So yeah....privacy more or less an impossible dream?
|
|
Juro Kothari
Like a dog on a bone
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 4,418
|
08-23-2006 18:01
From: Suzanna Soyinka I've built some incredibly large buildings in my time. My last skyscraper was 315m tall actually.
And yeah, sure, I suppose this would help in that one instance.
It's not really "one" instance, especially for builders - it's damn near all the time.
From: Suzanna Soyinka But...again, its a tool that may help grand scale architecture that will be more often put to use by people that are snooping.
I say move this feature to the Estate Managers menu. That way people that really need it have it.
That won't help most builders.
From: Suzanna Soyinka Residents deserve some kind of privacy. I don't care if they're living on an island or a 512 lot that comes with their premium billing.
Privacy in SL is, has and will continue to be pretty much non-existant.
Should that change? Sure, but let's not take away new features from people because a few residents will use it for snooping. |
|
Pratyeka Muromachi
Meditating Avatar
Join date: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 642
|
08-23-2006 18:02
privacy in SL has never existed, except on your own island. Privacy is for two (or more) "people" to be isolated from unwanted onlookers. AV's are not "people", merely some pixels on a monitor. Get it inot your head that there is no privacy in a virtual world. There are many chat spy thingies that allows chat to be listened to from anywhere in SL. Those and the new ability to remove camera constraints give you the ability to see and "hear" what goes on anywhere. Live with it. If you are ashamed of what you are doing in SL, then maybe you should only do it in your RL home. Or maybe you are plotting or saying bad things about other people.. Use IM. When you live in a world with no privacy, that's an incentive for behaving properly. You never know if someone is watchind... 
_____________________
gone to Openlife Grid and OpenSim standalone, your very own sim on your PC, 45,000 prims, huge prims at will up to 100m, yes, run your own grid on your PC, FOR FREE!
|
|
Ilianexsi Sojourner
Chick with Horns
Join date: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 1,707
|
08-23-2006 18:11
From: Suzanna Soyinka
Privacy was bad enough already. I wish someone could tell me what disabling camera constraints does thats actually..yanno..positive. Cause all I can see it being used for is to spy on people who'd probably rather not be your own personal peep show.
I agree totally... I don't like it either. I liked being able to fool myself into thinking that distance gave me a bit of privacy. I know, they're just pixels, I know all the arguments about how it's just a game, there's no way to have true privacy, and so on... it still bothers me.
_____________________
Everything's impossible,'till it ain't. --Ben Hawkins, Carnivale
Help build a Utopian Playland-- www.doctorsteel.com. Music, robots, fun times!
|
|
Ilianexsi Sojourner
Chick with Horns
Join date: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 1,707
|
08-23-2006 18:20
From: Pratyeka Muromachi
AV's are not "people", merely some pixels on a monitor. Get it inot your head that there is no privacy in a virtual world.
Live with it. If you are ashamed of what you are doing in SL, then maybe you should only do it in your RL home.
Yes, but-- and I'm not trying to be bitchy here-- if I want to be alone with someone and have a romantic moment, if I want to stand around naked to check the position of tattoos I've made, whatever, don't I deserve to be able to do so without having to be afraid someone a sim away might be watching? Doesn't the fact that I pay for land mean that I should have that right? I mean, there's a difference between being ashamed of what you're doing and not wanting an audience.
_____________________
Everything's impossible,'till it ain't. --Ben Hawkins, Carnivale
Help build a Utopian Playland-- www.doctorsteel.com. Music, robots, fun times!
|
|
Juro Kothari
Like a dog on a bone
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 4,418
|
08-23-2006 18:28
From: Suzanna Soyinka
You're defending a tool that may be used for your stated purpose by 1 in 50 people. If that.
That doesn't hold water. Hell, why not get rid of the build tools altogether, since only 1 in 50 use them. |
|
Joannah Cramer
Registered User
Join date: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
|
08-23-2006 18:39
From: Pratyeka Muromachi privacy in SL has never existed, except on your own island.
Privacy is for two (or more) "people" to be isolated from unwanted onlookers. Yup. Which, when you think of it, is rather silly. Even something as ancient as IRC recognizes both the concept and need of privacy, and provides means to have it, through private messaging and private password protected chat rooms. This could be easily transferred into 3d by allowing one to switch between 'public' and 'private' channels/dimensions of 3d space. So that one can both see and be seen only by people/things in the same dimension they are. You want privacy? You switch to private dimension in your parcel, and invite over these you want to share it with. You can't be seen by anyone outside it, and cannot spy on people outside, either. A much better and more logical solution than the whole kneejerk 'there's no privacy, deal' thing, imo... |
|
Roxie Marten
Crumedgeon
Join date: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 291
|
08-23-2006 18:42
From: Suzanna Soyinka Yes. It does.
Its called paranoia.
I don't think asking for a little privacy is such a big deal. Not with what I pay monthly here. If your that paranoid. Try locking yourself in a closet  |
|
Richie Waves
Predictable
Join date: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 1,424
|
08-23-2006 18:44
OMG THE IMPLICATION (z0rs) you mean some little griefer might see my pixel nipples?? my girlfriends pixel bum? might know whos typing and when? (obviosly not WHAT were typing because they are too far away)...
oh hey I just WOKE THE FUCK UP... who gives a flying shite?....
_____________________
no u!
|
|
Lost Newcomb
Registered User
Join date: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 666
|
08-23-2006 18:47
free amateur pr0n!
one more reason to join SL newbs.
_____________________
I'm the uncontested Ubar of All of Gor, and Knight of SecondLife.
Proper way to greet me : Sir Lost, Ubar Lost, or if your so inclined, Master Newcomb.
|
|
Isablan Neva
Mystic
Join date: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 2,907
|
08-23-2006 21:35
There. is. no. privacy. How many servers does your "private" email pass through on its way to its destination? Your ISP knows every last site you visit. Your searches are logged - just ask the 658,000 customers of AOL who are now horrified that the world knows their "private" search keywords. The second you launch onto the internet, you lose anything resembling privacy. Oh, and by the way, our government is listening to your phone calls. If you want something to be paranoid about, having someone see your avatar change clothes from 2 sims away is pretty low on the scale. 
_____________________
 http://slurl.com/secondlife/TheBotanicalGardens/207/30/420/
|
|
grumble Loudon
A Little bit a lion
Join date: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 612
|
08-23-2006 22:41
I proposed a feature some time ago. There are also several votes for features like it in the voting system.
Basically we can kill two birds with one stone by having a parcel Zones. It would be tricky to set unless it is done using a script, but basically it would add one forced hidden oct-tree box that would make everything inside the box invisible to anyone outside.
The sim could also use the list of zones to clip chat and sounds and the sim could clip the objects based on your avatar position (not the camera) and remove the objects from the pipeline.
This would also increase frame rate since the inside of your neighbors club does not exist as far as your PC is concerned.
I know it's a tricky thing to implement, but LL has done more ambitious things.
|
|
Suzanna Soyinka
Slinky Slinky Slinky
Join date: 25 Nov 2005
Posts: 292
|
08-24-2006 02:29
How is it that a call for a basic human right, which is privacy and the ability to not be on public display at all times, generate such ridiculous fascist responses?
NOTHING IS PRIVATE GET OVER IT?
What the hell are you on? Theres no cameras in my real life bedroom. Theres no microphones in my living room. The CIA isn't watching me, neither is the FBI, the DIA or the NSA.
The problem here is you all seem to think...oh its just pixels..its immaterial.
Thats fine, you're welcome to think that. But the name of the platform is SECOND LIFE.
That means that I think of my avatar as a little more than "just pixels", my avatar is ME...its who I am. So having some level of privacy is a comforting thing because, as a human being...I expect to be able to go into my apartment and do whatever I want without it ending up on video tape somewhere.
Chat spies aren't that hard to circumvent..they have to be placed in a prim, that prim will invariably be from an unfamiliar name, all you have to do is check your Objects list fairly regularly and you can remove these kinds of things as a privacy violation.
But you can't even detect someone freewheeling their camera around for shits and giggles.
I find it absolutely astonishing that with the Lindens strict view on privacy as far as in world interactions are concerned (no posting chat logs, no naming names..and what not) that theres absolutely no considerations towards personal privacy on land that we pay to own.
Its yet another example of very short sighted thinking at Linden Labs. The "privacy" of their membership is a constant concern through the Community Standards....but yet landowners are afforded NO PRIVACY at all short of buying an island and closing it to the public.
It is a double standard...and I believe that rolling over and accepting it just cause it might help 1 person in 50 make a big huge building a little easier is tantamount to accepting the Patriot Act because of the "potential" of more security it could feasibly give us while cutting the Bill of Rights to shreds.
You can have your unfettered camera...thats fine, I want a way to block it off my land. Its MY land after all.
|
|
Yiffy Yaffle
Purple SpiritWolf Mystic
Join date: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 2,802
|
08-24-2006 05:25
There never has been any privacy and there never will be. that isn't one of LL's conserns. Their only conserns are that SL replaces the internet, gets millions of users, allows you to do whatever you want, and brings them money.
|
|
Joannah Cramer
Registered User
Join date: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
|
08-24-2006 05:48
From: Isablan Neva There. is. no. privacy. How many servers does your "private" email pass through on its way to its destination? How many postal service workers handle your normal mail on its way to destination? From: someone Your ISP knows every last site you visit. Your searches are logged. Customer support uses the data about handled cases to pinpoint the most pressing issues with offered products and services. From: someone The second you launch onto the internet, you lose anything resembling privacy. No. You are making a flawed argument here, by citing cases which are not considered infringement of privacy in RL, or which also happen in RL as some sort of proof of "no privacy on the 'net whatsoever". It's perfectly possible to keep your things private on the 'net in the sense 'privacy' is perceived in RL, and above all there's absolutely zero reason why such functionality shouldn't be offered as part of SL features. Because seriously, _why_ not? From: someone Oh, and by the way, our government is listening to your phone calls. If you want something to be paranoid about, having someone see your avatar change clothes from 2 sims away is pretty low on the scale. And yet you can draw the curtains to keep a random voyeur out of your house in RL. Not having ultimate privacy does *not* mean you can't nor *deserve* to get _any_ of it. |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
08-24-2006 06:07
From: Suzanna Soyinka How is it that a call for a basic human right, which is privacy and the ability to not be on public display at all times, generate such ridiculous fascist responses?
NOTHING IS PRIVATE GET OVER IT?
What the hell are you on? Theres no cameras in my real life bedroom. Theres no microphones in my living room. The CIA isn't watching me, neither is the FBI, the DIA or the NSA.
The problem here is you all seem to think...oh its just pixels..its immaterial.
Thats fine, you're welcome to think that. But the name of the platform is SECOND LIFE.
That means that I think of my avatar as a little more than "just pixels", my avatar is ME...its who I am. So having some level of privacy is a comforting thing because, as a human being...I expect to be able to go into my apartment and do whatever I want without it ending up on video tape somewhere.
Chat spies aren't that hard to circumvent..they have to be placed in a prim, that prim will invariably be from an unfamiliar name, all you have to do is check your Objects list fairly regularly and you can remove these kinds of things as a privacy violation.
But you can't even detect someone freewheeling their camera around for shits and giggles.
I find it absolutely astonishing that with the Lindens strict view on privacy as far as in world interactions are concerned (no posting chat logs, no naming names..and what not) that theres absolutely no considerations towards personal privacy on land that we pay to own.
Its yet another example of very short sighted thinking at Linden Labs. The "privacy" of their membership is a constant concern through the Community Standards....but yet landowners are afforded NO PRIVACY at all short of buying an island and closing it to the public.
It is a double standard...and I believe that rolling over and accepting it just cause it might help 1 person in 50 make a big huge building a little easier is tantamount to accepting the Patriot Act because of the "potential" of more security it could feasibly give us while cutting the Bill of Rights to shreds.
You can have your unfettered camera...thats fine, I want a way to block it off my land. Its MY land after all. I think what people are missing in this thread is the fact that Suzanna DOES have a right to want to have privacy. There are many arguments saying she has none, etc. But they all sound like you all are arguing agaisnt the Feasability of privacy and then decrying that its only pixels as a rationalle. If its not feasible to provide privacy in SL- then thats one thing - there is of course a solution, Instancing. But its not for anyone but the individual to decide if they want privacy for their naughty pixel bits and who they show them to. Its pretty obvious SL is a social platform. All those people buying lindens with USD$ are doing to to further their social online experience. |
|
Ranma Tardis
沖縄弛緩の明確で青い水
Join date: 8 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,415
|
silly rabbits!
08-24-2006 06:55
I just finished a "large" build and it was a true pain having to move to make it. I like the idea of a longer range camera. It will make my life a lot easier!
About privacy, sorry to burst your bubble there is none either in Second Life or Real Life. Don't you know how easy it is to get pictures of people inside their own homes without these people even knowing? The technology is out there and is not going away. There are cameras out there that can strip the clothing off of you and show your naked body.
I don’t think you would be happy if the Lindens removed this function. After all there are other ways of "peeping" into your land. How about making all plots of land completely cut off from each other? We might have a more private second life but you would worry about Linden "peeping". Even then if that was removed you might worry they still had it or someone was "peeping" into your internet connection. If you are paranoid there are medicines available for treatment.
If I were you would give Linden Labs an extra 70 dollars a month for a "private" sim. It will cost you an extra $2.33 a month. That is about a half a pack of "cowgirl/boy Killers" for you smokers. You will be happy with the extra control over your land and gain a lot more than a little extra "privacy".
I do not expect "privacy" in either real or second life and was not raised to be ashamed of either my body or natural functions. Does that mean I want to have sex in public well no but I don’t worry about some pervert peeping either in real or second life. In short get over it!!
|
|
Ilianexsi Sojourner
Chick with Horns
Join date: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 1,707
|
08-24-2006 08:26
From: Suzanna Soyinka
NOTHING IS PRIVATE GET OVER IT?
Yeah, I have to agree with Suzanna here... I understand that LL has priorities, and that personal privacy isn't one of them, and yeah, I understand that it's near impossible to have *true* privacy in a place like this. Still, though, 'get over it' seems to me to be kind of a cold response. Just saying, 'oh well, get over it' sounds to me like it implies that the person is foolish or wrong for wanting privacy, like it's a silly thing to ask for. I don't think it's foolish to want to have some control over your private property, or to feel upset when it looks as though that control is being taken away. I'd like to see an option to disable the use of this feature on individual parcels, like with push. That way, those who like it could use it, and those who don't could feel a bit easier.
_____________________
Everything's impossible,'till it ain't. --Ben Hawkins, Carnivale
Help build a Utopian Playland-- www.doctorsteel.com. Music, robots, fun times!
|
|
Joannah Cramer
Registered User
Join date: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
|
08-24-2006 08:30
From: Ranma Tardis In short get over it!! And if i don't then what, you will scream some more? You provided no argument to support your view, really. That there is no privacy currently in SL doesn't mean there can't nor that there should be none until the end of time. Mechanics-wise it's quite feasible to introduce it. Though of course, with their development model it'd require a Linden or a few to feel like doing it. |
|
Rachel Lach
Registered User
Join date: 8 Aug 2006
Posts: 1
|
08-24-2006 08:44
In other online environments - Privacy is available through Instancing
Basically in your apartment / Inn room , whatever - no one can go inside it unless you invite them.
Only the people who work for the game can enter without an invite.
This doesnt fit how SL is set up - but obviously its technically possible to do.
Im fairly certain if the lindens sold a feature where you could have a 20x20 private room for $5 or whatever a month - it would sell like hotcakes.
|
|
windozer Vargas
Registered User
Join date: 6 Feb 2006
Posts: 99
|
08-24-2006 09:03
From: Suzanna Soyinka I've built some incredibly large buildings in my time. My last skyscraper was 315m tall actually.
And yeah, sure, I suppose this would help in that one instance.
But...again, its a tool that may help grand scale architecture that will be more often put to use by people that are snooping.
I say move this feature to the Estate Managers menu. That way people that really need it have it.
Residents deserve some kind of privacy. I don't care if they're living on an island or a 512 lot that comes with their premium billing. dear suzanna,anything that is client side is hackable,so instead of having people running 3rd party applications for that,they just simply included it. you want privacy,you buy an island and hide from map. |
|
Ranma Tardis
沖縄弛緩の明確で青い水
Join date: 8 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,415
|
08-24-2006 09:04
From: Joannah Cramer And if i don't then what, you will scream some more? You provided no argument to support your view, really. That there is no privacy currently in SL doesn't mean there can't nor that there should be none until the end of time. Mechanics-wise it's quite feasible to introduce it. Though of course, with their development model it'd require a Linden or a few to feel like doing it. |
|
Ilianexsi Sojourner
Chick with Horns
Join date: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 1,707
|
08-24-2006 09:13
So, seriously, how workable an idea would it be to have an option to turn off 'disable camera constraints' on individual parcels? We can turn off push scripts now, if we choose to, and that's great... could the camera function be handled in the same way?
_____________________
Everything's impossible,'till it ain't. --Ben Hawkins, Carnivale
Help build a Utopian Playland-- www.doctorsteel.com. Music, robots, fun times!
|
|
windozer Vargas
Registered User
Join date: 6 Feb 2006
Posts: 99
|
08-24-2006 09:14
From: Ilianexsi Sojourner So, seriously, how workable an idea would it be to have an option to turn off 'disable camera constraints' on individual parcels? We can turn off push scripts now, if we choose to, and that's great... could the camera function be handled in the same way? its client side,we could hack it. |
|
Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
|
08-24-2006 09:20
From: Suzanna Soyinka How is it that a call for a basic human right, which is privacy and the ability to not be on public display at all times, generate such ridiculous fascist responses?
NOTHING IS PRIVATE GET OVER IT?
What the hell are you on? Theres no cameras in my real life bedroom. Theres no microphones in my living room. The CIA isn't watching me, neither is the FBI, the DIA or the NSA.
The problem here is you all seem to think...oh its just pixels..its immaterial.
Thats fine, you're welcome to think that. But the name of the platform is SECOND LIFE.
That means that I think of my avatar as a little more than "just pixels", my avatar is ME...its who I am. So having some level of privacy is a comforting thing because, as a human being...I expect to be able to go into my apartment and do whatever I want without it ending up on video tape somewhere.
Chat spies aren't that hard to circumvent..they have to be placed in a prim, that prim will invariably be from an unfamiliar name, all you have to do is check your Objects list fairly regularly and you can remove these kinds of things as a privacy violation.
But you can't even detect someone freewheeling their camera around for shits and giggles.
I find it absolutely astonishing that with the Lindens strict view on privacy as far as in world interactions are concerned (no posting chat logs, no naming names..and what not) that theres absolutely no considerations towards personal privacy on land that we pay to own.
Its yet another example of very short sighted thinking at Linden Labs. The "privacy" of their membership is a constant concern through the Community Standards....but yet landowners are afforded NO PRIVACY at all short of buying an island and closing it to the public.
It is a double standard...and I believe that rolling over and accepting it just cause it might help 1 person in 50 make a big huge building a little easier is tantamount to accepting the Patriot Act because of the "potential" of more security it could feasibly give us while cutting the Bill of Rights to shreds.
You can have your unfettered camera...thats fine, I want a way to block it off my land. Its MY land after all. Well put. coco |
|
Joannah Cramer
Registered User
Join date: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
|
08-24-2006 09:23
From: Ranma Tardis Ok, so you think you can have true privacy? I don’t see how this is possible. I mentioned one of possible ways earlier in this very thread. Just because you personally 'cannot see it' doesn't mean a solution doesn't exist. From: someone Do you buy scripted objects? Do you know what they can do? Most of these scripts can not be view to keep them from being stolen. How sure these scripts are not only recording and sending the chat but also a visual record to some web site somewhere Feel free to educate yourself on what's actually possible with LSL. Then you'll realize your FUD is exactly that. From: someone You can scream all day and it will not change a thing. You are right, we still have to put up with people abusing the push for griefing despite people complaining about it- oh, wait. From: someone I do not think it is possible without Linden Labs devoting almost all of their attention to it. And? Every piece of functionality put into SL requires LL attention. Do you have any good reason why this particular issue should *not* get their attention? From: someone Even then I don’t think it is possible to have a really secure connection over an unsecured network. hey, secure connections over unsecured network. go figure. From: someone You are going to have to get over it.p No, you will have to come up with some actual argument to support your point of view why there should be no privacy in SL, than "get over it". Repeating the cliche phrase just doesn't provide any rationale, am afraid. |
