Remove llGiveInventory

I can only hope you say this in jest.

As you can see here both llGiveInventory and llRezObject are already throttled.

The griefing abilities made possible by llGiveInventory's implementation is no reason for the removal or the additional limitation of such a command. Valid reasons for llGiveInventory lie all around us. How do you think most vendors sell multiple objects? llGiveInventory, DUH.

Controlled object-multiplication can also be used for valid purposes. I created an image-display device that rezzed the prims it used as pixels using a form of multiplication. The display device then cleverly used llGiveInventory as an alternative to llListen for triggering the death of every screen prim.

And as for sandbox sims, you shouldn't complain when they crash. The very reason Linden Lab opens up sandboxes is to give people places where experimenting can't hurt paying customers directly; no one owns land in those sims.

Screw you, blaze! SCREW YOU! You'll take my llGiveInventory from my cold, dead fingers! RAAAASK!



*licks*

*ponders*

No, still tasty.

um... see most people didn't know how to make self replicating objects... NOW it might be a problem as you've given them the hint they needed.

Hey, don't lick me there... oh wait... that's kinda nice... please continue ...

Id say keep it as it is.
Since were saying how to kill a sim... lol..
you can do it with llRezObject alone. just a little stacking of scripted objects in objects in.. ect.. each one rezez x number(depending how fast you wanted to kill it)..

Point is it will always be possible.
And anything done to prevent it could limit its usefullness.

llGiveInventory must be throttled and SOON. The cracks are already starting to appear.

Any shred of credability you may have (had) is gone if released. Last i checked the law looks down on people who destroy the works of others for the sake of destroying.

I think you're missing the point, blaze. Your solution to the griefing problem, no matter which of the approaches that you've suggested, is to basically "cripple SL at the point it is being abused".

That's not the solution. The solution is to detect, report, and ban griefers. We don't need less powerful tools for griefers to use, we just need fewer griefers.

- Ace

Unclear to me why so many people on these forums want to personalize everything. It's like as soon as we feel a slight bit threatened we need to attach some kind blame on some person.

The issue needs to be opened for discussion. To simply hide it away for fear that some script kiddy is going to discover it (which they will) is sticking your head in the sand.

The only thing worse than that is blaming someone because they are the messenger. If we want to talk about losing credibility - start there.

Just because I describe a problem, doesn't mean I'm the cause of it. The red wings incident has nothing to do with me, it's only obvious evidence of a command way out of control. I'm suggesting something be done about it before it gets much worse.

Ace - absolutely. However, griefer's quite often like to go out in a blaze of glory. How do you ban someone who doesn't plan on logging back on?

It was how you started the thread. It was matter of fact and left nothing open to debate, without providing any useful information.




-----------



The problem is pretty cut and dry. The solutions are pretty obvious. Our position as a community as a whole is to keep the feature. Our job is done, it's in the hands of LL.

As to you wanting open discussion you have posted no information of use to hold an open discussion, just your ultimatum.


-----------



My last post assumes your complicity in any exploitation of this weakness; As your last post suggested you knew more then you were saying. I do not believe it is a major issue. Things like the asset server are a bit more pressing.


-----------



This would require them to know they were going to be banned, I don't know anyone who has built a self destruct for if they are banned.


-----------

Too tired to accurately check over my arguments.

And I'm not - that would be just as bad as actually doing it.

Besides, Strife, you are probably one of the best if not the best scripter on SecondLife. You don't need me to spell it out to you. If you do, IM me and I'll describe it to you. I'm not going to post in a public forum.



Yeah, I got that which was my comment about not blaming the messenger. Something which I found personally very offensive, probably moreso because I think you're a bright fellow.



No it wouldn't.

Let's say they are simply bored of SL and want to go somewhere else. I'm sure this happens at least 10 times a day (or a 100 times by all the "I'm quitting!!" posts in the general forum), and will be happening even more in the future.

However, you did bring the law into the equation - which is a very very interesting point. Would it be illegal (against the law) to write an LSL script which takes advantages of certain commands? I think you might be able to make a case, however I'm not so sure a lot of people are going to take the time and consider that.

I am pretty sure that LL can't follow up like that without putting a chill over their little universe here..

Just had a conversation with blaze ingame and we understand each other now.

I don't see it so much as a flaw in llGiveInventory but as part of a bigger issue. Virii & Worms in SL.

Redwing was a self replicating spammer that in part used llGiveInventory to do it's dirty work.

I'm thinking the correct solution is to build a sort of anti-virus (or immune system) to detect run-away growth (cancer). So that when an object tires to replicate ad infinitum it would be red flagged by a watching process. This red flag would be sent to all the other sims.

1. Sim red flags script & object asset tags that have replicated.
   
2. Sim freezes all scripts in red flagged objects.
   
3. Red flag is sent to all other sims.
   
4. Window is opened in users client if they are online and asked to file a report as to what has happened if they know. And what to do with mess.
   
5. Lindens evaluate the situation, take samples of the mess for later analysis.
   
6. Mess is cleaned up, life goes on.
   

No!

Again, there is nothing wrong with self-replication done in moderation. I myself have used it for entirely legitimate purposes, including obtaining information from the entire grid "quickly" (quickly being around an hour, something that could have potentially taken me days in other ways), and mimic-life attempts that basically won't be efficient enough until LL gets Havok 2 in.

The problem is NOT llGiveInventory and it's NOT self-replication. The problem is stupid and/or malicious coders. Quite honestly, we have a perfectly good way of dealing with those. It's called "being able to find out precisely who created the object in question, and temp or perma banning their ass from SL".

Do not neuter creator's abilities because of something that MAYBE crops up once every few months.

Ooh, Kris! Death by chocolate! Yummy

L8r,
UU

Some type of throttling or protective measures are required.

What about the issues with red wings? If that was done with anymore cleverness, it would have been much much more annoying.

I don't see how anyone is going to take this suggestion seriously given that the one person crusading it is as being an evil function only any good for griefing is the same person that sells Atomic Bomb grieferware for L$10.

That's either massive hypocrisy or presumably once we're all sick of being bombed a few times is supposed to beat us into submission and make us agree with him on throttling potentially 'dangerous' LSL functions?

Kris,

You're making the mistake of something called 'the attack on the man'. Simply because I'm doing something you hope others might percieve as incorrect, has nothing to do with my logical presentation of the facts above.

For example, if a mass murderer said 2+2=4 .. would you say it must be false because she's a mass murderer?

Second - There are numerous weapons and bombs in SL. LL has purposesly added functionality for these items. Philip Linden even bought an Atomc Bomb. If anyone uses this outside of Jesse or an appropiate place, they will and should get abuse reported. I provide quite a bit of warning as to the effects.

Thirdly, I'm not 'crusading'. I certainly do not benefit in any way from this discussion. I simply see an obvious loophole in the system which is already being abused and no one seems to be doing anything about it.

Ditto for llGiveInventory.

Stop trying to crusade against something that is not a problem.

How is the 'red wings' incident not a problem?

Precisely

As I said. Hypocrisy. It's ok for Blaze to build weapons and sell them to griefers, and come here and justify it because there are numerous weapons in SL (and something about mass murderers being able to do math) - after all, what else would you want an atomic bomb for? - but we should have the function we legitimately use for passing contents between objects removed or throttled because it could potentially be used for griefing?

Though some 'red wing' incident that obviously didnt make news in my part of SL is obviously bothering him greatly, I still don't see how he can seriously think we should cripple LSL every time someone writes a line of code that's designed to do something that annoys someone else.

Fortunately, I don't think anyone is listening or likely to take him seriously. And if they did, we would of course just work round the throttle just like we did the email wait delays

--
Kris

Just because you have no logic doesn't mean I don't like you... although I don't.

Ah, Kris, I love you .. you are so wonderful!!

(no sarcasm, really, I just want to tone down the anger in this thread)

The red wings thing was BARELY a problem, as the only thing I ever heard of it was a message shouted by a Linden through all the grids because I just -happened- to be in world at the time.

Said person obviously wanted to be a nuisance. Or said person was a really bad coder. Either way, the presence of llGiveInventory did not cause him/her to stray. They either wanted to create a problem and/or were a really bad coder. If llGiveInventory didn't exist, that wouldn't have stopped the person in question from doing something -else- that was "bad".

llGiveInventory is not a problem. People are.

EDIT:

WAIT A MINUTE!

You started this thread over the red wings thing? MY GOD! Blaze, have you any idea how MINOR and LAME this red wings thing is compared to other uses llGiveInventory has? Have you NEVER heard of the Ants? Hello?! This whole time I've been arguing with you I thought you were basing this latest insanity on you FINALLY figuring out that llGiveInventory allows for virus-like propagation of objects across the grid. Which has happened in the past. At least three times. The situation is handled just fine by either Lindens (if it's crashing sims) or other residents (if it's not). What the hell, man? Are you just now figuring out the potential in LSL? Baka.

Can we please try to complete a post without personalizing the issue in a negative way, folks?

My original point was something else entirely, however my recent follow up was based purely on the Red Wings incident.

Quite frankly, the Red Wings incident poses more of a threat to SL than crashing the grid. Crashing the grid will probably be slightly funny in a childish way at first, extremely annoying if it ever happens again.

The red wings incident is simply creepy and gives us all a very bad taste in our mouth if you are on the end recipient of the picture.

I would not want my wife to see that kind of thing pop up on my screen while being SecondLife. Nor do I want to suggest to *any* of my friends to come into SL if this is the sort of creepy stuff they are going to be exposed to. Nor for that matter would I want to make any attempt at any business where my customers might be exposed in that way.

The unfortunate thing here is that LL is just going to turn off picture give inventory. Which will suck big time for things like Texas Holdem poker.

But if we take some time and discuss this intelligently, like *mature* adults, I'm sure we can propose a better solution to the problem.