Attachment 1.8.2 culling: Violating Freedom of Expression and COMPLETELY IMPRACTICAL

I'll take that as a 'I have no retort to progress my argument about freedom of expression'

It actually only advances my point - those who choose to read what I wrote - will see what I said - you haven't interfered with that in the slightest.

Those that won't - eh they won't.. it doesn't change what I've said.

And putting forward your 'abridged' version will only get someone saying 'oh ... you didn't read every word'....

You've not selectively changed my speech - merely selectively listened.. so even your comment about 'selective speech' is in fact false.. (as is trying to assume what I'm a fan of.... )

It's hardly an attack to say someone is "uninformed" and then provide evidence exactly why they are uninformed.

"uninformed" hardly "attacks" someone as it puts down only a person's knowledge of a specific issue, not the person in general.

But what's funny? I said neither that someone "does not know what they are talking about" nor did I say that someone was "uninformed". Search the thread. No where. Please stop misrepresenting what I am saying and try to rewrite the history of this thread.

Fair enough. I checked again and it was only twice of your three posts. I apologize.

And why would I step away from the thread when people are raising questions to me about it? No, naturally I will answer it. And in good humor. Please point out where I've attacked someone, and I'll either point out how it isn't, or apologize.

Heated debate is good, Cristiano. I'm fine with it, so is everyone in the thread. But my statement stands - rather than repeat yourself, why not either add new information, or just relax and let the thread be on its own?

But those only seeing my screen with the reply will only see that clip.


I hear you there, and it's valid to a point. I totally agree that people ought to have the ability to censor / mute / reduce quality, but doing it in a way that "selectively" alters/removes one part differently than the whole is modifying the work. You're welcome to disagree.


That's because I made it fairly obvious?

But regardless, if the person didn't have your original quote, then they would say "you didn't read every word" but then not know what the original words were.


Yeah, I know... it was just to illustrate my point in a different (and slightly light-hearted) fashion.

And again ... keep in mind the freedom of expression is only 1/2 of the problem I see with it. The other half is still the "Gee, this has the potential to make things look seriously silly."

Maybe I read it differently - but it seemed to me that culling would be done selectively against distance - to me it seems no different than anything that wasn't done on the Amiga back in the 90s.. something is so small - at such distance - don't draw it.

Only we have the power to change it..

I see it no differently than not enabling shadows and shiney by default - or the current 'detail' sliders.

And yeah - if there is a significant difference (and untill we see we won't know) SOMEONE will see things with full detail.

Just as SOMEONE will see my post.

Look at it this way: I create an account with shiney off... I look at Max Mondes early skyscraper - is that infringing on his freedom of expression?

I tend to think not.

I'm not going to argue the point of 'is this good or is this bad' because doing so at the moment - without seeing it (Maeve apparently HAS seen it and I think her observations should be given more than a skip over) would be silly.

What I think is a false statement is that it's 'violating freedom of expression' I don't think it is at all - people still express themselves in their own manner - noone is stopping that.

Thats the way I see it.

heh, good point Hiro. but if the behavior with the setting turned all the way up is the same as the current behavior, then I will turn it all the way up and be done with it. I can think of other options, none of which would be any better. Imagine if they suddenly limited the number of prims on an avatar or even on an attachment, not could you not see psyra at a distance, but you'd destroy all of his work.

It doesn't look like LL is planning to comment on this. It's safe to assume they have some idea of what they're doing. If they don't, we'll find out in the next two days.

Didn't I read somewhere - I think it was Karen Linden? - saying she would talk to the devs and post something today? Admittedly its 4.30am in Linden HQ right now so I don't expect anything for a few hours at least.... but that's good enough for me.

Lewis

I repeat, their track record does not particularly bare out this assertation.

I must apologize beforehand for not reading through the last 8 pages of posts (I read the first page, that was enough for me), but...

Isn't this just a standard level of detail system? The kind that affects objects depending on the distance from the camera? I'm perfectly comfortable with my client not rendering 52 million prim hair on an avatar that is over 64 meters away from me, because I can't see it anyways (my view distance is turned down). In fact, even if they were only 30 meters away from me, most of those prims are so small that they only take up a pixel on my screen. I see no problem with culling those either. Either Linden Labs plans to completely revolutionize and redefine the traditional meaning of Level of Detail system, or the original poster really... doesn't understand what one is.

Here's a new system I'd like Linden Labs to add - a 'sky is falling' LOD system, that would cull all posts by people who think that even the slightest change in SL is going to make the entire thing implode. Traditionally, that would only work if you were viewing the forums from a distance, but in these new times of just posting random stuff without any research, it would simply cut out over 3/4ths of the posts.

Thanks for "not reading" the thread before calling me Chicken Little, Mr. Hyperbole.

Im here for the free steak knives.

Before this thread gets locked, I *do not* think the culling is going to be as bad as people think.... people can't see those 0.03x0.03x0.01m slivers from 5m away anyways, so they may as well be omitted unless you put the camera in close enough to see them.

It's already been said. Let's wait and see how it is before we judge it. It may be way more subtle than people realize.

Dude. Are you seriously accusing other people of hyperbole when you have a first post that's so hysterical and dramatic it could have been ripped from a high schooler's LiveJournal? Glass houses, man.

You completely jumped the gun and blew this situation completely beyond all proportion. Now, as Siggy might say, take your lumps.

It comes down to the simple fact that Hiro has no idea how freedom of speech works.

In the words of Willie Wonka "You lose, good day sir."

Because every poster in this thread has a different idea of what the hell this new feature will actually do, and spinning our wheels loudly like so many rabid fanboys only makes a nice breeze, not change.

Regardless, the Lindens have shown, many times in my 3 years here, that they'll implement whatever they want. They think long term; we (residents) think short-term. Whether or not their policies are correct is for a discussion broader than this thread.

At the end of the day, they own the source code, the servers, and your access pass. There's little point getting bent out of shape, ESPECIALLY over something that, more than likely, will be a good thing for 80% of residents, and result in a FPS speed-up.

It's even worse than that, though. None of us has any idea how any of this is going to work, except for Maeve, who reported nothing along the lines of the certain, apocolyptic mass infanticide that Hiro asserted would come to pass.

"You overreacted, therefore you deserve to be attacked."? Am I reading you right?

It's your opinion that I am overreacting. You're entitled to that. There's no reason to sink to the same level you're accusing me of.

...

I may add ... I've been contacted by (a) Linden(s) and concerns are being heard. I totally understand that Linden Lab likely believed this patch was a no-brainer, and no one's alleging anything negative about Linden Lab. (Though, as someone pointed out, Previews are a really, really nice thing.)

Yeah, I'm being really vocal, and yeah, I was riled up when I wrote the original post, but I haven't attacked anyone. In addition, previous posts about the issue weren't seeming to get any gears turning. On top of that, all I literally asked for in my post was to pause and consider the effects of the patch and discuss it with the community.


And I asked "please".

Is that so hysterical?

One thing that you might have a problem with... what if it renders the "skeleton" of your prim wings, but the feather prims are too small to render?

Awk! Plucked Phoenix!

No. This is hysterical:





Being vocal != making unsupportable claims without facts



No. I'm saying you don't get to call people out for hyperbole when your entire thread is predicated on smoking an enormous hyperbole bong. I'm saying if you're going to make a bunch of baseless remarks, people are going to check you for it and you don't then get to act all self-righteous and hurt about it.



I accuse you of running your mouth with zero facts.

I support the above statement/product/idea.

Ok - yes I bought and use a furry AV as well (currently making my own from scratch), and I'm sure the one I bought is prim rich as well.. BUT..

What exactly is wrong with setting a limit on the wearable prims a AV can use at one point in time instead? Heck, even with owned land your limited in the number of prims you can use on it.. why should AV's be free to use as many as they want?

If your using that many prims, you seriously need to consider fine (performance) tuning your AV rather than making everyone suffer because you need 500 prim hair, bling, butt plugs or whatever!

Set a reasonable prim limit of say 200 prims per AV. Would that not help rather than randomly displaying missing limbs, tail, or breast implants?

Your opinion. Fine. No need to add personal attack.


How were my claims unsupportable? I said there would be violations of expression that would occur, based on what was in the announcement. I gave examples to illustrate, and I asked that the feature be discussed / examined with the SL community.

Do I know exactly what the patch will do? No, that's part of the problem - no preview was done for this patch, and like other preview-less patches, the probability is that things will go wrong that could have been fixed in Preview.


And I'm allowed to defend myself and explain why I disagree. We both can express our opinions without attacks.


There's only 1 thing I can say to this:

Nothing. I realize this is page 10 now, but the problem is that the creator of the AV will have no control over which prims are cut - and indeed, it's not just individual prims, or polygon reduction, it's culling of entire attachments.


200 isn't necessarily a reasonable limit. A lot of people use a lot more than 200 and the AVs look incredible. On the other hand, 50 toruses are way more hard on the client than 200 cubes.

How do you know entire attachments will be culled? Are you simply going by the text of the announcement?

I originally understood the announcement text to mean that culling would only factor in viewer distance, not prim size. Based on what people who went on the tour said, it does indeed factor in prim size.

It's quite possible the concern you bring up is also due to bad wording in the announcement. But I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

That's good to know.


Yeah, I suppose that's a possibility too. But any wording can be mistransmitted or interpreted - the real source is the lack of a Preview.