|
Tiger Crossing
The Prim Maker
Join date: 18 Aug 2003
Posts: 1,560
|
12-14-2004 10:22
We are limited by the bounds of Second Life. If I want you to be able to put MY object in YOUR pocket in real life, I can hand it to you and say I want it back. If you rip it apart, I suppose I'd have legal grounds to sue or something. But in SL, in order for someone to put an object in their pocket, they must "own" it. I can't let someone borrow a shirt or an attachment in SL. In SL possesion IS the law, not just 9/10ths of it.
Now, that whole borrow thing IS just an example, there are many ways in which SL is more restrictive than RL in what you can and can't do. The concept of borrowing or leasing is just one of these.
What it comes down to, and what everyone is complaining about, is that there are big holes in the permissions system. Holes most people don't know about. Holes you could shove an oliphant through. Heck, I know how to modify objects I DON'T EVEN OWN!
It's all just a tad concerning since so much RL money can be involved.
_____________________
~ Tiger Crossing
~ (Nonsanity)
|
|
Lance LeFay
is a Thug
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 1,488
|
12-14-2004 19:39
From: Huns Valen If the script is copy+no transfer, the script can be copied out of the item and placed into another. In this way, it is possible to copy a script into many objects that were not made by the creator, while still having the script running in the original object. Creators can object to this on grounds that they intend their scripts to run as a single instance. This is a well-established precedence in the software industry. If you want to install Windows on five machines, even if all the machines are yours, you need to get five licenses, or negotiate a site license. Wrong, actually. THe scripts are no copy, and can only be moved, not copied.
_____________________
"Hoochie Hair is high on my list" - Andrew Linden
"Adorable is 'they pay me to say you are cute'" -Barnesworth Anubis
|
|
Huns Valen
Don't PM me here.
Join date: 3 May 2003
Posts: 2,749
|
12-15-2004 02:07
From: Lance LeFay Wrong, actually. THe scripts are no copy, and can only be moved, not copied. I said at the top of the paragraph, "copy+no transfer." From: Tiger Crossing What it comes down to, and what everyone is complaining about, is that there are big holes in the permissions system. Holes most people don't know about. Holes you could shove an oliphant through. Heck, I know how to modify objects I DON'T EVEN OWN! I am assuming you have bug reported this. |
|
Hiro Pendragon
bye bye f0rums!
Join date: 22 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,905
|
Kinda Solution
12-15-2004 02:24
I had to get around this problem in my color-changer scripts for my katana. Since I sell them copy/no trans, of course the scripts need to be copyable. To prevent them from being used on other items, I have it so that the master script (where 90% of the code is) will llDie() in an on_rez state if it does not detect the correct llGetName() of the object. So they would have to not only steal my script, which would show me as creator, but name their item the same as mine - including my name, which is in the title of my objects. 
_____________________
Hiro Pendragon
------------------
http://www.involve3d.com - Involve - Metaverse / Emerging Media Studio
Visit my SL blog: http://secondtense.blogspot.com
|
|
Pirate Cotton
DarkLifer
Join date: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 538
|
12-15-2004 04:44
Hi folks, thanks to some help and tips I think Mark has a handle on this issue. He's also cut the listens in-game by a huge ammount due to some recoding so the game should be running quicker when we update the pack shortly While i too agree there should be a range of rights, from GPL, to (cc) to whatever else.. we do need the right to have complete and utter control for DarkLife. If not, the game would get hacked and fall appart. I figure that's our right as creators and others can chose not to participate if they don't wish. I don't really think it's a problem for anyone tho. |
|
Mark Busch
DarkLife Developer
Join date: 8 Apr 2003
Posts: 442
|
12-17-2004 03:06
Yeah Grim told me a good trick to prevent scripts from being transferred (well it doesn't prevent it but scripts will be disabled  ) and I've found 2 other functions.. namely the changed and CHANGE_INVENTORY which can detect if a new script is added or one is removed and the (to me) new function llGetCreator. I've implemented all of these features and if one of them detects any change in any scripts all scripts will disabled. So in the new version DON'T remove the scripts from the backpack because they will all disabled and I didn't feel the need to implement a reverse-disable function so you loose all your stats and I can't help you then  That'll show the cheaters |