1.8.0(3) - P2P changes! Huge privacy and landowner rights victory for SL!

Just loaded up the test server to try to see how the teleport system acts if you have teleport disabled. Of course I then realized that I need to find a slice of land that has teleport disabled....

What I did notice is that the second you hit teleport it teleports you, it doesn't immediatly check to see if you can teleport there because it can't contact the region. What I'm assuming happens, is that you go through the whole "saving attachments" thing, then it does the contacting region, at that point i'm assuming it will check with the plot to see if it's a valid teleport spot, and then problary kick you out of the teleport black screen saying you can't teleport to that spot.

If this is the case I really hope Linden changes this. I have a small 512m parcel. It's a very thin parcel and is almost impossible to select it on the map. If I want people to teleport to me, and the people around me are set to not allow teleports, people that try to visit me are going to be clicking around on the map in a small area and each time they hit teleport they will wait up to 30 seconds (depending on lag) before being told that they can't teleport to their selected location.

I'm assuming that every linden owned sim has atleast some linden land on it. If the way I described above is actually what happens (As I said it's kinda hard to test i'm just assuming from the way p2p worked when I tried it out) there should be in each sim a public teleport landing zone on linden land (like the street) so if they do click on protected land by mistake, they still atleast get into the same sim. And it's public linden land so people don't end up teleporting into the nextdoor neighbor's house.

The idea of default teleporting people to telehubs is not a good idea at all. I'm assuming that the vast majority of land will allow teleports because sl is a public place and most people realize that. If you default teleport people to telehubs it will falsely add extra value to the telehub land even though traffic to the telehub areas will be extremely minor. It will just end up in more cases like the ones we are seeing recently, with people paying premiums for telehub land, not realizing the drastic changes that are taking place.

I don't want to be driving / sailing / flying along and smack into someone rezzing out of nowhere.

And here is exactly your false assumption.

People will not want people coming to their place. Not porting near it, nothing. They have that right because they pay for the server space for the land.

Yes, altering P2P is only 1 piece of the whole privacy picture, but this is an important piece.

Now you simply misunderstand me.
(a) is a default in place - as in, you don't have to come up with a new algorithm that will eat up CPU clock cycles to figure out where a person should be landing if a place is blocked.

(b) People who port directly to where they want to go will port to places where it is allowed. But there are also people who just wander - for them it's a matter of getting to a region, and having a centralized telehub as this fall-back makes sense.

I have a proposal that states that teleport home scripts should be banned and another that says warning signs need to be posted in order to use forcefields.

Link please? I have 6 open votes now that Prop 244 had been acknowledged.

Your viewing it from that way. We are viewing it that the person gives his neighbor the right to choose to accept his misplaced teleports. They are both equally valid.

The Lindens are making a major mistake listening to this minority of people. The Majority want unlimited Pinpoint Teleporting.

As I said, after winning the right to block Pinpoint teleporting, they will then demand the right to block teleporting to nearby Public land,

If land is set aside near or next-to roads that won't block the path, then I'm fine with this. I just don't want people popping up on or above the road / waterway that I'm travelling.

The interaction with the land happened when the person tried to tp to that land, in essence - the teleporting person gave that landowner that right to choose to deny it.

THAT LAND ALREADY EXISTS.

Really.

Where in SL is there ANY Linden road that goes PRECISELY to the edge of the parcel? There's always at least few meters or so around to absorb the "jagginess" of the parcel edge. If someone is porting to land and pops up on the nearest public land because it's blocked... they'll be porting into that border. EVEN IF THEY'RE WEARING A 20 FOOT TALL MECHA, their bounding box is still the same, and won't block the road.

But there is no way to distinguish between a neighbor who "chooses to accept misplaced teleports" and a neighbor who doesn't.


Based on what?


No, this is a seperate issue; this is not a matter of landowner rights; this is a matter of ensuring paths of travel are kept clear.

If land is set aside near or next-to roads that won't block the path, then I'm fine with this. I just don't want people popping up on or above the road / waterway that I'm travelling.

Of course, setting aside space for avatars to safely pop-in is the equivalent of adding mini-telehubs next to roads, isn't it?

Actually ... that's kind of a novel solution; why not add spots like this along roadways, don't make them full telehubs, but they'd be public landing spots. I think that would be a reasonable compromise because then local landowners who buy land in the area would be fully aware of where people would be porting in to.

How about that as a compromise idea? Can we build on that?

I'm thinking like ... they could look like Bus stops ... or even the exits from subways ... or even just alleys between buildings. That would be very cool.

Magnum,

You ignored the earlier question which I thought was quite poignant which I'll re-phrase, in case you missed it.

You express yourself on these forums as the champion of the MAJORITY of the people. How you could have met, interviewed and/or polled over 50% of SL's population... well over 45000... I have no idea. But I digress.

You consistently claim to represent democracy, choice, freedom and the majority. If that is the case, why do you practice a lifestyle that not only is inconsistent with freedom and choice, but is the EXACT OPPOSITE OF IT? Why am I not allowed to IM Whisper Speculaas without talking to you first? Or your other slave?

While I don't care what two consenting adults choose to do, I do care when someone is being COMPLETELY HYPOCRITICAL.

Please respond: How do you justify your chest-pounding as the champion of freedom and rights here when you practice the exact opposite in your choice of lifestyle?

Oh, and BTW - this isn't a personal attack, its a question about something I don't understand about you. You know I like you in general, we just disagree on most issues.

Regards,

-Flip

I believe the root issue here in this Thread is that the Telehub owners and those who support them want Pinpoint Teleporting to go away.


This will not happen.

End of story

Magnum, you are a broken record who has shown 0 evidence of anything of the sort. You repeatedly throw accusations and speculations and provide no backing.

If you don't have a counter-argument to things that other people bring up in the thread, stay quiet.

Explain to me how this off topic post is NOT a personal attack. I see it as such.

You ignored the earlier question which I thought was quite poignant which I'll re-phrase, in case you missed it.

You express yourself on these forums as the champion of the MAJORITY of the people. How you could have met, interviewed and/or polled over 50% of SL's population... well over 45000... I have no idea. But I digress.

You consistently claim to represent democracy, choice, freedom and the majority. If that is the case, why do you practice a lifestyle that not only is inconsistent with freedom and choice, but is the EXACT OPPOSITE OF IT? Why am I not allowed to IM Whisper Speculaas without talking to you first? Or your other slave?

While I don't care what two consenting adults choose to do, I do care when someone is being COMPLETELY HYPOCRITICAL.

Please respond: How do you justify your chest-pounding as the champion of freedom and rights here when you practice the exact opposite in your choice of lifestyle?

Oh, and BTW - this isn't a personal attack, its a question about something I don't understand about you. You know I like you in general, we just disagree on most issues.

I believe the root issue here in this Thread is that the Telehub owners and those who support them want Pinpoint Teleporting to go away.

And no, a few meters is not enough room, and your 20 foot mecha is a great example.

Bounding boxes don't factor into it, if I can't see the road.

Magnum, you are a broken record who has shown 0 evidence of anything of the sort. You repeatedly throw accusations and speculations and provide no backing.

If you don't have a counter-argument to things that other people bring up in the thread, stay quiet.

I
You obviously want to keep telehubs.

When presented with another idea (teleport to closest linden land) your argument that the teleport to closest land doesnt' work because it passes your teleports off to your neighbor's land(even if they don't want it)was no longer valid.

Instead of agreeing that teleporting to the nearest linden land was a valid solution,

and in turn adknowledging that there is a solution that fits all your requirements but doesn't involve telehubs,

you argued that teleporting to the closest linden land doesn't work because you don't want to crash into people while driving on the streets. Not realizing that the chances of crashing into someone that teleports 30m from their intended destination are much smaller then crashing into people that are flying over 3 sims to get to their destination just because of the time they are traveling.

Your argument against the closest linden land idea is grasping for straws.

The reason Magnum is accusing you of just wanting to keep telehubs so the land value doesn't drop comes from the fact that the only solutions you will adknowledge as valid all include keeping telehubs as they are.

Of course magnum has no evidence that you won't be happy untill telehubs stay as they are and p2p is taken out of the game.

However your refusal to adknowledge any system that doesn't include leaving telehubs into the game does imply that that is your stance.

[Telehubs are] a great way to default to if all teleporting is banned, and they'd make decent regional information locations.

Actually, no. If people are flying 3 sims, they will be much higher off the ground than people TPing in on ground-level roads.

I do.

Mainly because it got ME as a newb.

You click on a map and choose "teleport", you naturally expect to GO RIGHT THERE.

I got used to the SL Telehub way, but it seems perfectly within reason that someone might find telehubs confusing... because at least one person did.