Harsher measures > downtime

This latest bout of downtime is utterly ridiculous.

To cut it short and simple, harsher measures are better than all this constant downtime because some sad low-life rezzed a single object and took down EVERYTHING.

Want a simple example? Don't allow anyone who signed up without payment info to use the llRezObject(), llPushObject() or llGiveInventory() functions, or transfer items containing such scripts. This way free alts that sign up due to the grievous lack of judgement that is the current registration strategy, aren't able to do anything harmful on the current scale. If an account gave payment info then there is at least some chance of holding them accountable!
Or just bloody well put registration back to how it was, where you needed to prove you exist in a reachable way before you can get any access to cause problems for people. This has got to stop. I know some people are inconvenienced by having to provide payment info, but to perfectly frank, the majority of them are probably griefers or underaged anyway! Meanwhile EVERYONE currently in-world is inconvenienced every-time the grid is taken down by someone with an alergy to sunlight.

I concur wholeheartedly!!!

i was more like no scripts for unverified but i am a tyrant ^_^

Not allowing people to transfer objects containing certain scripts would really violate the principle of least astonishment.

Until LL gets rid of completely anonymus accounts people will use them for greifing. This is just the "worst case" example, there are many many more.

Every account has to be connected to some kind of identifiable person. No exceptions. That means that LL has to get rid of some of their limits. Let people have as many accounts as they need, and set up accounts for friends who don't have CCs... but they're responsible for their friends when they're using them. They don't need to go all the way to my "sponsorship" scheme but they HAVE TO stop letting people get on with no verification.

Machine IDs and IP blocks are hacks, and don't work all that well... they punish the innocent and don't stop the griefers.

If they want to demo SLm, set up a "demo grid" like the "teen grid". Maybe let IMs out, and add an option for folks to respond to the IMs by sponsoring people into the real grid then.

There is one major problem with this solution. Yes it would stop the attacks and I agree with that but it is like exterminating every single bee on earth because you were stung by one. Of course in that case all life would end but that is besides the point. Also beside the point is that I am horrible at creating anologies

But look at the numbers. There are now 863,601 accounts. How many are unverified? For arguments sake let's say 1/3, which comes up to 287,867. Only one person is responsible for these attacks. Why in the world would you want to limit what a third of the population can do because of one person?????????????

I was an unverified account at one point. I never launched grid attacks. Well, now someone will say that unverifeds cause other problems. Excuse me, but I joined before unverifed accounts and they still had problems back then. Why do you think the abuse report system was in help back then?

Nope, LL is not going to get rid of unverified accounts nor limit them in anyway. They will come up with a software solution to stop the attacks thou. I proposed a simple one today and I see another one proposed also. If there is just a tiny amount of disruption due to an attack as opposed to disabling all scripts, stopping log ins etc. Then launching an attack in the first place is a pointless excersize.

Wishful thinking. There were no unverified accounts for a LONG time before you joined and things worked fine. It's simply a matter of choosing between a quality community and a large userbase.

I'm thinking that companies, in general, prefer to keep the paying customers happy in the long run. Not a good idea to alienate the ones who are responsible for the numbers on your paycheck. After a while they dont feel so generous with their cash and take it elsewhere.

Yeah, I agree, I was going to make a new thread but I'll just post my suggestions here. Same basic points but more of a drawn out rant...

1. Terrorists - The first action LL should take is to start calling them terrorists, not griefers. Griefing doesn't sound serious enough. It sounds like some immature kid is annoying you, and trying to get your attention. Terrorism, on the other-hand, sounds serious. Taking down the whole grid is an attack meant to scare people away from Second Life. They hate us for our freedom... so call them terrorists.

2. Terrorist Threat Levels - Since they are terrorists, we should have threat levels. Last night when LL turned off scripts they shut down everything from vendors to vehicles. If vendors are shut down the economy comes to a hault. That's like the US government declaring a 'Red Alert' terrorist threat level, then shutting down all commerce. Isn't there something less drastic like turning off the llGiveInventory() and llRezObject() functions, which could maybe be an 'Orange Alert'.

3. Airport Screenings - llGiveInventory() is like plutonium, or the power to split the atom(or prim). llRezObject() is like the explosive ordinance which triggers the nuclear explosion.

Should we really give unverified accounts plutonium before they even show us their RL data? I say for scripting with these functions you must register to be a scripter in-world. It would sort of be like an airport screening. You go somewhere in-world, some Linden with a police hat asks you what you'll be using those functions for. Maybe they'll ask you to take off your scripted attachments and put your arms up like your editing your appearance etc. Then they register you as a scripter. If you aren't a registered scripter you can't use those functions that help in self-replicating objects. (llGiveInventory, llRezObject) Or we could just say verified accounts can only create objects using those functions if that's easier (like the above post).

4. Smoke 'em Out - Banning IPs and hardware doesn't seem effective. For example a college student could have access to hundreds of IPs and computers. Well you need to work with universities/organizations to fight terrorism.

If University computers are being used for SL terrorism you should call them up and say 'this is a terrorist investigation, could we get your computer logs.' If they don't agree you could put them on 'State Sponsors of Terrorism' list. You could even put other organizations in the same subnet on the State Sponsors list, just because we don't like how they run their organization. Then LL coud gear up for a pre-emptive Virus/DOS attack on organizations costing us taxpayers millions/billions of Lindens for no apparent reason when the organization had nothing to do with terrorism in the first place. According to Bush this is the best method of fighting terrorism... so why not?


P.S. This is a half-serious after being up-all-night rant.

I think that the reason we have unverified in the first place is because without exceptions, a lot of people can't get on. Which is why, while I agree on creating 'sub-classes' of player isn't nice, we should still allow unverifieds but nerf them enough that they can't cause harm, but can still enjoy themselves.
I mean, while scripts do create a lot of rich content, most of them aren't necessary to enjoying the game, and it's mainly certain functions that are open for abuse.

It would be nice to have compromises on several of the major ideas I think:

1. Make verifying accounts easier via different methods (cell-phone being a major one to globalise if possible). Possibly even as far as accepting a cheque for verification; ie, you sign-up unverified, send in a cheque/postal order to LL, and once it's verified it gets converted into L$ for your account and restrictions are dropped.
2. Add your sponsorship suggestion, essentially this verifies an account as well, but the responsibility is on the sponsor's details.
3. Restrict unverified accounts by blocking script calls to llGiveInventory, llPushObject, llRezObject (and llRezAtRoot) and any physics related functions (except those applied to a vehicle class prim). Unverified accounts cannot give scripts containing these functions (to avoid them sending a free item to someone else who rezzes it, crashing the grid).

Yes it may make it harder for unverified's to set-up a business. But by the time you're thinking along those lines you should have made some friends who might be willing to sponsor you, or you have verified yourself. Just like how a real-world business needs to be registered.
I'd maybe go so far as to include limiting unverified accounts to PG sims to prevent underage users getting in this way.

863,601 non-unique users. I'd say the number of unique users is a quater to a third of that number.
So, unverified uniques are really more like 95,955 assuming your ratio of 1/3 of users (unique in this case) are unverifieds.
And under of the sponsorship ideas, I'm sure 95% of that 96,000 could fins someone to do it.

Honey, I ain't artistic, but I can write scripts, and make stuff for people that way, even make a couple toys good enough to sell.

You ever heard anyone say different strokes for different folks? You don't think it's necessary, but there's a whole bunch of people who wouldn't be here if it weren't for scripting. Heck, it's a big enough deal for me that I didn't stir myself to boot up and log in last night just because scripts were down. So I reckon that it's necessary enough.

Oh, an by the way, both of my toys need llRezObject, and neither's gonna be taking any grid down.

I'm mostly a scripter as well.
If scripting interests people and verification is relatively painless, then it's a tiny extra step to get access to the big bad functions. Until then you'd be perfectly able to script simpler things (which most scripters are going to start out doing anyway). First thing I scripted was some hover-text for my old prim-head, a simple project and a great way to get to grips with some of the basic LSL syntax differences.

Unverified accounts wouldn't have zero access to scripts, they'd have enough to practise, learn and play around with. But not enough to cause any trouble, and if they feel they need the heavier functions, then all they have to do is give what is basically some insurance that they won't intentionally misuse them.

If when I'd started out such a system were in place, I would still be where I am today, as giving that extra bit of info for security isn't a completely unreasonable request.

What about unverified accounts that are GIVEN malicious scripts?

Do we lock them out from running possible troublesome commands, as well? :O

If it were not for scripting, I'd have absolutely zero interest in SL. I'm serious, none at all.

Now, I joined as a premium from day one, but... If I had joined as an unverified and had been able to use a restricted subset of lsl only, I think it would have been a very easy decision for me to become verified. I would have seen that lsl is not difficult, and while limited can do some interesting things, and would have went for it.

Not being able to do any scripting at all while verified would absolutely not have convinced me that it was worth having an SL account at any level.

That's what I'm proposing. Instead of blocking scripts for them entirely, this would be much like the "Block push" option on parcels, it would stop functions like llPushObject(), llRezObject() etc but for any unverified user. And prevent them sending any script containing disallowed functions.
The main problem is keeping tabs on unverified status for this purpose, it would have to be somehow be kept as a flag in the script when it is set to running (so once a user verifies they can reset the script to give it their new permission).

That's one of the reasons, yes.

1. There are people who can't get a US credit card or paypal account.

2. LL wants to have big numbers to advertise.

3. LL wants to leave the people who need more alts than they allow a loophole so they'll quit bugging LL so much about the strict account limits.

4. It may reduce customer support costs.

Once you have these, there's no objective reason for unverified accounts at all, so there's no reason to make them second class citizens in any way. Give them a grace period to get accountable one way or another, and you won't need to playtricks like this:
This would cause HUGE customer support problems, because there's all kinds of products that use these calls for all kinds of reasons, often not obvious ones. For example, a lot of furniture and vehicles give a small llPushObject() push when you stand up to keep you from being entangled in it. Many objects use llRezObject for proxies (like Jillian's widely used splashable water, a lot of pets, any llSetPos teleporters, ...).

And unverified accounts can still be used for griefing even if they don't do anything but stalk people. No scripts involved.
If verification is relatively painless, then there's no reason not to require it for all accounts.

The problem is that there will still be people who can't verify their account for whatever reason, and sponsorship to them is likely to be useless unless they know someone in the game. People who have come having read a web-article, or from a google search, or a link from a site would be unable to get in.
So really the unverifieds would be more like demo accounts except with full access to the world, thus allowing them to make friends in whatever areas interest them. These friends can then sponsor them at this stage, this verifying their account. I get the second class accounts argument, but there needs to be some bridge to ensure people can GET sponsorship and thus verification in someone else's name. A nerfed unverified account does this as a preview account.
If you want to avoid the scripting confusion, then you can go even harsher, and have unverifieds unable to accept inventory, and unable to pay into objects or buy objects. It's super harsh, but for a demo account it permits exploring, making friends (thus sponsorship) and interaction with things that don't involve inventory. But with a nice selection of included objects (in the library folder, perhaps take some donations for this to get a wider variety) and the appearance options you can still see what's on offer. If you do try to pay, buy or receive inventory you'd get a little dialogue saying you need to verify your account and that it can be done freely in one of the ways available.

Personaly I am a programer in RL and I was atracted to scripting, but I did not get into llSetRemoteScriptAccessPin until I started looking into much more complex scripts.

Since it is the cornerstone of all grey goo atacks, I would block that first.

Blocking it would not prevent the person from owning vendors {llGiveInventory()} or holo vendors {llRezObject()}

I get greifers all the time and my weppon scanner deals with them. I just wish I had llReturnObject() to deal with there objects at the same time.

Anuther thought would be to add a LSL command to change the land script settings so that a system like banlink could be used to switch back and forth based on conditions.

Also don't forget that there are hacked clients acting as bots. Therefore even a new acount could TP and rez lots of junk.

Those two functions can Grey Goo as well. I've done it--although on a VERY slow scale (one rez/give every 5 minutes) so I was able to see that what was going on (Grey Goo) was NOT what I wanted and fixed it.

i still don't get the problem of restricting free accounts, being even able to log in sl without dropping a cent is an enormous privilege in the online "games" industry, LL isn't here to do welfare after all, and if there was more peoples paying them the sl experience might be cheaper for everybody instead of being extremely expensive for a few and free for the rest

there should be more incentives to give $ to LindenLabs for the work they do

Some persons will ALWAYS have an excuse, i am sorry but if you can't afford a mere 10$ a month you definitely should put your energy in finding a job or reconsider your priorities rather than wasting your time on the net.
I don't buy cheap excuses, and even if the problem is real, there will ALWAYS be someone that will have a problem, you can't make something like sl, make it totally free, make it run on a 28k line, on a 10 years old computer at the same time, there is a limit .

If I couldn't script while I was trialling SL, I wouldn't be here.

Now at the time that was "7 days free before you have to buy an account", but that free trial period without restrictions was enough to get me paying my ten bucks to get in. This is the first and still the only online game I play, and since then I've paid hundreds of dollars to LL as well as creating some pretty widely used scripts... and there's thousands of people like me, some who are *still* Basic accounts even though they're paying rent on 1/4 of a sim or more. They're paying Linden Labs (through the sim owner who can afford to own a sim because they're being paid that rent) $50 a month on their "free" account! SL is *so* different from anything else that some kind of free trial is essential to getting the people who are most valuable interested in doing the stuff they pay for.

Once you start down the road of restricting free accounts you're stuck playing a balancing game between discouraging potential paying accounts and your arms race with the griefers.

And the problem isn't free accounts. There wasn't a huge long-term increase in griefing when free accounts showed up (there were other problems, and I don't like the way LL addressed them, but that wasn't one of them). It's free anonymous unaccountable accounts. Turning the account policy back to the "free trial period, with payment info" of 1.6, or even "free with payment info" of 1.7 or later (I think 1.7 is when it came in), would still let almost everyone who wants to try the game out in... and some sort of sponsorship scheme would open it up for the rest... without letting griefers make all the "get out of jail free" accounts they want.

We could just limit them to flying around, dancing or sitting in those chairs for one linden an hour.

jt

Argent, you still seem to be neglecting the part where if you can't use payment details to get in, and don't know anyone willing to sponsor you (because you haven't played the game yet!) that you still wouldn't be able to play. This is why we have the unverified accounts in the first place!
As a result, to allow those people in we'd still need some form of unverified account. However, if it has restricted access to dangerous LSL functions (but not basic ones, which are enough to fall in love with scripting anyway!) then they can at least join the game, at which point they can find someone in world with the same interests, make friends and as a result they would have a sponsor willing to verify them.

This way unverifieds, instead of being a griefer heaven, would be a way for people to try SL with only a few missing features (scripts that rez objects, or use pushes etc, or nerfed in some other way), but which have all the functions and access that they need to meet people and get themselves verified by sponsorship.

The only alternative is to have sponsorship schemes where someone advertises that they are willing to sponsor people, and people apply for their sponsorship, but it would have two huge drawbacks:
a) The player has to wait for a sponsor to choose them to become verified!
b) How does the sponsor know the person isn't going to grief and get them into trouble?

Whereas if the nerfed unverified account is used, the player can make friends in common interests, these friends then would have at least some idea of what the person is like, and can judge for themselves if sponsoring them would be a good idea.