one too. Hoarding will drive up the price of anything. Wasn't that the main reason the US government stopped using the gold standard in the 1930's? Backing money with gold seems more risky than not doing so. One also has to wonder how bad normal inflation is. A dollar might be worth 25 times less than a century ago, but more people are able to buy a house, a car, a new kitchen, plenty of food, go on vacation etc. etc. Hyperinflation is always a risk, but a bursting bubble is a higher one if you ask me. Therefor (among many more reasons) I have more trust in "normal" currency than in bitcoins. But what do I know? I'm not an economist.

Elzbiet Meili wrote: Better still, please include a date- created or modified, either would work. The inventory window has a feature like that, although it doesn't actually show the date directly and it works on a folder by folder basis. Anyway, here it is (it sorts by the date the objects entered your inventory btw): I agree, plenty of room for improvement in the inventory department...

Gaia Clary wrote: It is possible that SL breaks this as you report. I recall i have seen similar problems while testing the Avastar but i thought i had fixed that. I have to test again... [edit]actually... it is possible that the SL normals point into slightly different directions... That could explain why the seems sometimes are still visible... I meant a difference in colour, not in lighting. As you describe, Avastar will get rid of that. The only body replacements I ever use are my feet. My experience with those is that i can't get a perfect colour match under all circumstances. Get it right in daylight and it won't match at dawn and vice versa. Since Sanya uses Maya and not Blender, using Avastar is not an option. To match the lighting, editing the vertex normals on the edges sounds like the best solution for fixing any difference in lighting. Unfortunately I use 3ds Max, so I can't say how it is done in Maya exactly. The basics are explained in the Maya User's Guide. You can export only the head and have the vertex normals of its boundary edges welded to the adjacent upper body boundary edge without exporting the upper body. (the "Weld to all visible" option is for that) You can disable the feature completely. Since the feature only takes edges between objects into account, sharp edges within objects are not affected. I was just wondering about the sharp edges between objects. Thanks for explaining, it sounds like it's a well thought out feature. I can think of one situation where it might not work as well as manually editing the vertex normals though:) What if you want a partially sharp boundary edge? (In all fairness, I have never uploaded an object like that.)

Gaia Clary wrote: So it does fix this particular issue As I said, I don't think it's the direction of the normals causing the difference in light reflection. If that's the case, no amount of normal editing/welding will fix the issue. Nice feature btw, but I was wondering about one thing. You say Avastar will match normals when objects with adjacent edges are exported, does this mean you have to export the rest of the avatar as well, then unlink it after upload and delete it? What happens if you want a sharp edge? Can you turn the feature off?

The only thing I can think of is the lowest settings letting the viewer use the CPU for some things rather than the graphics card. If your CPU was already heavily used (and your graphics card was not), that would explain the performance loss. I'd also say it's better to ask in the Firestorm forums.

Sanya Bilavio wrote: Im using Maya and i know that Blender has Avatastar which fixes this. I am pretty sure Avastar does not fix this. You can't edit vertex normals in Blender and the avatar and head are separate so there's nothing to weld. Maybe Avastar lets you alter the normals on the edge, I'm not sure. I am sure you can edit vertex normals in Maya. It doesn't look like the normals are causing the difference though if you ask me. I don't know how it works in Maya, in 3ds Max you can copy-paste the values between two vertices. Attachments and the SL avatar simply react to light sources differently, that has always been the case. Even if you get a perfect match, wait until the SL sun has shifted a couple of degrees and you can start all over. That is even the case when you set your head to full bright which will make you look like a christmas tree when it gets darker.

Why the pdf is in a zip is beyond me, but thanks for the link

Michelle Mananguinne wrote: The linux viewer is not a real linux it is a windows with wine functionality. That's new to me. I haven't heard that before and I can't find anything about it.

PaulM Dagostino wrote: Same issue here. Michelle is right, on linux perfect, with unfinished botch-up (lol Michelle) aka window$ lots of troubles. My comp is not underscored, its a 2x hexacore xeon X5660, 32GB of reg. ddr 3 1600 and a nVidia GTX 680 with 4GB memory, main os fc18_x64. I agree that window$ can not handle memory sizes over 3GB even you have more installed I maded THE TEST and window$ hung up and even slowed down with over 48GB, linux is able to allocate the maximum of 192GB ram without any speed decreasements my mainboard can handle. ciao window$ With 16GB installed, my Windows 7 uses about 2.5GB without any applications running. Why is it then that I see no slowdowns as soon as I open anything, which would push memory use over 3GB? @Kwaki, don't mixup facts who have been already explained. Which facts would that be and could you explain them again?

LisaMarie McWinnie wrote: Triangles: 27.280, Vertices 22.224. Is it possible you have done something weird with your object before exporting? Open edges? Flat shading? Anything that boosts the number of vertices? If You make a 100x100 square plane for example, the result is 20000 triangles and 10201 vertices. It's not a rule, but the case in general is, that the number of triangles is about twice the amount of vertices.

Michelle Mananguinne wrote: You are not alone with this supposition, however, but so much i do understand now from the operating systems, that in fact the required texture memory size should be automatically set by the game according to size of the dedicated graphics memory. It is, but with a maximum of 512MB. Anyway, as I said, I'm sure there's plenty of room for improvements. However, if you ask me, the big issue here is the fact the viewer crashes when memory use is too high, not the fact that the limit is low. I have never encountered the issue myself btw, not on my current GTX670 with 2GB and not on my previous EN9600GT with 512MB. About the supposition, SL builders are terrible. In the past it was possible to upload 2048x2048 textures (taking a whopping 16MB of VRAM). I've seen textures that big which would look just as good as 512x512. We all know about the 200 sculpted prim boots, we all know about those boots having 200 scripts. If people are allowed to use x amount of resources, some (understatement of the year) will use just that. The other problem is that Windows can not properly administer total memory of more than 3 GB. If I run, however, the Windows-viewer under linux 64 bit with wine, the memory consumption goes up to 864 MB and remains there stable, while Windows regularly produces a memory overflow. I think the main source of all problems is the architecture of Windows itself, who was and is an incomplete botch-up, where the krux is the whole texture files will be "stored" on disc instead in the ram as on linux. Then these regular crashes would stop. the 3GB limit is a 32 bit issue, not a Windows issue. I run Windows 7 Pro and can use all the 16GB I have when necessary. Texture files need to be stored on disk, as cache. If everything was only loaded in RAM and discarded after use, it all had to be downloaded if the texture came into view again. Why would you run a Windows viewer under Linux in the first place if there is a Linux viewer available?

Storm Clarence wrote: ETA Fixed a typo Dillon had too much fun with it. Freud anyone?

I hope you're always in the black, or you might get a heart attack or develop some serious bipolar behaviour!

YukiMamushi wrote: To a POINT. What really makes the decision is L$ vs Credits. When you buy 5000 Credits from IMVU, you pay 5.00. When you buy the same ammount from SL, with L$, you pay over 20 dollars, that's a bit rediculous. 20$ doesn't justify walking and flying freely. The clear winner, is IMVU. "If I buy 5000 British pounds, I pay 6000 euros. If I buy 5000 Indian rupee, I pay 60 euros. India is the clear winner." What kind of logic is that? You don't need $20 to walk and fly in the first place, you can do that for free.

Michelle Mananguinne wrote: it should meant that 1280 stream processors can handle simple graphics as those of sl, compared to the games i listed for comparison. SL has anything but simple graphics.It has been said a million times, but I'll repeat it. Due to very unoptimised user created items with far too many (and far too big) textures, the texture load created by SL exceeds the load of those better looking games by a mile. Setting the RenderVolumeLODFactor to 3 or 4 instead of 2 (which is the highest possible, without touching the debug settings, in the standard SL viewer) makes this load even higher (and the network/sim load too). I'm pretty much clueless on how the viewers handle memory and I'm sure it can be improved, but allowing something in SL usually means creators and end users take that as an invitation to make full (mis)use of it. So allowing more texture memory might result in even more textures used in creations. Your graphics card might have 2GB, mine has as well, so usually that means half of it is free when running SL. That doesn't mean others have this much. A GTX550 for example, which is probably more than the average user has, only has 1GB.

Let me be a smartass and point out that Arton already said that in the very first reply in this thread. To be fair I'll add he didn't say where to find the advanced lighting toggle. Glad you figured it out though

yw!

If you have six visible objects, you will need six physical objects. You can't use a single physical object, since it will conform to one of the bounding boxes of the visible objects. If you have six different objects, the uploader needs to know which visible object out of the six matches which physical object out of the six. As far as I know, SL will pick the order in the dae file, which can be controlled simply by naming your objects alphabetically or numerically before export. So something like: Object01_Visible, Object02_Visible etc and Object01_Physical, Object02_Physical etc, , where Object01_Visible will match Object01_Physical. I hope that makes sense:)

I would have that land anyway, but I agree, this is better discussed in the merchant forums.