Bots?

I have to agree, when I log in most of the world is asleep (12am SLT) and despite what I read about the problems during the day I seldom see any of it and then the concurrent number of users is usually under 25K So number of logged in people does matter.

Google maintains a database several orders of magnitude than the whole of the SL inventory system will ever be, and they seem to be doing all right.

re: bots and system load- A bot logged in and sitting idle consumes fewer resources than an avatar logged in using the regular client. This is because the bot clients are very streamlined and don't download most of the information (particular prims and textures) that the normal viewer does unless they're explicitly programmed to.

re: throttling policy- I'm surprised (but pleased) that LL re-instated the queue for high concurrency login times, as performance/reliability during high concurrency has kind of sucked lately. And I do think it's unfair that the hundreds (thousands?) of traffic bots on the grid, who are programmed to automatically and immediately log back on when disconnected, are competing with legitimate users during those busy times. I can't think of a technical solution that would address it, though.

That is only partly true, bot clients do download them be it at the minimum level but just ignore them, last time I checked update beacons (this shows everything SL sends to the client) avatars are constantly updated even when standing afk because SL asumes animations keep changing, this is a push system so unaffected by the client, sure a human controlled av sees a greater distance but bot avatars are generaly clustered so the draw distance does nothing for filtering out this info.

I just read that even premium members were getting that warning the other day, by the way. *facepalms*

But none of us know how everything is implemented.

For all we know every avie holds one database connection open for as long as it's logged on (would be a rather bad way to do things, but LL does some other odd things as well) and there will be a finite amount of those. If something that needs one can't establish a new connection, it would break.

In that specific scenario a bot is equivalent to an interactive user, both are holding a database connection open while something else that needs one can't make one. Kicking 1 bot out would have the same effect as kicking out 1 interactive human.

Again, it's an entirely made-up scenario, but there's no way any of us know how everything interconnects beyond the sim level, or not in enough detail to make any claims one way or the other.

Bots *should* be lower resource on average as long as they don't hammer this or that service, but that doesn't mean it actually works out that way in practice.

Their database is accessed totally different. They give you just one search result, not load every single page you searched for during the last two years to your desktop.

whether they do or do not use as much i'm curious..does one user with 40 bots hurt logins verses one user that doesn't?does a user logged out with no bots use as much as a user with 40 bots that is not logged in while their bots are?
is it based on the number of accounts that get in the grid or is it based one available grid recourses??
you can compare a grid that used to be based on 35,000 logins to 65,000 logins because when it was 35,000 there were a lot of 5 servers in sl and a lot less 3's//more 5's and 4's than anything..
because if accounts are used for bot logins then they do count in the login numbers and really did come into play hard when we were at the 35,000 login mark..

level 5 servers came into play more twards the end of 2006 not 2007..

these bot camp boxes were started up around the end of the summer of 2007 when logins were still in the low 29 to 30 k's and have increased since then..

resident logins have tripled since 2006..
they are logged in just as an account so they do affect the number we see as actual residents logged in..
my question is.
do they let only so many on SL or do logins stop when the system is taxed?

But it doesn't matter the specifics to the point I am trying to make

Even if a bot used 1/1000 th the resources of a normal resident sitting there chatting -

then 1000 bots would equal one normal resident chatting.

Basic math.


When its Bots its not just some person on a different account its some person AND a different account.

Thats the core difference. One person using multiple accounts at one time. That is inherently unfair.

If were talking resource use - each person should be allowed to do stuff with the account they have logged on FIRST, then if there are additional resources THEN people should be allowed to be logged on multiple times.

If you ran into a situation where everyone was only logged in once and STILL resource use was too high, then it would be time to look at individual (non-bot) resource use.

The root cause of the problems is LL running the system as cheaply as possible. I joined in December 2006 and the problems were there then - SL breaking down often. Early in 2007 I remember a blog comment saying that "we all know what happens - when it reaches 30k logins, it breaks". Bots weren't around in any significant numbers at that time. LL has improved/added hardware since then, of course, but not sufficiently, and they are not in the process of doing it now, as far as we know. A couple of months ago they added to the asset server, and the problems shifted from that to the database. They work reactively, rather than in advance, so the problems will continue as long as LL operate as cheaply as they can get away with.

But yesterday the reason given was "heavy load" so surely we must conclude that on this occasion, concurrency (x mean resource use per login) was indeed the issue. If not, what did they achieve by preventing us from logging in? Of course there must be other reasons why the system can't handle high concurrency, which are what really need to be addressed, but it is obvious that concurrency must affect the database load.

Bots = traffic (99% of the times).... traffic is gonna disappear (whenever someone believes that the RC9 reintroduction going on the opposite direction... na it will disappear and soon), there are then limited cases where the bots are used for legit purposes, and others because of the green dots in the map. Resuming, if your activity survives because of the bots (or you think, it still survives because of that "traffic" number) it's time to think about a different marketing strategy: now.

But bots aren't the problem of Second Life, their resource usage is insignificant, eliminating them will not solve the problems. You may think (as Colette says): "even if they are using 1/1000 of the resource of a regular avatar, they are still wasting that 1/1000 for no reasons... so it's anyway bad"; this is correct, but the you must consider the traffic (users connected to second life) contribution. None knows how much the bots are affecting the "connected users" number (they are all speculations), but suppose they are really 1/3 of those, cutting that number by 1/3 may impact tremendous on the sl asset "value" (as company...), to the eyes of the internal and external investitors.
Non you, me, second life exists because Linden Lab exists, anything that affects the company will bounce on us.

That's why, whenever i consider the bots not as a good thing, i perfectly know that they cannot disappear from a day to another, they are giving a positive contribution to the company (and second life) value. Is it artificial? Indeed it is... it's exactly as a mobile phone company, where 50% of the users are zombies: they've purchased a SIM, so they are registered as users, and they counts on the active subscribers even if they never used the phone, or if they have used it 1 year in the past... only a crazy company management would decide to cut the number by 50% in a day, and trying to explaining to the investitors: "Sorry, but they really didn't existed...", the company would loose 50% the next day at the stock exchange opening.

So we're really asking to dismiss the bot affair, they may decide to do so.. but what we will earn? We will not see any broken legs noobs around.. we will not see any fake green dot on the map.. and this is gonna "help" us someway? Does we will sell more? Does the asset server would works better? None of these.. the result will be only ppl (competitors, unfriendly newspaper, etc.) popping out to tell "the world" again: second life is dying, 33% of the users were fake, this is s*hit... oh it really helps my (and yours) business in second life. yes.

How about 40 of them though, and what if they are bouncing around the grid searching for camppads, for sale items, harvesting avatar names and land, they only take a few seconds to scan each sim before bouncing to the next one, most of the time you don't even see them, because they aren't in the sim long enough to rez, a visitor tracker will keep announcing visitors you don't even see with:
10:28:40 xxx yyyy has arrived at your store
10:28:56 xxx yyyy has departed your store
When bots first hit the grid bot runners half a dozen bots were hammering the asset server so hard so quickly LL had to put a delay in to slow everyones TP down.
Of course bot runners get round this by just running more bots.
I don't have a problem with the uses of most bots, it's the people can run unlimited numbers of them because there is no verification on accounts. All you need is a hotmail address and the ability to check an "Are you over 18?" box and you're in.
It's so ironic to see the people we know run bots, complaining on the blog that TP's and transactions are failing and their sales are dropping because customers can't login.
In nearly 2 years I been in SL I watched the off peak population go from 1/4 of the day peak to 2/3 and I suspect it's due to a crapload of 24/7 bots, not a heap more Australasians.
The population has been climbing still in the last months and it's not due to more real residents about. People who didn't run bots had got fed up with losing their edge and are now running them too, if LL didn't do something with search it wouldn't be long before every one with a 512m store would be running a couple of bots for traffic.
And now LL is forced to do more upgrades to support more users online, so botrunners can run more bots.
The people who goldfarm WoW and other MMO's love it here because LL practically invite them to come in and farm, their idea of being a resident in SL is to login to the account page to transfer money of their bots gains to their bank account.

well it sure will let a lot of businesses that have been pushed to the bottom because of traffic be seen don't you think?kind for sharing the wealth instead of being on top because some manipulate the system better using bots?
they have tripled in growth in two years..thats on fake numbers but dropping to 40k or even 30 k is not gonna affect their stock..
oh you have 5 million residents instead of 8 million i'm pulling my stock?
not gonna happen ..not in a recession..people expect company's are taking hits right now and if it were minimal numbers with no loss in profit margins i think they would see improvement and increase in income over resident occupancy..people don't pull stocks because of the number of people in something ..they watch the money..
oh you're making more with less..wow you must have made a move in the right direction..think i'll invest lol

That sounds like a good plan

I don't care anymore because we're in June 2008, i don't have a timetravelling machine, so i can't solve the past problems. Today the traffic doesn't count (almost) anything (with the new search engine, the traffic does have a weigth of about 1%? If not less..), the new search engine is being used day by day by a larger number of resident, the old "Places" will be shut down soon (they tried with RC8 but then they reverted back to RC9.. but the route is signed: the traffic is ded). The traffic will have then no usage at all (Popular places are already removed), so what's the purpose to remove its manipulation *NOW* that has no more value? None. I see more people blaming at the bots for no concrete (technical) reasons, they where BAD in the past because of the Places and Popular Places ranking, this reason doesn't exists anymore.. or it won't exists soon. So? After we removed the bots...? Do you think the "unfair" shop owners will be affected someway? They are already scoring high in the new search engine (and not because of the bots).

i still have a pop list and see traffic working..1% affect?i wasn't talking past i was talking future..and really all this success about the new search? i've heard nothing but people say what a let down it was..until it is based on anything but traffic traffic will have an impact and from logging in a few minutes ago i don't see much of anything different that has changed from last week to today..until the places search is gone and the poplist the problem will still always be traffic..
my response was more about your thoughts on their stocks going down if they pull bots more than anything..
exposure to more businesses less traffic in resident numbers not per login showing the same amount of income or more from a company would show they have done something with less while taking a hit on less population but come out looking good.. my point was it would not chase stock holders away but probably pull in more or have current holders invest more.
funny ..traffic doesn't have a thing to do with it anymore but yet so many places still use bots to draw traffic..wow only 1% is about traffic..and bots barely hurt the system?
we must be in two different sl's

do i think there will be some major change is problems with sl? no because they have not all been about overcrowded places..

do i think there will be less theft if bots were gone? yes..do i think it would be better if less bots were sweeping in to mess up land deals while two people are about to exchange land and money or take someones furniture they just bought and rezzed? yes..

do i think there would be less lag in a sim with 40 bots pulled out of it ??yes

if you say they don't cause lag you are wrong..because i know people with bots and they have dropped 40 in a sim with me and one other person and the sim was on it's own lvl 5 server and there was a dramatic increase in lag..
so yes if the bots were gone i think it would help some..
i know the changes won't have anything to do with any other bots like sweeping theft bots but i do think some sims will run a little better..now if some sims run a little better would that be helping the grid or not changing it at all?

and lets not forget about camping..with no traffic being a factor there would be no need for camping but yet we still have all these places that have camping..i think it's alittle more than 1% in the traffic stats..

My reading of it is that Vittorio's 1% was about the new search, and he anticipates traffic in the Places tab disappearing in the not too distant future.

i would love to see it drop to that or more..i'm sorry if i misunderstood..
i'm all in favor of places and pop list going away..i do think it is going to help some but it's not the cure ..i hope i didn't come off as it being a cure but just a booster shot lol

Maybe having to complete some sort of captcha-type task or answer a question on log-in, that a bot wouldn't be able to do? I'd actually like to see that enforced for extended logins too, like if someoen's online for say 12 hours continuously, they have to do the same to stay logged in.

Of course LL don't want to have the bots logged off because it makes their figures look good. Theor 50,000 concurrent users would drop to 20,000 if they got rid of the bots.

Unfortunately captchas are no longer an effective defense against bots as even the most sophisticated ones have been broken:

http://securitylabs.websense.com/content/Blogs/2919.aspx

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1232&tag=nl.e550

The arms race continues, but the bots seem to have the advantage at the moment

I'm sry my english suks.. yes i mean the traffic counts by 1% (1% is random value.. it means: nothing) in the new search engine scoring, so if you just place 100 bots into your sim, it doesn't give to you any advantage (in reality it gives to you eigth inbound links... but that's nothing). And since (i'm assuming here) that the new search engine is actual (near future) way to find "something" on second life (we say: shops), i come to the conclusion that the usage of bots *for this purpose* is not important anymore, so i don't see a concrete reason to put efforts into their elimination (because it would be a challenge to distinguish a bot by a regular user, eventually, if they start to deploy smartest ones..), on the other side i see potential trouble to the internal economy *IF* the traffic drops instantly by a large number... o i say: the "risk" is not justified by a compensation.

...and about the guy that is filling *HIS* simulator with 40 bots, creating lag... why do u care? It's his business, if he believes that creating lag would help him and his sim... let him continues. *But* if he puts the same bots into a mainaland sim, with other resident parcels, then you can AR him... and the bots will be removed.

So, if you say that the bots creats any kind of problems (example: the bots are the cause of the asset server failure...) i would agree with you > removing them will improve our experience; But if the bots are not causing any trouble to the system, plus their purpose (traffic) will be eliminated soon, plus their disappearing would lower the "resident number" that would affect the economy... i say: leave em in place... they will go alone when the owners will realize that the traffic (as a number) isn't important anymore. Some bots will remain because of ligit usage, other because of the "green dots" on the map, bu imho that's ok.

I heard about this, too. I heard that one of the reasons sim crossings are so tricky is because the next sim has to instantaneously load not only you and everything you're wearing, but essentially everything in your inventory.

When I first rented my place, as part of the "resident kit" I was given a copyable "box" to help control inventory. The way it works is this: you rezz the box on the ground, and put all the stuff from your inventory that you never use but don't want to throw away, in that box. You can even use multiple boxes, for different types of objects for instance. So, say you throw 12 inventory objects in one of these boxes, and then take the box back into your inventory. Yeah, the 12 objects are still in it, but as far as the INVENTORY - and the next sim you walk into - is concerned, you've got 11 fewer items. You can rez the box from inventory and remove items to use whenever you want. It's a great way to stow all those folders and unpackable-box-things you get from vendors.

Although the "box" thing I was given was specially-built, I expect any prim would work the same purpose.

Well, another bot thread, great

Bottomline with bots is that Linden Lab seem tot to mind them. Since they are the owner of the system, how on earth can some people call a botrunner unfair? They use the tools that are available and allowed.

Furthermore a system like SL had a couple of bottlenecks:
- Data traffic to and from the serverfarms to the users: bandwidth, load on routers/switches/firewalls and so on.
- Load on the asset servers
- Concurrent logged in users (?)

Probably more then these three as well. Now for static bots:
- Data traffic: irrelevant as they do not download anything but some bytes of text.
- Load on asset servers: low as they hardly have any inventory

Why would concurrent users be a problem, apart from the fact they contribute to data traffic and asset server load? What does SL have to know a bout a logged in user, apart from the fact they authenticated (which hardly can be a problem):
- where are they located: not a problem with static bots
- what groups are they in: irrelevant
- who do they interact with: irrelevant

So following this, my conclusion would be that static bots hardly are contributing to instability of SL. And not a single argument in the past couple of thousand bot threads leaded me to believe different. Most of them are emotional instead of logical.

Of course, landbots are much more of an issue regarding server load, and camping bots put more load on the system then traffic bots in a skybox as well.

But as said, the rant towards bots is mostly lead by emotion. Things are unfair, immoral, plain wrong. So are the Lindens for allowing bots. They allow bots to push the concurrency number higher, even if it means an unstable platform. Heaven forbids that bots are not a factor in grid instability, and Lindens allow them because they know that.

Against arguments, it is good to discuss. And a good discussion can be learned from. But against emotions, one can never discuss.

I think you are all jumping to the conclusion that the restricted logons are because of the total amount of users logged on.

This is not necessarily so.

I believe that the logons are restricted, particularly when the system has just returned online, in order to limit the "thundering heard" syndrome. You simply can't process 30,000 users back online at once. The gates have to be throttled to allow a certain number per second to re-enter the system.