Category: Opinion

“Dear Ebbe”

Posted on by Inara Pey

Colins Land, September 2013Collins Land, September 2013

Dear Ebbe,

As today marks your first official day at the helm of Linden Lab, I’d like to formally welcome you to the hot seat and wish you every success!

Thanks to Twitter, you’ve already seen that we’re a pretty passionate bunch – which can be good and bad when it comes to company / user relations, as you’ve no doubt experienced in the past!

Crystal Oak Falls, December 2013Crystal Oak Falls, December 2013

I’m not about to offer-up sage (or otherwise!) advice on what needs to be done with regards to “fix” Second Life and its direction. You’ll be aware of what the board is seeking, and I appreciate you need time to gain familiarity with everything that is going on at the Lab and with its partners in terms of products and services before determining courses of action. However, I would like to say a little something, if that’s OK?

Through those Twitter messages, you’ve likely also already caught-on to the fact that company / user community communications are a concern to many.

Black Basalt Beach, August 2013Black Basalt Beach, August 2013

Truth be told, there are areas within the Lab – most notably within the technical teams managing the servers and the viewer – where communications are excellent, and the people responsible deserve thanks and recognition. However, over the years, broader communications have been left to wither on the vine. This has led to frustrations, upsets and misunderstandings which could so easily have been avoided with a positive, outward communications policy. So, with this in mind, I’d like to encourage you to:

  • Encourage the board to see broader outward communications as a positive thing which helps both company and users
  • Get a team together who can drive positive outward communications through the SL blogs, the forums and e-mail in a consistent, open, and informative manner – and who can listen as well!

Colins Land, September 2013Calas Galadhon Park, December 2013

We don’t need to know absolutely everything that’s going on, but even a monthly round-up of news is better than prolonged (and painful) silences which have been the hallmark of the Lab’s attempts for the past few years. And if folks in the Lab tell you the blog isn’t used because no-one reads it; then rest assured, if posts are provided, and Twitter, Facebook, Plurk and the SL feed, etc.,  are used to promote them, people will come and read. The same goes for an e-mail newsletter (and how better to reach and woo those who have perhaps stopped visiting SL?).

We’re a supportive bunch at heart, and we want SL to continue to thrive and grow. Just give us the word, and we’ll be ready to help. We might even have a few ideas to help with some things; we just need to know someone is listening!

Looking forward to seeing you in-world on occasion – and if you want a guide to some of SL’s wonders, feel free to give me a call!

Best regards,

Inara

... and as I know you enjoy Formula 1, here's a Ferrari (sorry, couldn't find a Merc or McLaren) from 2010 by SL user Timmi Allen
… and as I know you enjoy Formula 1, here’s a Ferrari (sorry, couldn’t find a Merc or McLaren) from 2010, by SL user Timmi Allen

Silence may be golden, but it also weighs heavy

Posted on by Inara Pey

I keep promising myself I won’t start banging  on about Linden Lab’s inability to openly communicate. That was more-or-less the tone of things in this blog back in 2011 (see my views on business, communication and growth, and the growing frustration over the Marketplace situation in 2012, and weel as point in between and after, if interested). However…

Rod Humble may have gone, but the Lab apparently has yet to issue any statement in reponse to enquiries from the media
Rod Humble may have gone, but the Lab has yet to issue any statement in response to enquiries from the media

Friday 24th January saw the news break that Rod Humble had departed the Lab. According to his own comments pass to others at the time of the announcement, he’d left the Lab “last week”. If so, this could mean the Lab has been absent a CEO for about two weeks, and they have yet to say anything on the matter.

It’s not just the fact that repeated enquiries from the likes of Hamlet Au and I (among others) have gone without response – we’re still small fish in the ocean of blogging / journalism. Where the story has been picked-up by the games media, it also appears that enquiries made to the Lab also remain unanswered.

True, the message has been somewhat slow in spreading to the media at large; only Gamesbeat picked-up on the news in the 24th along with as did Games Industry. Since then Gamasutra covered the news on January 28th, as did  Massively. Nevertheless, one would have thought some message would have been forthcoming from the Lab in order to squash the potential for speculation or negative rumours to become established as fact.  Or could it be that Rod Humble’s annoucement was a knickers-around-ankles moment for the Lab?

See what I mean about speculation?

Beyond this, as Ciaran Laval observes, there is still ongoing confusion and upset relating to attempts to cash-out and  / or tax ID requirements.  A part of this seems to be down to the Lab possibly being overwhelmed by the inflow of documentation, and it is taking time to clear things up. However, the fact that noting is  – once again – being done to communication matters and provide some form of open feedback really isn’t helping matters at all.

Of course, the Lab may well feel secure in its position that the majority of SL users are likely to be oblivious as to what is going on, and are happy knowing that SL is still there for them when they are ready to log-in. But in terms of those who are investing time, effort and money into helping make Second Life a place people want to log-in to and enjoy, not actually taking the time and effort to offer reasonable clarification of what is going on as requires things like cash-outs and tax (and, indeed, what is and isn’t required ahead of time) doesn’t tend to send a positive message, but does tend to add a little more weight to an overburdened camel’s back.

In writing about Rod Humble’s tenure, I pointed out that communications had started on a downward trend prior to his arrival, and had continued to sink throughout his time there, despite his own initial attempts to ramp things up. This smacks of a deep-seated cultural element within the company (driven out of the board?) which doesn’t see communications as having any real priority. As such, I’m not holding my breath in the hope that things will change, even with a new CEO, when (if?) we ever get to hear about one being appointed.

But even a short-term upswing, as witnessed in the months immediately following Humble’s arrival at the Lab prior to the downward trend resuming, would actually be better than we have at the moment.  I won’t borrow from Tateru again and use her Silence of the Lab logo, but I can admit, I’m sorely tempted to do so.

Three in ten: a look back over Rod Humble’s tenure at LL

Posted on by Inara Pey

It’s been a great 3 years! All my thanks to my colleagues at Linden Lab and our wonderful customers I wish you the very best for the future and continued success! I am starting-up a company to make Art, Entertainment and unusual things! More on that in a few weeks!

With these words, and a few personal notes to the likes of Jo Yardley, who broke the news to the SL community as a whole, Rod Humble’s departure from Linden Lab entered the public domain.

Rod Humble, with a little reminder from his past
Rod Humble, with a little reminder from his past

Rod Humble officially joined the Lab as CEO in early January 2011, although according to BK Linden, he had been logging-in during the closing months of 2010, “exploring and experimenting in-world to familiarise himself with the pluses and minuses of our product and the successes and challenges faced by our Residents”.

Prior to his arrival, and under the much maligned Mark Kingdon, the Lab had been investing in hardware and infrastructure, with Frank (FJ Linden) Ambrose being recruited into the company to head-up the work. This continued through the first year of Humble’s tenure as CEO, paving the way for a series of large-scale overhauls to the platform in an attempt to improve performance, stability, reliability of server / viewer communications and boost the overall user experience.

Much of this work initially announced in 2012 as “Project Shining”.  It had been hoped within the Lab that the work would be completed within 12 months; however, so complex has it proven to be that even now, more that 18 months later, elements of core parts of it (viewer-side updates related to interest lists, the mesh-related HTTP work, final SSA updates) have yet to be fully deployed.

Even so, this work has led to significant improvements in the platform, many of which can be built upon (as with the HTTP updates paving the way for HTTP pipelining or the SSA work already generating core improvements to the inventory system’s robustness via the AIS v3 work).

SSBAsaw a complete overhaul over the avatar rendering process in order to eliminate the bane of users' lives: bake fail
SSA, aimed at eliminating the bane of users’ lives,  bake fail, was one of a number of projects aimed at benefiting the user experience

It might be argued that these aren’t really achievements on Humble’s part, but rather things the company should have been doing as a matter of course. True enough; but the fact is, prior to Humble’s arrival, the work wasn’t being done with anything like the focus we’ve seen under his leadership.

A philosophy he brought to the Lab was that of rapid development / deployment cycles, as he indicated at his first (and only, as it turned out) SLCC address in 2011. This saw the server release process overhauled and the three RC channels introduced, making it easier to deploy updates, patches, and fixes to address bugs, issues and exploits.

Humble referred to this as “putting the ‘Lab’ back into Linden Lab”, and in fairness, it didn’t always work as advertised, as with the initial experience tools deployment in June 2012, which resulted in a spate of grid-wide griefing. However, it is fair to say it has generally resulted in less grid-wide disruption and upset.

More recently, this approach has also been applied to the viewer release process, allowing the Lab to focus more sharply on issues arising within the viewer code as a result of changes or integrating new capabilities. This in turn has largely eliminated the risk of issues bringing viewer updates to a complete halt, as happened in the latter part of 2012.

One of the more (to many SL users and observers) controversial aspects of Humble’s tenure was the move to diversify the company’s product brief. When talking to Giant Bomb’s Patrick Klepek in October 2012, he candidly admitted his initial attraction to the post was born from the company being “ready-made to do a whole bunch of other products, which I wanted to do.” He’d also forewarned SL users than the company would be diversifying its product brief during his 2011 SLCC address.

Many objected to this on the grounds it was “taking away” time and effort which might be focused on Second Life while others felt that it was a misappropriation of “their” money, or that it signalled “the end” of SL. In terms of the latter, the reality was, and remains, far from the case. In fact, if it can be done wisely, diversification might even, over time, help SL by removing the huge pressure placed upon it as the company’s sole means of generating revenue.

Diversification isn't in itself a bad idea; the problem is ensuring that a company diversifies wisely. Some of LL's initial efforts under Humble's guidance mean the jury is still out on that matter
Diversification isn’t in itself a bad idea; the problem is ensuring that it’s done wisely. The jury’s still out in that regard with some of LL’s initial efforts

The problem is that the direction that has been taken by the Lab thus far doesn’t appear to be the most productive revenue-wise, at least in part. The apps market is both saturated and highly competitive (and even now, two of the products in that sector have yet to arrive on Android). Similarly, it might be argued that Desura could be more valuable as a marketable asset than as a long-term investment), and dio appears to be going nowhere. All of which leaves Patterns,  which in fairness does appear to be carving a niche for itself, and has yet to be officially launched. It will be interesting to see what, if any, appetite the Lab has for continuing with these efforts now that Humble has departed.

There have been missteps along the way, to be sure. Humble’s tenure has been marked by a series of ongoing and quite major issues with the SL Marketplace which the company appeared to be completely unable to bring under control. These prompted me to wonder if “putting the ‘Lab’ back into Linden Lab” might actually work in all cases.  Worse, they led to a clear and continued erosion in customer trust where the Marketplace was concerned and quite possibly damaged Humble’s own reputation. Despite promises of “upping the tempo” with communications and updates, all merchants saw was the commerce team reduce communications to the bare minimum, and refused to hold in-world meetings which might otherwise have improved relationships.

Similarly, some projects were perhaps pushed through either too quickly or without real regard for how well they might be employed. Mesh was perhaps prematurely consigned to the “job done” basket, particularly given the loud and repeated calls for a deformation capability which were spectacularly ignored (and are only now being addressed, after much angst and upset in the interim, all of which could have been avoided).  Pathfinding has failed to live up to the Lab’s expectations and still appears to be something that could have been pushed down the road a little so that other work could carried out which might have left people more interested in given it a go.

Continue reading “Three in ten: a look back over Rod Humble’s tenure at LL” →

The Lab looks back at 2013

Posted on by Inara Pey

secondlifeLinden Lab has issued a blog post looking back over the course of the last 12 months, noting what have been, in their eyes, the high points of the year.

It’s an understandably upbeat piece – and there is nothing wrong with it being so. It’s possible that some will see it as a reason for more grumbles and complaints about X, Y and Z. Certainly, I’ll be offering my own look back over the year as seen through the pages of this blog in due course, and not all of it may be as positive as the Lab’s post. But all things considered, this has been a reasonable year for the platform, particularly on the technical level, as the post points out, referencing as it does Project Sunshine (Server-side Appearance), Project Interesting (the interest list updates, the last of which will be making their presence felt in viewers in 2014), materials processing and CHUI.

There’s good reason to point to these items, and several which pass unmentioned, such as the Lab finally deciding to get behind a methodology by which mesh garments can be made to fit, and the ongoing work to overhaul the Lab’s network communications protocols, as taken together they all demonstrate that the Lab still has the interest Second Life in order to try to substantially improve it and to address users’ needs.

And while the decision over which approach to take in order to get mesh garments to fit may not be pleasing to everyone, at least we now know that we are going to see mesh garments fit our assorted shapes, and it’s not going to be too much longer before it is available to everyone. We can even take some comfort in the fact that while it may not be the easiest to work with from the creation standpoint, it can be used (and indeed, is being used), and it is likely to stand the test of time in terms of maintainability.

The Lab’s introduction to Project Sunshine from earlier in 2013

Server-side Appearance (SSA) in particular was deployed as it should have been: without being tied to specific time frames or “to be done by” dates, while fully involving the TPV community in order to make sure that everything was not only on course, but to also help ensure the Lab didn’t miss any glaring holes or make any damaging omissions. Yes, there were issues and upsets along the way – the loss of the “z-offset” height adjustment capability, the introduction of the less-than-ideal “hover” option to replace it. But on the whole SSA was perhaps one of the smoothest deployments of a substantial change to the platform rolled-out in the history of Second Life. Not only that, but it appears to have helped forge new levels of co-operation between the Lab and TPVs.

This year, thanks to SL’s tenth anniversary, also saw the platform regain some attention from the media – and while some of it was the same old, same old, it’s fair to say a good part of it was fresh and positive.

Of course, there are the things which are left unsaid: Marketplace sales may well have been good, but the Marketplace itself still remains a sore point for many merchants – as does the long-term silence of the Commerce Team when it comes to outward, ongoing communications. In fact, communications from the Lab have remained at rock-bottom throughout most of the year. Had there not been a raft of projects going on under the “Shining Project” banner, one wonders how much actual communication would have taken place between Lab and users outside of the in-world user groups. We also have the unfortunate situation with the Terms of Service still to be sorted through; while some things like the changes to how third-party L$ exchanges can operate could have perhaps been better handled than they were at the time – but that again brings us back to the most awkward of “c” words, and I’ve banged on about that enough in the past.


Facebook may not by everyone’s cup of tea (it’s certainly not mine), but that’s no reason to get upset over the SLShare capability introduced this year and which provides the Facebook users among us with the means to share their SL experiences with friends and family if they wish

Tier hasn’t been quite the cause célèbre it has been in the last couple of years, but it has still been a worry for many, despite the fact that there really isn’t a lot the Lab can do about it without potentially hurting themselves more in the process. something which is probably unlikely to change any time soon. It’s also something I’ll likely have more to say about myself in the near future, if only to update (and complete) my post on the subject from the start of the year, which I never quite got around to finishing with its “second half” despite periodically working on it.

But even with these not-so-upbeat aspects of the the year, we’re all still here; or the majority of us are, and many of those who have departed have not necessarily done so out of annoyance or anger with the Lab, but simply because times change, interests wax and wane and life inevitably rolls on.

All this is not to dismiss the issues which have occurred during the year; 2013 hasn’t all been a bed of roses. But then again, name a year in the public history of the platform that has. However, this year has been positive in that it has seen the Lab put good, solid effort into making Second Life more robust, and more predictable than perhaps it has been in a good while, and added some decent nips and tucks to capabilities across the board. Hopefully, in 2014, we’ll see the same approach taken towards unravelling the thorny issue of ensuring more of those coming into Second Life “stick” (to use Rod Humble’s expression) long enough to become fully engaged with the platform, its user base and its economy.

After all, contrary to the opinion held in some quarters, it’s not just (or even necessarily) the cost of land that’s the key to SL’s sustained growth – it’s the numbers of people using it. But that’s a blog post for another day.

The spies who came into the virtual

Posted on by Inara Pey

News has been breaking that the United States National Security Agency (NSA) and the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the British equivalent of the NSA, “infiltrated” various on-line gaming platforms and virtual worlds as part of the anti-terrorist activities.

Revelations a part of The Guardian's "The NSA Files" series
Revelations form a part of The Guardian’s “The NSA Files” series

Information on the operations, obtained via Edward Snowden, the former CIA employee / NSA contractor, who released some 200,000 documents to the press, is at the centre of a series of reports the Guardian newspaper in the UK in partnership with The New York Times and ProPublica, and which have been widely picked-up by the on-line media on both sides of the Atlantic. The reports show that both the NSA and GCHQ were so concerned about the various methods nefarious individuals might use to communicate with one another, that they started targeting various on-line platforms – often on the thinnest of reasoning.

The actual activities were varied in scope, ranging from specific data gathering through the use of “mass-collection capabilities”, through to operatives posing as players on various platforms seeking information and also charged with recruiting potential informants from the more technically aware members of the various communities – with Second Life being one of the targeted platforms.

In some respects, the interest in virtual world and games platforms is unsurprising; I’d frankly be more concerned if the security agencies hadn’t considered the potential for such platforms to be used by militant or terrorist groups (which, I would also add, should not be taken to mean I necessarily condone their actions). However, what I do find to be eyebrow-raising, and doubtless what other people will as well, is the degree to which GVEs – games and virtual environments – were subjected to surveillance and what went on.

For example, ProPublica reports that in 2009, a 3-day “test” of capabilities to gather data from within Second Life, Britain’s GCHQ gathered real-time data on chats, IMs and L$ transactions which amounted to some 176,677 lines of data. How widespread this data-gathering was, who was affected by it and what happened to the data, is unclear.

GCHQ’s interest in Second Life appears to have started out as a legitimate activity. Towards the end of 2008, they were involved in tracking down a credit card fraud ring in what was known as “Operation Galician”. When the fraud ring attempted to move some of their activities to Second Life, GCHQ and the police followed. Even so, the success (or otherwise) of that operation doesn’t seem to stand up as justification for the wholesale gathering of data as occurred in 2009.

The UK's GCHQ - gathered over 176,000 lines of data pertaining to SL users chat, IM and L$ transactions in a single real-time "test" of their ability to gather SL data
The UK’s GCHQ – gathered over 176,000 lines of data pertaining to SL users chat, IM and L$ transactions in a single real-time “test” of their ability to gather SL data (images via Gizmodo)

The British security agency was no slouch when it came to other virtual and gaming environments, either, as the Guardian’s report reveals:

At the request of GCHQ, the NSA had begun a deliberate effort to extract World of Warcraft metadata from their troves of intelligence, and trying to link “accounts, characters and guilds” to Islamic extremism and arms dealing efforts. A later memo noted that among the game’s active subscribers were “telecom engineers, embassy drivers, scientists, the military and other intelligence agencies.”

GCHQ was also the motivating force behind data gathering activities directed at the Xbox Live console network, and developed “exploitation modules” for various platforms. Much of this activity appears to have been carried out at Menwith Hill, a Royal Air Force base which provides communications and intelligence support services to the United Kingdom and the United States of America, and where GCHQ and NSA operatives worked side-by-side to infiltrate World of Warcraft.

Continue reading “The spies who came into the virtual” →

ToS changes: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by short-sightedness”

Posted on by Inara Pey

Following the August 15th changes to the Second Life Terms of Service, and specifically the clauses contained in Section 2.3, many have taken time out to loudly and persistently proclaim that the wording is indeed deliberate and indicative that the Lab have darker desires on the content within Second Life (and their other properties) than they are willing to admit.

I’ve already pointed out in these pages that this needn’t actually be the case; that things might actually be down to a matter of the Lab trying to bring together their own Terms of Service with the Terms of Use previously employed by Desura. These latter, in their Section 2, contained wording remarkably similar to that found within Section 2.3 of the updated ToS. However, this point seems to have been largely ignored by those pointing to conspiracy theories and laying out an agenda of supposed intent on the Lab’s part.

But, even if I’m totally wrong about the Desura connection – and that could well be the case; God knows I’ve been wrong enough times in the past – does it really mean the Lab is awash with nefarious intent? Or did they simply take the easy option and boilerplate the updated ToS with scant regard for anything outside of the sections they’d identified as needing update (such as the inclusion of a revised dispute resolution section and clauses on updating the ToS?

In talking to an IP attorney over the past few days, I found myself pointed to a number of Terms of Service / Use documents which carry language largely identical to the Lab’s own. So much so that they look to have all been taken from the same boilerplate. Let’s look at some examples, starting with a refresher of the core element of Section 2.3 of the Lab’s ToS, with what have been seen as the key phrases of concern highlighted:

LL logo“Except as otherwise described in any Additional Terms (such as a contest’s official rules) which will govern the submission of your User Content, you hereby grant to Linden Lab, and you agree to grant to Linden Lab, the non-exclusive, unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, and cost-free right and license to use, copy, record, distribute, reproduce, disclose, sell, re-sell, sublicense (through multiple levels), modify, display, publicly perform, transmit, publish, broadcast, translate, make derivative works of, and otherwise exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Content (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats, on or through any media, software, formula, or medium now known or hereafter developed, and with any technology or devices now known or hereafter developed, and to advertise, market, and promote the same.”

Now compare that to GigaOM’s own ToS Section 2.3:

gigaomYou hereby grant to GigaOM, and you agree to grant to GigaOM, a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, worldwide and cost-free license to use, copy, record, disclose, sell, re-sell, sublicense, reproduce, distribute, redistribute, modify, adapt, publish, edit, translate, transmit, create derivative works of, broadcast, publicly perform, display or otherwise exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Submissions (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats, on or through any media, software, formula, or technology whether by any means and in any media now known or hereafter developed and to sublicense such rights through multiple tiers of sublicenses, and to advertise, market and promote the same.

Or if you prefer, you might want to compare it with the Terms of Service from Tribal Nova, who run ILearnWith:

ilearnwithYou hereby grant to Tribal Nova, the non-exclusive, unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, and cost-free right and license to use, copy, record, distribute, reproduce, disclose, sell, re-sell, sublicense (through multiple levels), display, publicly perform, transmit, publish, broadcast, translate, make derivative works of, and otherwise use and exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Content (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats, on or through any means or medium now known or hereafter developed, and with any technology or devices now known or hereafter developed, and to advertise, market, and promote the same.

Continue reading “ToS changes: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by short-sightedness”” →