Snooping on a neighbor wrong?

Egads...listening to other peoples conversations in an online world....Geez, get a real First and Second Life...

Violation of the TSO, this results in a PERM BAN from SecondLife! This is NOT new, and people HAVE been PERM BANNED for it in the past! So watch it!

Yikes, so an eavesdropping script could actually function inside an attachment owned and worn by another player, and still send their text to you?

Posting the script here in any useable format wouldn't help matters, I think that might give a lot of people who don't have the know-how the capacity to carry this sort of thing out, even though I suspect that this kind of script is already in wide circulation at this point.

Seriously it never occured to me before that I should be concerned about my own attachments spying on me, and I've worn all sorts of anti-push or animation attachments made by people I've never met. I guess I sort of have it coming for being LSL-illiterate for more than a year.

I wonder if there are any scripters out there that would like to post a non-commercial anti-surveillance script? It'd certainly ease a lot of people's concerns if they could check for eavesdroppers.. personally, I'm going to head over to the scripting boards right now and see if such a thing already eists.

Wow you must be quite some scripter. A listening device that can hear people anywhere in a sim, eh? I know a few scripters that have been here a year or so that'd like to know how that one was done.

Shame, cuz instead of being a contemptable asshat, someone with that kind of skill prolly ought to be putting together, say, modular networks so people with big plots can control all their scripted devices from out of earshot, and make thousands from their work instead of a couple of bucks. But then I don't suppose anyone would buy a script from said contemptable asshat, since their reputation would be shot to pieces by then. After all, who'd trust any scripted device from someone with this kind of moral code?

I mean, who is to say that the fabled Ohu doesn't IM everything it hears back to its creator as well as the owner? Would a denial from the creator make any difference at this point? I think not.

I think you should improve it more, to make it able to hear ANYONE, ANYWHERE in the whole of SL, now that would be impressive...

So now your lying to all your fellow gamers... tsk tsk, naughty naughty, very very naughty

*strolls off looking over shoulder*

Most scriptors don't talk about things like this because most have the common sense enough to realize it would ruin their reputation. I know a few scriptors that have been here since Beta who could tell you how to do it. But they won't.


I had the pleasure of seeing the control room for Caymen; it did precisely that.
I also designed my own long-range communication system back during the game development competition back in Spring.


Namecalling notwithstanding, yeah, you hit the head right on the nail.

There is... a great deal of malicious scripting that has been ... not used ... due to the restraint of scriptors. The overwhelming majority of scriptors are ethical programmers who simply love to program. People like this are the kind that make virus, use easy exploits to crack computer systems, and so on. In the days before the Internet, Arpanet was an open society of scientists and academics. Guest accounts were often left on systems to let guests come, browse, discover, leave things as they are, and enjoy.

Truly, we are still in the golden age of Metaverse. But Babel will fall because of unethical behavior like this wannabe lamer. *sigh*

If I were to explain how easy it really is to make a SL-wide listener system, virtually undetectable and plausibly deniable, you would be shocked to think it hasn't been done yet.

Or has it?

I personally offer a guarantee - I will provide, on request, references to my scripts and would even subject to a source-code verification by an independant party. But no one has ever asked me for any sort of proof that my scripted items aren't malicious.

Buyer beware, neighbor beware.

Well yeah. The big difference is between the person who knows they could write a public channel listener in 3 lines of code, and the person who does it and then sells it as a commercial product.

And yeah, I know you CAN do long range communications - I designed one myself before emails to objects came along.

My point was simply that instead of throwing together a really basic script to exploit people who are ignorant of the ToS and scripting and get yourself a bad reputation into the bargain, why not make something that is truly useful, make you real money from more people than just nosey griefers, and would likely do your reputation little harm?

Thing is with the 'it's not illegal to make or own one but it is illegal to use it' argument, is that surely it's reasonable for a shopper to assume that if the product is available to buy that it's legal to own and use? I know people are supposed to also be familiar with the ToS and all, but wouldnt you be severely pissed off if you got banned or suspended for using something you bought because it was illegal to use it?

Think about RL examples - like DVD Copy software and phone-frequency scanners. So as not to infringe on peoples' right to legal use of these, there are laws requiring the seller to clearly post a disclaimer on how the object should not be used.

The same applies here.

For that matter, if I made an object called "ultimate grief machine" and it promised to "boot, harass, and lag" the AV of choice, should users assume it's okay under TOS? The argument is not sound - just because someone marks something as "for sale" doesn't guarantee its ethicalness.

I tend to run in fear of your view - it allows the average person to not use responsibility and common sense and make it someone else's fault.

i wouldn't mind since i don't HAVE a house to plant chatloggers in.

And if i ever would..i never say anything intresting anyways


Putting chatloggers on someone's land is banable tho...

What's the legitimate use for a public channel listener? I'm struggling to think of a single reason you'd want to record everything everyone said. Even if it werent against the ToS to do so.

I really don't think it's anything like DVD copy software

How do you think Town Hall repeaters work?

In the Ouranos group, we have found them quite useful for an accurate, complete log of a group meeting without the hassle of remembering to copy-paste a log.

I've seen them used as answering machine-type devices, whereby you could record a brief message to a storeowner or similar.

How is a covert listening device that stores up conversations and plays them back to one person the same as a town hall repeater?

Sorry I didn't spell out 'what is the legitimate use for a near invisible eavesdropping device with recording capabilities?', but I thought that was a given in the context of the thread.

And as for group logs... how about using something just a tad more advanced (like my team game headset system! )?

Like it only records people with a particular group set. Or only records people with the microphone attachment?

Is a generic eavesdropping device really the way to go?

I reject this arguement, in any event...

If I go out and buy a shotgun, I know I can use it to hunt deer, but not to hunt people.

If I go out and buy a car, I know it's legal to drive, but not to run people over.

If I go buy a can of spraypaint, I know it's legal to use to paint my toolshed, but not to paint my name on a store window.

Etc, etc.

This is the Sony case all over again. And I still find it just as moraly objectionable.

I'm against people using these bugs to snoop, but I am even more against their very existance beign outlawed because someone might use the in a naughty way. This is treating everyone as if they were a criminal... "Since we cant trust you to have something, nobody gets to have it."

No thanks.

*sigh*

Ok. I give up.

I'm talking about a device I can see no legitimate use for in its current format. One that is blatantly advertised by the seller for eavesdropping.

You lot are talking about shotguns and cars and dvd recorders.

I am NOT out to ban anything that has a legitimate use, so stop trying to put words in to my mouth.

kthxbye.

It's the same fundamental concept, used in a different way. I object to restricting technology in any connotation.



Yes. As it is, its a single item that nobody needs to mess with. We turn it on, and we are set. No silly attachments to mess with, no fussing with group flags (Which are worthless if you invite people that arent part of your group for some reason or another), etc.

Your missing the point.

Because you do not see a use for it...

AND

Because it is advertised as being used for something naughty...

Is STILL no justification for making the device contraband.

Look at those X-11 cameras that a few months back were all the rage on popup ads. Those and similar devices have long been advertised for spying on people. Same with keystroke loggers for keyboards. Bugs for telephone lines. Tiny microphones. You name it.

Yes, each of these has much potential to be misused. And I can't honestly think of a legitimate use for a telephone bug. But they still shouldn' be illegal. It's just technology.

Thats what I said.

Hey! I wear a diaper. (Cause the Lindens force me too).