Category: News-Opinion

The road to hell…..?

Posted on by Inara Pey

I use the Emerald Viewer. Over the years I’ve used a wide range of Viewers to experience Second Life, from the official Viewer through Snowglobe to Meerkat, Imprudence, Cool Viewer for Windows, KristenLee’s Viewer  – and even Viewer 2.0 and the Snowglobe iteration of Viewer 2.0.

But it is with Emerald I’ve found my “home”; of all the Viewers, this is the most stable for my PC configuration and provides the fastest fps rate of any (although KristenLee’s Viewer isn’t that far behind. Truth be told, if KLee’s Viewer incorporated RLV functionality, I’d swap over in a heartbeat, as her rendering pipe just blows everything else to pieces on a good graphics card).

It is true that Emerald has features that could be a nuisance if incorrectly used: the ability to locate anyone on a sim and Tp right into their face is one. I’m also aware of the claims of data scraping and the like surrounding Emerald and the claims relating to it ignoring permissions (generally made by those who have not sought to actually use the Emerald export tool). But the fact is, Emerald includes much that has been lacking in the official Viewer for general users, builders and estate managers – and these make it a winner.

As such, I applaud the efforts of the Emerald Dev team in building and maintaining a versatile Viewer.

However, even good intentions can go a step too far. Today, members of the Emerald Viewer group received a Notice and attachment I’d venture to suggest is questionable.  The attachment came in the form of a wearable prim. The Text of the Notice accompanying it reads thus:

This neat little prim has certain magical properties about it that causes viewers that do not respect permissions to crash when selecting it.

We turned it into a sort of “copybot shield” you can wear.
Fractured thought you guys should have these, they won’t hurt any viewer that respects permissions.
Come by Emerald Point to see us if you liked it.

So in essence, it is a prim that can be worn and which contains a script that identifies malicious Viewers and crashes them.

Now *IF* this prim is for real (there are no visible scripts, so exactly how it detects / communicates with “illegal” Viewers is beyond my ken), then on the surface it would appear to be a neat trick in deterring copybotters. However, *IF* it is for real, the tool raises concerns on a number of fronts.

  • At the very least, it would appear to violate the Terms of Service, to whit, Section 4.1, which includes the statement: In addition to abiding at all times by the Community Standards, you  agree that you shall not: (v) take any actions or upload, post, e-mail or otherwise  transmit Content that contains any viruses, Trojan horses, worms,  spyware, time bombs, cancelbots or other computer programming routines  that are intended to damage, detrimentally interfere with,  surreptitiously intercept or expropriate any system, data or personal  information. Given this prim has the ability to crash suspect Viewers, it could be argued that it is a form of Trojan horse  / time bomb intended to detrimentally interfere with other systems
  • While copybotting is a major concern, and it could be argued that Linden Lab should be doing more to control / eliminate the worse cases, this same argument does not entitle users and /or content creators to undertake what amounts to be vigilantism in lieu of firmer action on the part of Linden Lab (and I say this as a creator of content myself). Two wrongs simply do not make a right
  • There is already a degree of controversy surrounding the Gemini CDS system marketed by members of the Emerald team – not in terms of whether or not it hack people’s computers (it doesn’t) – but rather in the number of “false positives” it has been reported as giving. Can we be sure this tool is actually foolproof, even if vetted?
  • What gives a group outside of LL the right to determine  which Viewers should or should not connect to Second Life? LL themselves are already in the process of rolling out their Third Party Viewer (TPV) Policy. While it has a number of flaws within the revised wording, it is nevertheless the official means be which the use of malicious Viewers is to be contained. What gives one or two developers who have no direct accountability to Linden Lab or anyone else the right to take matters into their own hands?
  • The means by which Viewers are added to this tool (assuming it is going to be maintained) is far from transparent. While the best of intentions may have been behind its creation, it is therefore open to potential abuse
  • What happens should a rogue coder decide to retaliate?  If this tool can be developed to target “illegal” Viewers, how hard would it be for someone to target a specific Viewer – the one supported by this tool’s creator(s)? If the tool can be worn, it can be rezzed in-world as a mass griefing tool. Do we then enter a war of escalation?

I’m genuinely curious as to whether anyone in authority at Linden Lab was consulted during the development of this tool or prior to its release. I’m also very interested to see how they respond to its presence on the grid.

Again, I have little doubt the intentions behind the tool were good. The major problem with good intentions is the manner in which they invariably pave all the roads leading to hell….

Scripts limits announced

Posted on by Inara Pey

Jack Linden – possibly as a part of his new role as Executive Director, Consumer Products today blogs about the upcoming server-side scripting limits.

These have been the source of much hype, debate, guesswork and outright misinformation (not, I hasten to add, from Linden Lab) for a while now; while it is still somewhat early days, Jack’s post is welcome as it does much to set out LL’s table on the matter, and start the flow of information very positively – allowing for the fact that much still appears to be in a state of flux.

Of course, there are concerns with the approach. While scripting limits are perfectly acceptable and may well help improve sim performance on overworked servers (allowing for the virtual nature of sims themselves), the planned roll-out of the new controls does lend itself to a lot of potential misunderstandings and confusion. In this respect, I certainly hope that Jack and the team keep Phase 1 of the project – Information – uppermost in their minds.

In summary:

  • Linden Lab will be rolling out the project in three broad phases: Information – and Jack’s post can in some ways be seen as the first post in this effort, even though there have been earlier general postings on the subject by the likes of Babbage Linden; Tools – see below; and Enforcement
  • Server 1.38, due out in April will start the ball rolling with the release of script monitoring tools
  • Said tools will allow script usage to be monitored on a per parcel basis but the parcel “owner” / renter; additional tools will be provided to the sim owner / estate managers which will enable the return of objects that are taxing the sim in terms of script loads
  • Script “space” in memory will be assigned to sims in a similar manner to prims: there will be a total limit for the sim as a whole, which can then be allocated to parcels as the land is divided up.
  • Additional script space will be allocated per avatar, with an overall “pool” of resources per sim to handle avatars
  • While Jack’s post does not make this entirely clear, it appears that if the script limit for a parcel / sim is reached, additional scripted items will not work; similarly, if all resources for avatars is used, additional avatars entering the parcel / sim will find attachments do not work.

Many have debated the pros and cons of capping scripts, but the fact remains, whether we like it or not, the servers supporting Second Life all have finite resources, and scripts have never really been monitored, and have become one of the causes of server-side lag, simply because of their overwhelming prevalence.

That said, Jack’s post does leave some cause for concern over potential angst / misunderstandings / over-zealousness down the road:

  • Currently, LSL scripts are capped at 16Kb, while  Mono scripts can use up to 64Kb (but can in theory be a lot smaller than this – the average being around 9Kb according to Jack)
  • However, the new tools will initially only report on the maximum amount of memory a script can use. So, if you have four LSL scripts running, they’ll be reported as taking up 64Kb of memory. But…if you have 4 Mono scripts running, they’ll be recorded as taking up 256Kb of memory – even though the scripts may be a lot leaner than this
  • The monitoring tools will be tweaked later in the year so that Mono scripts will be able to report their actual memory usage – but initially, only the maximum 64Kb per mono script will be reported
  • The upshot of this is twofold:
    1. It gives an incorrect impression that Mono is actually more resource-hungry than LSL
    2. It runs the risk of having people single out Mono users unfairly on the basis that (whether or not parcel / sim script limits are being affected)  “they are hogging resources” because their “script usage” is “higher” – much as we witnessed people getting all het up and shouting about ARC and lag…
  • A third possible outcome of this is that when shopping (and assuming memory usage becomes a “feature” of vendors, people will opt for LSL-scripted items because they appear more memory-efficient

There are other concerns that have been raised – such as scripters being able to use the land tools to test the efficiency of their scripts (given than not all scripts own / rent land, but work in places like sandboxes where the tools – to be included on the About Land window – will not be available to them. However, it is probably this issue of actual versus perceived script efficiency that is liable to cause the greatest upset with this change, unless LL work very hard to fully and properly communicate this change to the community as a whole.

And while script limits may well be a good thing for SL overall (I’m hoping they will have the desired outcome as far as is reasonably possible) – we’ve been shown time and again that when it comes to proactive communications with residents, Linden Lab’s efforts seem to repeatedly fall far wide of the mark.

Azure: assurances and questions

Posted on by Inara Pey

Well, it’s official. As of today, MSL (operated by Anshe Chung) now effectively owns Azure Islands.

What does this mean? Well, overall, it means that a single land owning company now controls some 7.5% of private estates. May not sound a lot, but it is a bit of a clouting stick.

For Azure Island residents, it hopefully means that things will continue more-or-less “as is” under the new management, and both the outgoing Azure management and the incoming MSL team have stressed this, while indicating that perhaps some 5% of Azure residents may have to face relocation as MSL move to break up some of the Azure estates to provide “greater privacy and less lag” (to quote the MSL note to Azure residents).

The Azure team themselves are stating the reason for the transfer is simply that they’re in need of a change after some 5 years in the business – and as I previously noted, Adam Zaius does have his OS Grid interests that must be taking up a lot of time.

Change is a natural part of business. While some Azure residents may be adversely affected by the hand-over, it has to be said that while unfortunate, their disaffection doesn’t spell the end of SL or anything else; one can sympathise, but one isn’t going to chastise the Azure management or anyone else for the woo that some may encounter.

To me, the burning questions remain related to the wider implications of this move. While on the one hand, one cannot blame those behind Azure for wanting to move on to new challenges, there is still something deep down about the timing of this  change that concerns me – although what it is, I can’t rightly say.

Then there is the potential impact on smaller private estate owners. MSL / Dreamland is now a very powerful voice in LL’s ear, and one wonders at possible future implications in this. Again, none may be forthcoming, but given Jack’s penchant for behind-closed-doors deals, one has to wonder.

The entire – topography – of land sales and rentals is changing; the Azure move is in many respects “simply” another part of this. Doubtless some will cheer what appears to be another step in Adam Zaius’ departure from SL, while others will point to the sky and claim chunks of it are falling. I don’t think either is the case – but by the same token, I’m glad I’m no longer in the land business myself.

An Azure Dreamland?

Posted on by Inara Pey

It seems one of the major land businesses in Second Life is about to change hands. A comment posted on the SLU forums quotes the following for a notecard apparently circulated to some Azure residents:

We’ve got some fairly big news for the residents of the Azure Islands, as of March 16th, the Azure Islands will be transferring from us, over to a new management team run by Metaverse Services Limited.

If accurate, this is newsworthy on a number of counts. For a start, “Metaverse Services Limited” appears to be the holding company for Anshe Chung (Ailin Graef) of Dreamland fame, Time magazine celebrity and flying penises notoriety. If Azure is going under Anshe’s banner, then it means that from tomorrow, MSL control a huge swathe of estates and land across Second Life and are potentially in even more of a position of power where matters of policy and behind-closed-doors discussions with LL on land benefits, etc., are concerned.

Secondly, it begs the question as to what is happening to the land business overall in Second Life. Adam Zaius (Adam Frisby), primary owner of Azure island has been staunchly involved in SL almost from the beginning – something that has earned him a reputation as being a “pillar” of the so-called Feted Inner Core (FIC) and the devil incarnate by some, whilst simultaneously viewed upon as a fair and committed land owner, businessman and pioneer to others (notably his residents). Whichever side of the coin one happens to view when looking at Mr. Zaius – it cannot be denied he has built a considerable business enterprise within SL – one that goes beyond Azure itself; and has given a tremendous amount to the platform as well.

That he is now apparently selling-off / transferring / pretty much bailing on the SL land business – and taking into account his growing interest in / commitment to the OpenSim environment, which may be playing a part in this decision – tends to suggest that the entire land business, which has for so long underpinned SL as a going concern, is in far worse state than even the most negative of speculations around it have suggested. Even with his preoccupation with OSGrid development, it is hard to see Mr. Zaius abandoning what must be a healthy revenue stream simply for the hell of it. If he really is a “pillar of the FIC”, does he know something other’s are not privy to? Again, Zaius is not alone in running Azure…What of his partner in the venture?

Of course, this all could be grist for the rumour-mill – but I’ll be quite curious as to what emerges tomorrow.

Coming to a splash screen near you – your own MOTD…sort-of

Posted on by Inara Pey

In June last year, people logging-in to SL and who hung around while the progress bar was displayed caught a rather unusual Message of the Day (MOTD), thus:

(with thanks to Ciaran Laval for this image)

At the time it caused a mix of teeth gnashing and speculation. When pressed, there were mutters from some inside the Lab that the Azure MOTD was a “pilot” (or “beta” or some such), and that others would get the opportunity in “the future”.

Well – it seems the future has arrived.

On the surface, it comes across as a reasonable idea – those running businesses in SL can have the opportunity to reach a wider audience by having their very own Message of the Day displayed on people’s Viewer log-in screens. Of course, there have been the inevitable howls about “more advertising” in response to this post – but lets be honest here; LL have taken something of a shellacking of late for the manner in which they’ve used the MOTD to promote their own in-world content (vis-a-vis Linden Homes, etc.) – so one might argue that this is an attempt to redress the balance and put residents on the same footing.

Well yes. Apart from one small detail. Anyone wanting to use this “service” is going to have to shell out a minimum of $1500 for each 11.5 hour block of advertising space they want to book – with the “peak” rate (07:00-18:30 PST) being hawked by the Lab at a staggering $4500 per 11.5 hour block.

(Technically, each block is 12 hours – but LL “reserve” 30 mins in each block for “administrative purposes” – which suggests your MOTD may not be actually displayed during this period.)

Ciaran Laval has rightly called out Linden Lab over these charges from the perspective of the more modest estate owners in SL – as it is fairly obvious that the rates are only likely to be within the reach of the largest land barons. However, and while acknowledging Ciaran’s call on behalf of the smaller estate owners, I’d say the matter goes further than just the ability of estate owners to use the MOTD as a channel to market – the pricing structure virtually excludes all content creators from any participation.

Given this, one can only assume one of three things; either:

  1. LL is increasingly playing to a minority within SL, or
  2. LL is indeed in financial difficulties, and this is an act of desperation to generate income, or
  3. The offer has been skewed by LL’s continued belief that the future of the platform is inevitably tied to the use of the platform by “big business”, and as such, the rates have been set in a belief that they’ll be seen as a “serious” “opportunity” for “big business”.

Inevitably, most will go with (1.). But the FIC theory is all too often rolled out in response to LL’s actions whether or not they make sense.  (3.) has merit in that those who consider themselves “serious” businesses (aka the GSP group) pushing for the ability to market themselves “professionally”, and LL seem to determined to tie aspects of activities on the large grid into their SLE offering.

(2.) Is also possible – and certainly, if one leaves out (1.) and (3.), the “offer” does have more than a whiff of desperation about it.

As I’ve said elsewhere, I’m going to be very interested to see just who takes up the offer.

I guess coincidence can be pretty coincidental at times*

Posted on by Inara Pey

Trends are interesting things to observe. Sometimes you can learn a lot from them – other times, you can end up looking a complete twit for ever getting involved.

I’m really not sure which way this will go, but I’ll mention it anyway, given I’ve already posted on the SL blogrum.

There has been a lot going on around the subject of SL and RL identities of late – almost all of it initiated by Linden Lab. Vis:

  • Drawing ever closer to Facebook
  • Wallace Linden’s utterly mishandled posting on the subject of aligning rl and online identities
  • Running a Valentine’s day “scavenger hunt” in which the main prize can only be won by those prepared to “out” themselves on Facebook
  • The arrival of Viewer 2.0 with the Profile section rearranged to place rl information right below SL information
  • Running an advertising competition that encourages residents to reveal their rl selves in return for some unspecified prize…

And now, to add to the list, we get Lexie Linden initiating a conversation on residents meeting up in RL (which, at the end of the day, is the most intimate means of linking one’s rl and SL identities).

Leaving aside my astonishment at Lexie initiating a discussion, rather than stomping on one (oh, me bad!), as far as I’m aware, she’s not come anywhere near starting a discussion on anything up until now.

So I can’t help but feel that her choice of subject is not entirely…random, shall we say?

Given the trend demonstrated to date, I cannot help but put “ulterior” and “motive” in the margin alongside Lexie’s thread. After all, if people indicate that, under the right circumstances (such as at events like SLCC, etc.), they’d be prepared to reveal their rl identities, might this not be seen by some in LL as a sign that closer in-world linking of rl and SL selves would be acceptable…?

Or should I simply lay off the cheese late at night?