Things have never been easy in Second Life, for you, for us, for anyone. But once upon a time when you were about to start working on something that might affect us all in world, or when you discovered something was going borky, you’d have the decency to tell us. There would be a nice little blue pop-up appear in the top right-hand corner of the screen advising users of this, that or the other. When issues were resolved, there would be a nice little notice telling us so.
It was informative; it was helpful; it was reassuring to know you guys were out there, keeping an eye on things and letting us know what was going on. It gave us a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside. In short, it was communicative.
And then one day it stopped, leaving us with no option but to find out about Things Going Wrong or that planned maintenance had started by experiencing it the hard way: through teleports failing or transactions going astray or No Copy items poofing into the ether, never to be seen again.
Now, I appreciate that you cannot be on top of absolutely everything. The unexpected isn’t exactly predictable; that’s why it’s called “the unexpected”, right? I mean, I understand that. No-one can reasonably ask you to always get the word out before people start having issues and problems. But when you are aware of problems or when you yourselves are about to start Doing Things, is it really too much to ask that you actually, well, let us know in-world?
Yes, I know you try to keep us informed via the Grid Status Page and Twitter; but frankly, not everyone has a Twitter account. And even those of us who do find that having to keep one eye on it and one eye on the Grid Status Page tends to be a tad disruptive of the old immersive in-world experience we all know and love.
Surely it’s not that hard to renew the old in-world notices to all and sundry? After all, what is preferable: being told database maintenance is underway and that logins are suspended, or deciding to log out for a few minutes while you make a cuppa only to have the log-in screen gloatingly inform you you cannot now log back in?
I know which I’d prefer. So how about it? Pretty please?
Some time ago, LL opted to shift their method of accepting foreign payments away from PayPal. A deal was struck with Dragonfish – which in a sort-of bizarre twist, given LL’s attitude towards gambling – is operated by 888 Holdings the, er, online gambling giants.
There have been numerous issues with the payments system (which also appears to be linked to Cassava Enterprises, another subsidiary of 888 Holdings, registered in the tax haven we call Gibraltar). Now it appears as those woes might be growing.
As reported on the official forum, members in Europe using the payment system towards the end of last year are finding themselves subjected to directed mail shots to the e-mail accounts that they have specifically set-up for use with Second Life. What is more worrying is that in at least one instance, the mail sent to the SL-related mail account has called the recipient by their real first name. Elsewhere, another use who has used a partner’s Credit Card to make payments to LL via Dragonfish has found themselves receiving directed e-mail to their SL-related e-mail account addressing the card holder by name.
Frank Ambrose (FJ Linden) has attempted to pour oil on troubled waters by suggesting that those affected have been victims of malware / spyware on their own computers, and that no data has been leaked via Linden Lab or their “third-party” operative (Dragonfish). However, an increasing number of people are doubting this explanation, due to the number of coincidences concerned, perhaps the biggest of which is that the directed e-mails (mis-named “spam” in the forum posts) are from – wait for it – another on-line gambling organisation.
In other words, someone possibly in competition with 888 Holdings.
As Que Niangao points out in the thread, while it in not entirely above the realms of possibility, for FJ’s explanation to hold, the compromised computers used by those receiving the e-mail need to have been infected by some very elaborate spyware / trojan / key-logging system. However, a more reasonable explanation might be that the issue lies at the other end of the pipe and that while no-one is accusing 888 / Dragonfish / Cassava of deliberately passing on user information, it is possible that their own systems have or were compromised at some point.
Either way, it would seem that a more involved investigation is warranted – and neither Linden Lab nor 888 have anything to lose by ensuring the matter is fully and properly checked.
There is a danger in issuing what can be read as trite / suspicious and almost throw-away explanations (as some on both the forum and on Twitter are treating FJ’s response). That is that is deepens the belief that Linden Lab does little more than pay lip service to matters of privacy. This feeling has been rife among the user base for a good while now, and has been exacerbated by recent events around RedZone.
While no-one expects LL or 888 to hold a hand up and admit the specifics of any leak (should one have occurred), one does expect them to work fully and properly to ensure that all fears and concerns that their might be a leak are properly alleviated, and evidence given that customers’ data is in fact secure. If there has been a breach that is not connected to customers’ own computers, then it is also in LL’s best interests to ensure they understand what has occurred and when so they can inform users of the appropriate actions they need to take, if any.
A “Thanks but not our problem,” response – which is how FJ’s reply tends to read – doesn’t really help anyone.
Tateru Nino posts on a privacy issues surrounding SL web Profiles – or more particularly, the “old” profile API utilised by 1.x Viewers and the likes of Firestorm.
Although there is an issue here, I’m not entirely with her on her take on the situation, or in the options she provides as potential solutions.
Essentially, the problem lies in the fact that people seem to be under the impression that setting the privacy options on a web Profile via my.secondlife.com will “hide” the selected parts of the Profile from being viewed in-world. For example: if Groups to be viewed by Friends in my.secondlife.com, people take it to mean only Friends can view the Groups information when viewing the Profile in-world.
While this is the case for those people using the official Viewer 2, it is not true for anyone using 1.x-based Viewers or some TPVs based on Viewer 2. For these people, your entire Profile remains fully visible, regardless of the Privacy settings active on mt.secondlife.com.
This is because 1.x-based Viewers (and Viewers such as Firestorm) use the “old” 1.x Profile API, which has no privacy settings associated with it, and it simply doesn’t care what has been set via my.secondlife.com.
As such, and while acknowledging the situation, I’m hard-pressed to call it a “privacy” issue in its truest sense; the behaviour exhibited by the API is exactly what it has always been – no more, no less. In that regard, it’s certainly incorrect to describe the resultant situation as a bug with the 1.x Profile API.
Rather than being a matter of “privacy” with regards what is viewable on Profiles in-world, I’d actually suggest that this problem is actually an unfortunate outcome of another poorly worded communique from Linden Lab coupled with taking the “easiest” route to providing a solution.
Let’s put matters in perspective. The privacy settings on my.secondlife.com came about not to limit the viewability of Profiles in-world, but rather to address users’ concerns that my.secondlife.com initially made it far too easy for non-SL users casually browsing the web to see people’s avatar Profiles. Unfortunately, when LL moved to fix the matter (and very clumsily so, in the first pass), Q Linden issued a blog post that unintentionally linked the web aspects of privacy with the in-world viewing of Profiles; something that was possibly exacerbated by the clumsy manner in which “privacy” was first invoked. As a result, some people have become confused.
Unless LL unequivocally state it is their intention to enable the blocking of certain parts of a person’s Profile from in-world viewing (and there are actually valid arguments for this), then I’d dispute Tateru’s view on how to resolve this matter.
Far from there only being two options open to LL (backport the privacy controls to the 1.x API or to shut down that API entirely), there is actually a third. It’s this: add the necessary clarification to the privacy settings page on my.secondlife.com. It’s around 10-15 minutes work at most. The wording itself is pretty simple:
“Please note: These privacy settings apply to how your profile is seen at my.secondlife.com or by residents using the official Viewer 2. Residents using older Viewers and third-party Viewers may be able to see your full profile in-world, regardless of the settings made here. Please ensure you only supply information you wish to be made “public” within Second Life, and ensure your profile remains within our Community Standards guidelines.”
We all hate spammers – you know the type, they pitch up in Group chat and fire off an IM, complete with Surl for some sale or event that has nowt to do with the Group itself. Groups with open enrolment are, sadly, particularly susceptible to these idiots.
Deeply annoying.
But, in the case of large Groups, equally annoying is the tirades that then follow said spammer as Group members proceed to gnash teeth, yowl, shakes their fists and generally react – sometimes for several minutes at a time, the comments scrolling up the Group Chat window, and, well, spamming the rest of the Group.
Yes, spammers are a PITA but I really wish people would remember that by the time they’ve pulled up the IM window, typed a reply and hit RETURN the spammer is long gone. They’ll have closed their IM window and sodded off somewhere else – if not left the Group entirely to find another target.
So, before jumping on the bandwagon of condemnation (however tempting it may be), please spare a thought for the rest of your fellow Group members who have been equally affected and try not to become as much an irritant as the original culprit.
I’m going to go out on something of a limb here. Just why are people getting so worked up about having their “SL Accounts” on Facebook deleted?
Over the last 24 hours, FB have been mass deleting accounts linked to SL avatars (and no doubt other accounts that are “not linked” to “real information”), and people have been shouting about it across blogs, Twitter and Plurk as if it is so kind of outrage.
Well, sorry, it isn’t. I’m not Facebook fan; I wouldn’t even use it – but the Facebook Terms and Conditions of use are clear: only “real life” account information should be used on Facebook accounts. Quote:
“Registration and Account Security
Facebook users provide their real names and information, and we need your help to keep it that way. Here are some commitments you make to us relating to registering and maintaining the security of your account:
You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission.
You will not create more than one personal profile.
However fond we are of our Avatars, the fact remains that they don’t fall under the classification of “real names and information”; ergo, however much it hurts, creating a Facebook account using avatar information has always been a recipe for disaster. Given this, it’s hard to see how anyone can be outraged when Facebook seek to enforce their rules; it is their playground, after all.
I appreciate this may come across as a cold reaction, especially to those who have invested many hours in developing their Facebook presence, but it is honestly hard to be anything else. Had it been a case of FB suddenly changing their policy and wiping out accounts as a result, it would be a very different matter, one that would call for more sympathy for those affected by the move.
But it is not. As quoted above, the rules are clear. Foolish is the person who gambles against the house odds in matter like this.
However, there is another side to this situation. Leave us not forget that for well over a year now Linden Lab have been actively encouraging people to flip over to Facebook and join things over there. For example, we’ve had:
The 2010 Valentine scavenger hunt, the top prize for which could only be won by those registering with Facebook
The 2010 advertising campaign that (at the least) required SL users to connect their Avatars with their RL identity on Facebook
Wallace Linden’s heavy-handed FB push that marked his one (and only?) attempt to “start a conversation”
Amanda’s Linden’s own clumsy juxtaposition of announcing a forthcoming new “community platform” for “better communications” while at the same time telling people that “the” place to find out about SL is….Facebook…
While it might be argued that few / none of these initiatives have required people to sign-up to Facebook using their Avatar details, such arguments entirely miss the point. Facebook and Second Life are – for the vast majority of SL users – simply a bad fit, precisely because of FB’s “no ‘fake’ information policy.
Of course, there are those who don’t mind linking RL and SL identities: those operating a RL business with SL ties; those working in education in RL and SL, those operating non-profits, etc., may have few qualms in linking one to the other – and are excellently placed to use the likes of FB and services such as LindedIn to help promote themselves and their activities.
But for the vast majority of SL users, making FB a bedfellow has not been in our interests. Some at Linden Lab (/me waves to Amanda) have been using a form marketing kung-fu that can only be described as kicking oneself in the head, in that they seem to be of the opinion that pushing SL users to FB will be reciprocated in a flow of FB users to SL. This clearly is flawed in so many ways, it’s not worth rehashing all the reasons why, especially given they’ve been pointed out time and again by so many SL bloggers.
Hopefully, this latest move from Facebook will convince TPTB at the Lab that it really isn’t in their best interests to be so cosy with FB. In the meantime, for those who want an SL-related social network, why not give 2ndhub a try?
As Tateru Nino points out, Oz Linden issued a stark warning yesterday when commenting on third-party Viewers (TPVs): “[A]ny Viewer that isn’t being actively maintained is going to start having fairly serious problems over the next months. We’re making a lot of changes… if viewers don’t keep up, things will break.”
Now, Oz isn’t the most diplomatic of individuals, it has to be said; but a lot of people seem to be getting unnecessarily bent out of shape in response to his comments, apparently reading them as “You must swap to Viewer 2!” – which is certainly not what is being said.
Rather, he is pointing to the fact that with all that is coming down the line, there is a risk that some Viewer devs (particularly those working with the Viewer 1 / Snowglobe code who have to backport everything) may find their Viewers becoming obsolete. And his comment may well have merit.
While it is true that much of what has been developed for Viewer 2 has been backported to Viewer 1 TPVs (Display Names, multiple clothing layers, Avatar Physics, etc.), it is by no means certain that this will be possible going forward. for example, LL have already stated that Mesh objects will not render in Viewer 1, so it’s by no means clear if the code required to enable meshes to be visible can be integrated into the older Viewers. Similarly, they’ve also stated that the “Search 1” used by Viewer 1 is to be turned off at some point this year – leaving TPVs based on the code either without a search engine or needing to try to integrate with the Search used by Viewer 2. Therefore, there is a risk associated in staying with the Viewer 1 code base.
The Popularity Stakes
In the same meeting, Oz went on to say, “[T]that being said, we’re looking hard at what motivates people to stay on a 1.x viewer so that we can try to address those issues too,” a comment that was also met with a certain amount of derision, with people pointing to things like “usability”, performance and features as the major reasons why Viewer 2 “isn’t working”.
Much has been made of the Viewer 2 UI being “unusable”. At the risk of offending some, I think it fair to say this view is more reflective of people’s unwillingness to accept Viewer 2’s UI than it is of the usability of the interface.
Yes, there are quirks, annoyances, and things within the UI that could be a better than currently implemented – but none of them render the UI “unusable”. The fact is that *if* the Viewer 2 UI had been the de facto UI for the last 4 or 5 years, and was now being replaced by the Viewer 1.x UI, many of those decrying the Viewer 2 UI to be “unusable” would be making the very same claim against the “new” V1 interface. I’m not being snide in saying this: I’m simply pointing to a reality of human nature; Viewer 1 is in our comfort zone, and it is naturally more attractive.
Performance has been an issue with Viewer 2. Many report tremendous downturns in performance when swapping to it; I’ve experienced it myself in the past. However, today I carried out a couple of (admittedly simple) tests*, measuring FPS rates and rezzing times for the four Viewers I routinely use together with the “official” Viewer 2 and the Kokua development viewer (more out of curiosity with the latter than an attempt to measure its actual performance). The results were surprising, as this table on average frame rates on sims occupied by 2 avatars and 12 avatars respectively demonstrates:
Viewer frame rates on sims occupied by 2 and 12 avatars respectively
In terms of rezzing (using a mall as my baseline), Viewer 2 again performed well. The fastest Viewer for rezzing was, unsurprisingly, Kirstenlee’s S21 (The KLee Viewers have always preformed pretty well on my PC), with Viewer 2 running it a close second. Again, given the use of the JPG2000 library with the official Viewer, this might not be so surprising, but it does perhaps point to Viewer 2 not being as slouchy as its reputation suggests.
Obviously, the test is entirely subjective; what works for me, may not work for you. But its interesting that the overall performance of the Viewer 2 is not so much an issue as it may have been just a few releases ago (when things like frame rates did have me grinding my teeth in frustration).
Giving People What They Want
Truth be told, if Oz wants to understand why people stick with Viewer 1.23.5-based Viewers (or for that matter prefer the likes of Firestorm over Viewer 2), then he only need to really consider one thing: features.
Firestorm in-world Profile display: fast, easy, fun
simply put: TPV developers give users the tools they want: client-side AOs, radar, massive improvements to the Windlight engine and sharable presets, and so on. All these have served to keep Viewer 1-based Viewers at the forefront of popularity.
In the Viewer 2 department, TPV developers are being as equally accommodating, providing features and options users are requesting while LL turn a deaf ear: in-world Profile viewing that avoids the use of the Web Profiles, inclusion of the Media Filter, options to replace the context menus with pie menus, and so on.
As TPVs based on the Viewer 2 / Snowstorm code base mature and inherit features from Viewer 1 TPVs, people will migrate to them and overcome their bias towards the UI.
When that happens, perhaps the only question that will be asked within Linden Lab will be, “Why is Viewer 2 still the minority Viewer?” In reply to which, I can only say “check back here guys, and read that last few paragraphs…”
