Ossian1488303077

First off, M Linden was a very easy act to follow. And Phillip's return was a non-event. But I thought Rodvik started off well. It was pretty amazing to actually be able to communicate with a Linden. One day some clown bought $2000 US worth of lindens with my credit card, and customer service didn't seem to be doing a thing about it. I waited for weeks. I called and sent emails. It was impossible to find out if they were taking any action or whether they'd forgotten me. I mean, I would talk to someone on the phone, but they would have NO IDEA what the status of my issue was. So I asked Rodvik (via twitter) about it, and IMMEDIATELY they canceled the charge. It was an enormous relief, but now that Rodvik has gone silent, and his interest has passed from Second Life to making games, I'm afraid that if I had an issue like that again, I would simply be screwed. When I talk to friends or family about Second Life, I know that it's very difficult for them to understand it, so it must be very difficult to find someone who is qualified to be a CEO and at the same time has a clear idea of what Second Life is. I hope that whoever follows Rodvik "gets" Second Life - that they understand what it is, and have an idea of what it could be.

My guess is that the Board told him to quit talking to users.

leon Bowler wrote: ... I doubt whether any of you reach anywhere near my level, when one of you have an idea that is your own rather than something you heard then I will chat with you, but not one reply here is worth answering You were naive enough to start the thread, so if you're going to call anyone a fool, you might start with the man in your mirror. Clearly you aren't able to answer any of the questions that were put to you here -- aside from your flounce, which I quoted above. You are on our level until you prove otherwise, and you've done nothing in that regard.

The first thing that strikes me is that you could substitute the term "aether" for "cold plasma" -- aether is the traditional term for "the stuff that empty space is filled with." It would be a better term, because plasma is an actual something that someone could go out and collect in a jar of some sort. We experience red shift in ordinary life, for example, in the way a klaxon drops in pitch when a car passes us. If you're correct, wouldn't the klaxon always have the same frequency? And if you allow that drop in frequency, how do you explain why it doesn't apply to starlight? Would we detect the cold-plasma shift if someone bounced a laser beam off a mirror on the moon? I'm not a scientist, but I think the beam would accumulate twice the amount of shift expected, since it would happen on the way up AND on the way back -- in other words, it would be twice what one would expect from ordinary red-shift. Also, you say that light is a wave, not particles, but there are rather simple experiments that demonstrate that it behaves like both. How do you explain that? Finally, just because it tickles me and I never get a chance to repeat it: Karl Pilkington had idea that the big bang only *seemed* big because everything else was so quiet at the time.

When I first created my account, I accumulated about two dozen shapes and a dozen skin sets, but once I found a combination that I liked, I stuck with it. I do tweak my shape every so often, and I frequently try new skins, but so far I've only changed skins about once a year. However... I recently took the plunge into mesh clothes, and picked up the pack of standard shapes. They were not what I imagined, and after reading the notecard saw that there are only about ten values that were used to create the different sizes. My own shape turned out to be close to a medium (actually a little bigger), so I made a copy with medium values. Then I made a small as well. So now I have my regular shape, a medium version, and a small version. You can't really tell the difference between them, and it's only when I actually change from one size to another that I see the differences myself.

I've recently begun trying mesh clothes, and some are quite nice, although I have to wear a different shape or they don't fit. However, mesh hair doesn't convince me. It doesn't move. It looks good in pictures, but I can't give up the movement of flexi hair.

As far as the article cited (the one in NWN), you have to keep in mind that Hamlet has been forcasting doom and gloom for SL pretty much forever. His position, which he repeatedly states, is that SL is on the verge of disappearing and that its only hope lies in adopting the buzzword of the day. In other words, his doomcasting is just a habit. It's isn't new, and it's not usually noteworthy. There is a much more informed and interesting article on Cloud Party here: http://gwynethllewelyn.net/2012/06/25/not-yet-a-party-but-soon/

They definitely need to scrap that Tao and get a new one. It's a slap in the face to talk about transparency when that transparency doesn't include us, the customers. Why should we care if Linden A tells Linden B everything? How would anything be different for us if they didn't? What I see in that Tao of Linden is that customer service and communication with customers were missing from the very start - the founders didn't think to even scribble the word "customers" on the list. Phillip Linden has the right to be nostalgic, sure. But if he wants to be relevant, he needs better material.

Masami Kuramoto wrote: Ossian wrote: I notice that there's no avatar photo for Masami. Why is that? It's easy to SAY that making shapes is easy. But there is a big distance between saying and doing. So show us, Masami. Show us the wonderful shape you made for yourself. Better still, push those sliders around and amaze us. If you can make a better face than the one in my profile picture (which, incidentally, I bought), I'll admit you're right. But I'm quite sure from the way you talk, that you can't. You must be new here, Ossian Resident. Indeed, I don't push sliders in the appearance editor. I used to model human bodies from scratch, in Blender, and I happen to be quite good at that. Those who have been around longer than you may be able to tell you about it, because I did occasionally post examples here and elsewhere. So excuse me if I refrain from proving my skills yet again just to make an impression on a newbie. You don't use the appearance editor to make shapes. That explains why you think it's nothing. Thanks for making my point. For people like you, the word "easy" means "someone else does it." The fact that you do something else entirely doesn't have any relevance.

That's like saying that since da Vinci didn't invent paint or canvas, or even the idea of painting, all of his work is derivative. Anyone can move paint around on a canvas and call the result a painting. Anyone can move sliders around and say that they made a shape. Just because the process itself is mechanical, doesn't guarantee that the result will look good or even be usable. In real life, anyone can put flowers in a vase. None of us invented flowers or vases, and most of haven't made a vase. And yet, the results are drastically different between a person with a good eye and a sense of design. Training can help, too. I notice that there's no avatar photo for Masami. Why is that? It's easy to SAY that making shapes is easy. But there is a big distance between saying and doing. So show us, Masami. Show us the wonderful shape you made for yourself. Better still, push those sliders around and amaze us. If you can make a better face than the one in my profile picture (which, incidentally, I bought), I'll admit you're right. But I'm quite sure from the way you talk, that you can't.

I've spent many hours over several years trying to make my own shapes, but I've never been able to make something as good as the shapes I've bought. I judge a shape by the face, and there are many more sliders for the head and face than for the entire rest of the body. It's hard to make some thing remarkable, or even nice. At least for me, and as I've said, it's not for dint of trying.

Theresa Tennyson wrote: I've been meaning to post something like this for a while and this is a good place as any. HOW SECOND LIFE NAMES ACTUALLY WORK: All SL accounts have names in the same format. They are in two halves - The "First Name" is a text field that can have around 30 letters, upper and lower case, with no spaces. The "Last Name" is a NUMBER. This number is looked up in a database when your last name is displayed as a word. Basically, it's closer to a ZIP code than a name. 1 corresponds to Linden, 42 to Powers, 4823 to Mayo, etc. My last name is one of the last official ones and the number is 10910. All "single name" accounts have 10327 in this field, which is normally suppressed but returns "Resident" when a script specifically requests "LAST NAME". Because of this it's a major process to have a custom last name as it needs to be added to the central database - it would be the equivalent itof incorporating a new town and having the Post Office give you a new ZIP code. Meanwhile, I have seven alt accounts with single names. None of them has a number in their username and if you'll look at their display names you'li see their completely legible, properly capitalized first and last names which I chose for them myself. I doubt I'd have made those accounts if I had to pick last names from a list. I think you'll find the "Johnny563273"'s of today are the "john1978 Lastnames" of yesteryear, and they probably won't stick around that long. Assuming what you say is true, it's *less* complicated than zip codes, because in zip codes the digits have specific meanings (first digit is group of states, next two is a region in that group, and last two are specific parts of that region). So there is less play -- each region has only 100 zip codes in it. But if last names simply correspond to integers, even if they were limited to five digits (which would be unlikely), the number of available slots is in the tens of thousands.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Charolotte Caxton wrote: So yes, the explanations that it would be too difficult or impossible to do are obviously not correct as it is plainly being done. The explanations that it would be too difficult or impossible to do may have been misremembered/misunderstood. Here's a quote from Rodvik's response... "But back to the matter at hand. As I promised if we couldn’t figure out a way that was a win/win for folks who want complete freedom vs. a list of last names, we wouldn’t do it. We couldn’t, so we wont." Rodvik said a win/win solution couldn't be found. I did not read this as a technical statement so much as a business decision. Yes, both single and last name systems are still in operation. That is different than Linden Labs stating, as I quoted here, that the last name system created a lot of sign-up friction. While it is often technically possible to do unwise things, that doesn't mean you should. I find the widespread supposition that forumites are representative of the larger SL population to be a bit a bit presumptive. We might be, but LL suggests otherwise, both directly (that previous quote) and indirectly (by their actions). All that said, I'm not recommending we stop questioning LL's wisdom (I do it constantly), just that we remember they see more than we do. You're right about what Rodvik said, but in the past, before display names and single-name signup, LL was often asked if they could create a means by which users could change their names. And to be clear, no one meant "change on the fly". The context was always "I have a stupid name and a huge inventory, so I'd like to change my name (permanently)." As part of those requests, users also expressed their willness to *pay* for the change. LL's response was that it was for technical reasons not possible or too difficult.

Charolotte Caxton wrote: Ossian wrote: I recently made a account to try the new-user experience. It took me an entire day to come up with a simple, useable name that I liked. There are a few things to consider about this name situation: 1. There isn't any need for all of us to feel the same way about display names. It's appropriate and right for some people to despise them, others to love them, and the rest of us to fall somewhere between those two extremes. 2. From LL's point of view, having people choose ugly usernames is a good thing, because it gets them through the signup faster. When you are looking for a name that's worth having, it takes longer, and slows down the sign up process. 3. LL doesn't have any reason to change the current situation. They see more signups, more people staying. They feel that they fixed something that wasn't working. 4. That said, it would be smart of them to give the option of having a last name. If they did, I think everyone would be happy. 5. If they won't offer that option, they should at least explain their claim that allowing it's one of the most challenging programming tasks on earth. If they could do that, it would diffuse some of the frustration over this issue. Regarding your number 5 statement, there is no need to explain what a challenge it is, it is already in place and people are still signing up with last names. A quick search of the name Hurricane will show that as recent as April 7 2012, new accounts are signing up with last names. Someone before when I pointed this out said that the ability to buy custom names has always been around, which is true, but that costs 500 US Dollars to do so, these names are not custom names, if they are, it is a sour deal as they are all having to share the last name of Hurricane. They could perhaps belong to a private company that allows signups, like educational portals used to do, but even if, the fact that they are able to sign up a with last name proves that signing up with last names is not impossible or impossible to implement. It is already in place and never went away. Yes, there is a need to explain. Linden Lab has always claimed that allowing people to change names was too difficult for them. Recently, when Rodvik was exploring the possibility of bringing back last names, he said that he was told "it can't be done." This is, of course, contradicted by cases where LL changed people's names, and by the examples that you give. But that doesn't change the fact that they claimed that they wouldn't do it because it was so massively difficult.

I recently made a account to try the new-user experience. It took me an entire day to come up with a simple, useable name that I liked. There are a few things to consider about this name situation: 1. There isn't any need for all of us to feel the same way about display names. It's appropriate and right for some people to despise them, others to love them, and the rest of us to fall somewhere between those two extremes. 2. From LL's point of view, having people choose ugly usernames is a good thing, because it gets them through the signup faster. When you are looking for a name that's worth having, it takes longer, and slows down the sign up process. 3. LL doesn't have any reason to change the current situation. They see more signups, more people staying. They feel that they fixed something that wasn't working. 4. That said, it would be smart of them to give the option of having a last name. If they did, I think everyone would be happy. 5. If they won't offer that option, they should at least explain their claim that allowing it's one of the most challenging programming tasks on earth. If they could do that, it would diffuse some of the frustration over this issue.