RC Questions

Leaving us with a situation in which Aristotle's verification procedures are still trivially easy to circumvent....Really? I would have thought it depends on how large, how numerous and how located are the remaining holes.

Some might take the view that when you discover there are some defects in a plan (or a car, come to that) that just can't be fixed, you don't waste time and money patching up the bits you can; it's still going to unserviceable at the end of your well-intentioned but pointless efforts, so the time has come to scrap the damn thing and look for one that does work.

I want to achieve a certain objective. I consider a method and conclude it won't work because it has several clear and fatal defects. I will therefore fix one of them, leaving myself with a method I know still isn't going to work because I've been unable to do anything about the other fatal defects, and adopt it anyway, at considerable inconvenience to many of my customers, knowing that it won't help me achieve my goal and that I'm thus dooming myself to failure.

Hardly a sensible approach to problem-solving, to my mind.

I think there's a hidden assumption in that sentence that should possibly be examined.

What, you mean the assumption that LL *wants* a serious solution? or that Alex does?

^V^

I have updated my summary of comments here:

http://www.slapt.me/wiki/index.php/JIRA_Issue_Discussion

It's getting rather long, so I don't want to repost it here.

If you know of a major issue which is not covered, please add it yourself, or let me know.

I am NOT looking for whether you agree or disagree with the items there.

It is intended as a short (relative to thousands of pages of forum and JIRA discussions) summary of the things people have brought up.

(and it's not done yet, the comments page is enormous on that issue)

Lindal, you and I agree on just about everything. Therefore, let me take this opportunity to introduce a high-level concept.

If heroin were legalized tomorrow, would you rush out to the pharmacy to buy it? If it were perfectly legal for McDonald's to advertise with child porn, would they? Is Dell actively lobbying to legalize the offer of a prostitute with every notebook sold? If it were legal to starve your own child to death, would you?

Implicit in so many comments in this blog is the notion that human beings and human society are a seething cauldron of perversion that will go to hell the instant government regulation is loosened by a single stitch. In fact, the vast majority of people are quite conservative and polite. Social norms exert tremendous pressure on 'deviants' - far more pressure than any government can apply. It is difficult and therefore 'expensive' for individuals to go against the social norms of a community. In a multiple-iteration game such as Second Life, it is highly advantageous to cooperate with one's neighbors. Don't get hung up on details atm, I just want to get across the general concept that governments are not the primary source of regulation in human affairs. The primary source of regulation arises from society itself.

With that in mind:

Linden Lab created a world whose PRIMARY function was to enable NEW communities to come into existence - communities whose members come from every country and culture on the planet. This is unique. It means that Community X may share culture X, even though its members come from Spain, Indonesia, Japan, Brazil and Canada. It means that Community Y may share culture Y, even though its members are young black males, young Asian females and middle-age white females. It means aircraft enthusiasts from every stripe of every society can form their own community, that gourmet cooks or textile salesmen or BDSM roleplayers or elves or Victorians or Romans or Samurai or Linux programmer can form their own communities - NEW COMMUNITIES - interactive, realtime, information-rich, symbol-rich, 3D virtual, self-selecting communities - free from the constraints of old RL communities (race, sex, age, gender, language, geography, culture, status, profession, education, physical appearance etc). Hence:


For Linden Lab, therefore, to assume the role of nanny - to impose a set of moral values and behavioral definitions on the NEW world of NEW communities - runs counter to the very DNA of Second Life. Why is this happening? Because Linden Lab now sees Second Life as an extension of RL. Linden Lab is catering to existing RL communities (universities, businesses, NGOs, etc.) - catering to the OLD RL communities.

In my opinion, Linden Lab is making a strategic mistake because Second Life is NOT a good method of extending RL (as so many RL businesses discovered in 2007). Second Life is a different beast entirely. Yes, of course, old RL communities can benefit from a presence in Second Life, but it is not SL's strength - not its primary value. The primary value of Second Life - its 'killer app' - is to provide a neutral space for new communities to form and flourish - to be a new 'country'. Therefore, by twisting Second Life to satisfy the needs of old RL communities, Linden Lab is undermining the 'New World' it created.

The point I am trying to make is that Second Life is a New World with new rules, not the Old World with old rules. It is ridiculous to argue about SL as if it were a glorified TV channel or 3D website or online public library or interactive movie - and don't even think about bringing up RL legalities because they are NOT the issue here. The issue is the very nature of Second Life as an entity: social, political, commercial, economic. Here in the New World, social norms operating within the market system represent a new framework of social self-regulation. In order for this to work, Linden Lab need only articulate a property-rights structure that minimizes the 'Tragedy of the Commons'.


The New Paradigm in Historical Perspective (or Why People Don't Get It):

There is a famous paper by the economic historian Paul David called "The Dynamo and the Computer" in which he reflects upon the conceptual lagtime for the implementation of new technologies. A brief description can be found at http://www.slate.com/id/2167909/. I believe the same problem afflicts Linden Lab concerning their strategy for Second Life.

When factories were first built with steam-powered engines, the factory was literally built around the engine. Machinery was connected to the central engine by leather drive-belts. When the electric engine was invented, factory owners removed the steam engine, installed an electric engine and hooked up the drive-belts again. It took 30 years before factory owners realized that the electric engine was an entirely different technology. Small, decentralized engines replaced one big central engine, electric cables replaced belts and pulleys and factories were built flat with machinery reconfigured in an assembly line. The new technology generated a new commercial and economic paradigm.

Before Second Life, a variety of IT platforms facilitated communication and social networking. These were essentially 2-dimensional platforms enabling crude information exchange (email, bulletin boards, chat rooms, graphics-based online games). Linden Lab had the brilliant insight to create an information-rich social ECONOMY - a significant advance over social networks.

Linden Lab created not simply a virtual world; they created a metaphorical world of user-generated content within a free-market property rights structure. Second Life became more than a platform; it became a new 'country'. Residents and entrepreneurs were not attracted by the platform itself, they were attracted by the ability to transcend RL restrictions and social norms, to join an open society and participate in new political economy. They didn't play Second Life; they immigrated to Second Life.


The Future:

Having created this New World, Linden Lab asks the question, how can we monetize it? The current strategy is to employ SL as an extension of RL, but why? The business model was already sound: sell (lease) and tax (tier) virtual land and take commission on currency exchanges. Brilliant. Profitable. Successful. Congratulations! Why then this need to cater to RL organizations? For what purpose? More revenue? Silicon Valley status? What?

Why not be happy with the miracle of Second Life the country? Sure, sell the server software in a box; let RL organizations create their own 'communities' and their own 'worlds'. Nothing wrong with this, but why bring them into SL the country when they can create their own worlds? This is truly baffling.

I do not yet have a clear vision of the future of virtual worlds (and if I did, I wouldn't publish it here), but my instincts tell me that the answer lies in the metaphorical nature of the new communities within the New World - not in facilitating the communications needs of RL organizations.

Perhaps the future is a metamorphosis of real and virtual into a completely new economy - an iconic economy that encompasses both the real and virtual worlds - a political economy with completely new social norms that evolve from within the New World of new communities. Yet, none of that is going to happen - at least for Linden Lab and Second Life - if the New World is reshaped to serve the Old.

Read "Paradigm Shift" above.

Before anyone foolishly quotes the above, I wrote it - not Blue Linden. I did so to provide an example of how Linden Lab is squandering the intelligence, dedication and goodwill of its residents. The fora would be 50% shorter and 100% more productive if the company had the wisdom to treat its residents as an intellectual goldmine rather than a herd of cattle. Forgive my sharpness, but no business succeeds without consulting the customer BEFORE a major change in business practices. No army conquers with low morale. I am not promoting democracy here. I am simply asking for Henry V instead of Hamlet.

More reading for you below.

Before anyone foolishly quotes the above, I wrote it - not Blue Linden. I did so to provide an example of how Linden Lab is squandering the intelligence, dedication and goodwill of its residents. The fora would be 50% shorter and 100% more productive if the company had the wisdom to treat its residents as an intellectual goldmine rather than a herd of cattle. Forgive my sharpness, but no business succeeds without consulting the customer BEFORE a major change in business practices. No army conquers with low morale. I am not promoting democracy here. I am simply asking for Henry V instead of Hamlet.

Lindal, you and I agree on just about everything. Therefore, let me take this opportunity to introduce a high-level concept.

If heroin were legalized tomorrow, would you rush out to the pharmacy to buy it? If it were perfectly legal for McDonald's to advertise with child porn, would they? Is Dell actively lobbying to legalize the offer of a prostitute with every notebook sold? If it were legal to starve your own child to death, would you?

Implicit in so many comments in this blog is the notion that human beings and human society are a seething cauldron of perversion that will go to hell the instant government regulation is loosened by a single stitch. In fact, the vast majority of people are quite conservative and polite. Social norms exert tremendous pressure on 'deviants' - far more pressure than any government can apply. It is difficult and therefore 'expensive' for individuals to go against the social norms of a community. In a multiple-iteration game such as Second Life, it is highly advantageous to cooperate with one's neighbors. Don't get hung up on details atm, I just want to get across the general concept that governments are not the primary source of regulation in human affairs. The primary source of regulation arises from society itself.

With that in mind:

Linden Lab created a world whose PRIMARY function was to enable NEW communities to come into existence - communities whose members come from every country and culture on the planet. This is unique. It means that Community X may share culture X, even though its members come from Spain, Indonesia, Japan, Brazil and Canada. It means that Community Y may share culture Y, even though its members are young black males, young Asian females and middle-age white females. It means aircraft enthusiasts from every stripe of every society can form their own community, that gourmet cooks or textile salesmen or BDSM roleplayers or elves or Victorians or Romans or Samurai or Linux programmer can form their own communities - NEW COMMUNITIES - interactive, realtime, information-rich, symbol-rich, 3D virtual, self-selecting communities - free from the constraints of old RL communities (race, sex, age, gender, language, geography, culture, status, profession, education, physical appearance etc). Hence:


For Linden Lab, therefore, to assume the role of nanny - to impose a set of moral values and behavioral definitions on the NEW world of NEW communities - runs counter to the very DNA of Second Life. Why is this happening? Because Linden Lab now sees Second Life as an extension of RL. Linden Lab is catering to existing RL communities (universities, businesses, NGOs, etc.) - catering to the OLD RL communities.

In my opinion, Linden Lab is making a strategic mistake because Second Life is NOT a good method of extending RL (as so many RL businesses discovered in 2007). Second Life is a different beast entirely. Yes, of course, old RL communities can benefit from a presence in Second Life, but it is not SL's strength - not its primary value. The primary value of Second Life - its 'killer app' - is to provide a neutral space for new communities to form and flourish - to be a new 'country'. Therefore, by twisting Second Life to satisfy the needs of old RL communities, Linden Lab is undermining the 'New World' it created.

The point I am trying to make is that Second Life is a New World with new rules, not the Old World with old rules. It is ridiculous to argue about SL as if it were a glorified TV channel or 3D website or online public library or interactive movie - and don't even think about bringing up RL legalities because they are NOT the issue here. The issue is the very nature of Second Life as an entity: social, political, commercial, economic. Here in the New World, social norms operating within the market system represent a new framework of social self-regulation. In order for this to work, Linden Lab need only articulate a property-rights structure that minimizes the 'Tragedy of the Commons'.


The New Paradigm in Historical Perspective (or Why People Don't Get It):

There is a famous paper by the economic historian Paul David called "The Dynamo and the Computer" in which he reflects upon the conceptual lagtime for the implementation of new technologies. A brief description can be found at http://www.slate.com/id/2167909/. I believe the same problem afflicts Linden Lab concerning their strategy for Second Life.

When factories were first built with steam-powered engines, the factory was literally built around the engine. Machinery was connected to the central engine by leather drive-belts. When the electric engine was invented, factory owners removed the steam engine, installed an electric engine and hooked up the drive-belts again. It took 30 years before factory owners realized that the electric engine was an entirely different technology. Small, decentralized engines replaced one big central engine, electric cables replaced belts and pulleys and factories were built flat with machinery reconfigured in an assembly line. The new technology generated a new commercial and economic paradigm.

Before Second Life, a variety of IT platforms facilitated communication and social networking. These were essentially 2-dimensional platforms enabling crude information exchange (email, bulletin boards, chat rooms, graphics-based online games). Linden Lab had the brilliant insight to create an information-rich social ECONOMY - a significant advance over social networks.

Linden Lab created not simply a virtual world; they created a metaphorical world of user-generated content within a free-market property rights structure. Second Life became more than a platform; it became a new 'country'. Residents and entrepreneurs were not attracted by the platform itself, they were attracted by the ability to transcend RL restrictions and social norms, to join an open society and participate in new political economy. They didn't play Second Life; they immigrated to Second Life.


The Future:

Having created this New World, Linden Lab asks the question, how can we monetize it? The current strategy is to employ SL as an extension of RL, but why? The business model was already sound: sell (lease) and tax (tier) virtual land and take commission on currency exchanges. Brilliant. Profitable. Successful. Congratulations! Why then this need to cater to RL organizations? For what purpose? More revenue? Silicon Valley status? What?

Why not be happy with the miracle of Second Life the country? Sure, sell the server software in a box; let RL organizations create their own 'communities' and their own 'worlds'. Nothing wrong with this, but why bring them into SL the country when they can create their own worlds? This is truly baffling.

I do not yet have a clear vision of the future of virtual worlds (and if I did, I wouldn't publish it here), but my instincts tell me that the answer lies in the metaphorical nature of the new communities within the New World - not in facilitating the communications needs of RL organizations.

Perhaps the future is a metamorphosis of real and virtual into a completely new economy - an iconic economy that encompasses both the real and virtual worlds - a political economy with completely new social norms that evolve from within the New World of new communities. Yet, none of that is going to happen - at least for Linden Lab and Second Life - if the New World is reshaped to serve the Old.

Argent,

I have never once complained about criticism of anything I have said. I have complained about the basis for ciritcism once.

If LL is not going to step back and do this right, then they are not going to stop just because you (or I) say they are doing this wrong either. We are all posting here on the hopes that they might listen.

To state what should be blatently obvious, you and everyone else are free to disagree with me and to respond to my comments, or not.

As for nit-picking, I think there has been plenty of that on both sides. That is not meant as a 'cheap shot'. That is meant as a simply observation.

I agree with you on that too. I have been critical of Blondin on that from the beginning, and am critical of LL overall on that.

A agree with your logic, just not on the circumvention being trivial. Without that, the rest of the logic is a lot weaker.

Actually, NC-17 was introduced to replace X as an official rating. The Motion Picture Association of America does not have an X rating.

http://www.mpaa.org/FlmRat_Ratings.asp

Not only that a lot seem to be PIU PIOF and therefore verified.

And I Know exactly what you mean by nothing you can pin down to AR.
I am thinking of a certain large group in particular that had been watching me pole dance one day they all, arrived together. It was just the way they behaved toward the dancers, not like griefers & not like noobs as such. But there have been others to that one groups stood out bad to me tho.

Yeah you can play with the check boxes , but is does not do exactly what you would expect it to.

Until someone sits 100 teenagers down and lets them try to get in without any helpful hints, it's just supposition and arm-waving on our parts.

I know for certain it's possible to age verify with Elvis, cause I did it myself with an alt. I also have met several people who claimed to be under 18, or were very obviously acting underage (Quote: "I have to go now, my mom told me I have to fix my room.". Proving someone is underage is just as hard as proving they are adult, so I don't claim to be sure. I filed an AR for being underage and let the Linden staff work it out in cases like that.

The percentage of under 18 players that can get into adult areas on the main grid is certainly between 0 and 100%, my guess being around 50% for these reasons:

* Every child on the teen grid had to verify with payment info. If they could do it there, they can do it on the adult grid too.

* 20% of teenagers have credit cards and can therefore give payment info without asking anyone further, and the ability to use PIOF without charging the card means it's undetectable by parents who review their statements.

* Some further percentage of sneaky and underhanded teens, tilted more towards the near-18 year olds, will be able to figure out how to use someone else's ID or credit card. Some of them will be able to sell their parent's on using second life for its non adult activities (shopping, building, fantasy role play), and just not mention the porn. Others will sneak the info out of a purse or wallet when parents are not looking.

* There's probably even a few parents who will give full permission with knowledge: "Better they learn about this stuff in a safe environment with me looking over their shoulder", or "Nudity and sex are natural, this is educational for them".

There are a lot of possibilities, and without actual surveys and trials with parents and teens, we just don't know enough to say for sure what the numbers are.

When they travel in packs to an escort club, that's a clue to me. Not enough on it's own to be conclusive, but added to other clues it can be persuasive

The results totals do not add up properly. In theory, the searches for PG only + Mature only + Adult only should be equal to the number of results when all three are checked.

Search/All for "bed"

PG only = 4860
Mature only = 2630
Adult only = 3190
Total = 10,680

PG+Mature+Adult = 8,510

Something doesn't add up, literally

It would not surprise me as you rightly say the information is out there and they will come in droves to look especially as it is so simple for them to verify with CC or Aristotle. Personally I can see this whole Adult fiasco either blowing up in LL faces, when it is discovered just how easy it is for youngsters to access SL, or with all the Adult content information now freely floating around on the web SL will become even more synonymous with naughty things and become the new Red Light Area.

The other thing is that LL could ban all naughty stuff on the grid and make a PG zone of SL.

I wonder what will happen as it will be an interesting few months thats for sure.

Just my opinion though

shall I turn the light off now? It looks like the thread has outlived its usefulness

Second Life is a world created by its users, it is the users that has made Second Life to what it is today, and it is the users that continue to ensure that Linden Lab gets their ROI back in no-time and multiplied several times. So when it comes down to it, the change concerning adult contents of various natures, it is down to the financial benefits for one party, nothing else. Whatever can bring more money to the table, is acceptable and it will all be on the standards of the Lab deciding the outcome, not the users using it.

Corporate firms and educational institutions have little or no interest in adult material in Second Life for obvious reasons, so by hiding adult content from view, people are led to believe that it does not exist and more schools and universities are likely to jump aboard and establish a foothold in Second Life. In other words, more tier payments rolling in.
Modern media have done the same thing for long, covering up real facts and censor it before published and then sell it based on exclusivity and demand.

Should a reference to a real world scenario be drawn; a person having a sexual preference would not likely be thrown out of an institution for his/her opinions but would probably be thrown out should he/she drop their pants during an on-going lecture, much the same as we do should someone enter our Second Life class and attach a penis to their forehead during lecture.

As required by Linden Lab, any user entering the Second Life grid has to be over 18 years of age, in modern society this is classed as being and adult and as an adult, the individual is also responsible for their own actions and held liable for their deed. Let’s face it, most 18 year olds have sometime in their life seen another naked individual without having to visit a secluded island in a faraway fantasy paradise.

Even a 16 year old can today get their hands on a strong sexually, abusive and violent computer game to play, without having to provide personal identifiable information or revealing sexual preference to the seller of that game. So why are we being treated like children in Second Life?

When sexual content is moved and secluded, how long before it is segregated into religious beliefs, race and creed, country of origin and other cultural differences based on childhood experiences, wealth of families etc. and then stick everyone in their respective bunker in separate geographic locations with filtered search tags on their profiles and payment registrations completed as a mandatory requirement.

A similar process was established during Second World War.

One can yet but wonder why Linden Lab does not enforce payment registration and proof of identify upon registration for Second Life since you have to be over 18 years of age in the first place anyway.

The answer is obvious and simple, people would not join Second Life if that was the case.

Second Life is what you make it, but making it a prison for people who want to have freedom in a world they created themselves, is nothing short of madness.

Do I oppose to segregation? Absolutely.

Corporate firms and educational institutions have made it clear that this is not the reason they're not "jumping aboard". They've already done it, tried to establish a "foothold", and failed.

Alas, nothing that Linden Labs has done in this process has changed the probability of someone entering a Second Life class and attaching a penis to their forehead.

I agree. As I have said, my opinions are only opinions. I may disagree with you and others on some matters, but I do respect you for standing up for your opinions, and acknowledge that even though I believe mine are well reasoned, that does not mean my reasoning is correct, regardless of how strongly I may present my position.

In large part because no linden is answering questions any more. Blondin mentioned in one of his meetings he would come back after the next announcement. It would have been nice if he told *us here* that he was abandoning us. That's just common courtesy.

Meanwhile, in reviewing the MISC-2727 comments, I came across the best conspiracy theory:

Ursula will intentionally be undersized and filled with the most obvious adult businesses. At the same time the community standards will be strict enough to drive other people to Adult estate regions from the mainland. Tier on estate is 50% higher than mainland, so more money for Linden Labs. They don't especially care if Mature and PG mainland drops in price. That will encourage neighbors to pick up land left behind, or new players to buy or rent. But with an even exchange of mainland for estate, they come out ahead on tier.

This theory fits what we have observed pretty well. I just don't credit them with that level of inventive sneakiness, but that's just my opinion