Self Replicating Turned Off?

Would turning off the ability of objects to self-replicate affect huge portions of the grid the way having them on seems to affect everyone on the grid i.e. causing crashes, stalling teleporting, etc.??

While it wouldn't affect my content, it would definitely break a fair amount of content that's already out there. It's getting better and better - remember when the attacks first happened, it would take LL the better part of a day to clean it up. Now it seems to take a matter of minutes. It's a balance to strike between maintaining backwards compatibility and the freedom to create, and keeping morons at bay.

Regards,

-Flip

would kill this .

Well, I'm running some medium-range teleporter objects. It may not be obvious looking at them, but when you sit on them they create another instance of themselves, move to the destination, and then die. This let's them be used by more than one person without worrying about waiting until the user reaches the destination or in case the object crashes or something.

This kind of teleporter has been used in a number of different places, in particular the old TeaZer lobby (when clicking on an object moved you there, rather than pulling up the map and asking you to push *teleport*)

Is there a way to detect self-replication? The ability to create prims with scripts is the basis of a number of products, including Rez-Faux/Rez-Foo (and the others), stair builders, arc builders and other script-based object storage and design systems.

Given the link limitations I relied on Rez-Faux buildings exclusively and certainly wouldn't want them to go.

One "anti-griefer" feature mentioned a month or so ago that was to be implemented was a "max rez count" where you could set a ceiling for the number of objects on a parcel people could create. Would this being implemented prevent or at least curtail these attacks?

Self-replication is llRezObject and llGiveInventory in the on_rez function. However, self-rep has some cool uses, and the grey goo limit should prevent most self-repping attacks. I don't know if max-rez would get implemented correctly by the parcel owner if given the option, and most times self-rep attacks happen gridwide.

Actually, the Grey Goo fence looks like a fairly strong barrier, which could adversely affect self-replicating objects if they were part of a Rez-Foo (and is probably is a major problem for anyone trying to create ecologies, for instance). I'm suprised that something was able to get past those barriers, whatever it is would be limited to more of a slow-moving fungus that slowed down as it got larger.

Wow, that's really, really, really cool. I knew Laukosargas and Svarga had done something like this - and love it. I'll have to swing by and check out your ecosystem! Projects like this really intrigue me.

What I'd recommend is making a "About Land" setting, "Allow Self-Replicating Objects", and leave it OFF by default. That way, most of the grid becomes a natural Grey Goo Attack fence, yet people like Luciftias using it legitimately can set it to on.

Of course, even with if off, objects owned by the land owner / land group should work regardless.

Regards,

-Flip

Agreed, if anything, this is the way to do it.

I don't know if I agree. Self-replication is a powerful and potentially dangerous tool, but I don't think it should be default on. And how would LL determine what's self-repping and what's not? I can think of several ways to bypass a "no llGiveInventory in rezzed" restriction. Therefore, the setting would have to shut down objects rezzing objects alltogeather, which would not be cool, IMHO.

Actually, the Grey Goo rules describe a method that LL uses to discover self-replicating objects. Each object has a "family_id" which is associated with how it was created. If it was rezzed by an avatar then the object is given a new family_id, otherwise it inherits the family_id of its creator.

This means every object that is part of a self replicating system is identified by the same family_id, and (theoretically) a LL God could completely wipe out a self-replicating mess by destroying every object that shared that family_id, right back down to the first object that was rezzed by an actual player.

We've taken several animals offline right now. The (usually sleepy) gridlice are up, and the jellypods are marginally up. All plantlife is active.

I've only played this game less that 2 weeks and...I was wondering...what's up with this game...and all this bug stuff and shutting down grids.

I've never seen so much chaos in any game I've played.

From my understanding it wasn't like this before...or at least not as much.

Is someone diliberatly trying to shut the game down with self replicating scripts, or is someone just playing with scipts in a sandbox and it goes haywire...they go opps then they run away?

I'm not sure if permission could be given for self replication or if there is a way to lock it world wide and then hand out permissive scripts to those who need it for thier sim, without having the whole sim vunerable to attacks.

There are enough limits on self-replcation and the like that this is most likely not an accident. Unfortunately there are people that very much love demonstrating their power in destroying as much of the grid as possible. Part of this comes from the power of the scripting language that is provided as part of this game, it allows people great power in creating things either good or ill.

For what it's worth, I have not seen an attack like this in some time, although I hear that there were a couple that happened last year (google for "Second Life" attack).

I know that when I came into this game I was dead scared about creating self-replcating objects and was worried the first time I set one in motion that I might code something wrong and cause everything to melt down. If you want to make absolutely certain that none of your creatures escape the region, you can try them out in the "Island Sandbox", when it isn't completely overwelmed with googly-eyed monsters that is. Objects can also be set so that they are returned to your inventory or otherwise kill themselves if they attempt to cross a region boundary.

woudln't it be possible to have each server check and report around the grid the amount of processing tiem and resources consumed by objects of teh same name, objects by the same onwer, objects by the same creator, objects of the same familly, and have each server analyze what the other are telling about those and decide to throtle, freeze and even retunr or delete hose said objects if they start to pose a threat? I am not sure, but I think that monitroing the effect objects have on the server and acting acordingly could stop most threats while not harming most valid uses for self replication

this question I am not sur resis would be able to answer correctly, but waht if I create, lets say, 3 objects, each very diferent from the other, pick a forth object to the the starter, and put all three inside of it, and have the starter rez one of them randomlly, llGiveInventory all of the 3 for the object and have each object to the same, would that escape the grey goo fence or it would hit it just like if it was the same object reproducing? deos it matter if the all (all of them, physical, felx, name, pahtom, light, color, texture, etc) the parameters of the object was changed randomllly?

The Grey Goo fence is blind to all this. They will all be tracked as one "family" for Goo Fence purposes.

you gotta be fucking kidding me. It's starting all over AGAIN!!!!

More self-replicating objects doing the "Give Inventory" spam!!!

WHAT THE FUCK!!!!

I think self-replication is a big turn off. I like to have a partner for replicating.

Thanks for all the replies here. I'm really impressed with that Luciftias, and hope I can get in world to visit it soon.

Another person on Second Citizen sort of addressed the issue as well, and I wanted to add his comment here:

http://forums.secondcitizen.com/showpost.php?p=41088&postcount=3



Any discussion of this? I have to admit I'm over my head when it comes to discussing scripting. I'm just wondering if the benefit of self-replicating is worth the trouble of several grid crashes in a row, considering the uses of the function affect a few while the abuse of the function affects everyone.

Is it better to set a cap on llRezObject from one object, and would that affect other projects in SL? Obviously LL is not going to close unverified registration, but what about limiting the amount of grief a single resident could cause using the scripting language, which I understand is a very powerful tool in the hands of unverified accounts. (Understand when I say this, I own a Starax wand and know it uses this same scripting language to operate )

Heh

See Grey Goo Fence.

So is the Grey Goo Fence not working? Why did the grid crash if there's a failsafe in place, unless it's been circumvented?

My guess is that it was circumvented. Getting just the right restrictions in place without hurting normally operating objects sounds like a black science here. There are a couple ways that circumventing this could be done, some of them discussed in other forum threads (something equivalent to ILOVEYOU might work for example), none of which LL is likely going to tell us until they have successfully found a solution for preventing it in the future.

Nontheless, LL does take grid crashes seriously and they have already stated that the FBI is called in as part of the investigation and/or prosecution of anyone found responsible for one of these things.

Self replication and replication with others have been moved to Zindra.. please check local policies before replicating in public also!

Dang, I think we have a record-breaker here, folks.