Bots?

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.

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.

Google receives 91 million search requests a day, and this is to say nothing of the millions upon millions of adwords/adsense/spider hits to their databases. SL never has more than 65 thousand users connected at a time. I guarantee you Google handles much more volume than SL ever will, and the size of their database is not a hindrance to the performance of their overall system.

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.

Some bots have valid uses and fill the gaps in LSL. Prime example: the group invitation bot. This bot automatically sends out group invitations after transactions.

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.

wow spamming users with group invites is now a POSITIVE thing eh ?

Since this topic came about around the same time that people that could not log in - I definitely called bots unfair.

It is unfair for bots to be logged in when human operators using single accounts can't get on.

Basically the way I see it is that Every User should be allowed to log in one account, and only one account ... As long as there are other users waiting to get in-world.

As long as everyone is getting on no problem and performance is above some minimum threshold *then* multiple accounts per person would be up for possibility.

LL's not having issues with bots is irrelevant in so much that its entirely possible for a company to have policies that are unfair. Happens all the time.

I agree with you about the policy Colette but I cannot see a way that is could be done technically. You cannot use IP address due to the fact that for some regions of the world and in the corporate space lots of users are behind a single IP address.
You would have to move to an alternative registration system first. The one specified elsewhere in the forums would help, where you sign up for one account and register your alternative avatar logins under that single account. However even then there is nothing preventing people setting up multiple accounts unless you force ID verification upon each account. Even then you cannot guarantee that people would not falsely verify more than once.
Maybe it would still be an improvement on where we are today but perhaps not - it is hard to see in my opinion.

You could simply monitor those who are logged in 24/7

humans at the keyboard cant do that.

Some IP with a whole bunch of accounts logged in 24/7 ... Nudge them offline every so often from the server side. And deny re-loggin attempts for a little while

hmmm might work but I know at least 5 people on my FL who stay logged in all day everyday where possible.

LOL they could stand to get logged off once in a while - if only to help them remember to bathe.

hmmm might work but I know at least 5 people on my FL who stay logged in all day everyday where possible.

EDIT: Also the amount of monitoring would add overhead to the whole world. I mean SL cannot even properly monitor when you have disconnected reliably atm - if they could then they could just reconnect you behind the scenes rather than forcing the viewer to quit.

well yes of course - any course of action other than their current one will require effort on LL's part.

My guess is their preferred course is to simply increase capacity of the grid as they have done in the past.

One thing I haven't seen vocal consideration for is that some resident-provided services (SL Exchange; scripts that require reliable name2key; I can't think of what else) would cease to function until the bots were able to log in

Could you explain why those services rely on bots to function? I use name2key and always thought that it was gathered from SLXEchange terminals when people registered for the first time.

Not sure whether SLExchange uses failproof (in-world resident search) name2key, if they did it would make sure you could always deliver a gift to the desired resident (doesn't require them having an account). At a minimum, to verify deposits, logging in account is definitely required (an LSL script can't verify whether a money transaction was successful). I'm sure there are also other vendor systems in widespread use that require the payment to bounce off another account. I don't know many examples, but I think it's safe to assume plenty of services rely on logging in an account!

So again I cannot see where inworld logged in bots would be necessary.

You could simply monitor those who are logged in 24/7

humans at the keyboard cant do that.

Nudge them offline every so often from the server side. And deny re-loggin attempts for a little while

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.

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.

Uh?! I stay logged h24! And my missus too!

I wish someone would explain this idea to me. As far as I can see, an avatar's inventory is simply a list of database ids (uuids?), display names and links to parent folders. It doesn't contain any assets at all. That's why it takes time, for example, to look at inventory textures unless they are in the cache. Furthermore, the inventory only has to be available to the client. The sim doesn't need to know anything about your inventory until you rez something out of it (when, of course, there is another delay while the actual asset is loaded into the sime and then the client). Therefore the overhead for moving your inventory between sims should be precisely zero, no matter how large the inventory is, as the move has no effect on the inventory contents. What is wrong with that conclusion?