Stop the Peeping Toms / Camera Limitation

Same reason some people enjoy being in SL in the first place, and others don't see the point to it whatsoever. Personal preference and difference in how the brain is wired, questioning it leads nowhere.

I guess it didn't come out as clearly in type as it was in my head Read on for more of what I meant. But short point is: I don't disagree that you should be able to keep me or anyone else from seeing into your private spaces. Don't disagree at all.


Because the admins work on surprise projects constantly (there are weekly tournaments, etc) there would be a temptation for the island's owner to limit the camera distance to keep people from spoiling the surprise, which may affect us builders. Presumably the option exists for everyone, but there is not always a clear-cut "limit or not-limit" choice to be made.


And... I will skip the rest of your post to simply follow up with this:

You expect and desire privacy, and quite clearly many others do as well. I respect that. And again, I am very sorry to hear that some jackass invaded your privacy and made you so upset, this is not a good thing in any way, he/she needs to be banned!!!! I only wanted to vent about imbalanced or poorly chosen poll options (there are so many, not just this one), and I should have just kept my trap shut and been a little more sympathetic.

Having said that, I will not troll the thread any more I wish you the best.

Robby, thanks.

You seem pretty sweet actually. Sorry for getting all edgy like that. I've been doing that a lot the past few days. I'm not exactly my friendly self at most times, but I'm working on getting back to normal.

Actually, everyone, sorry for being so edgy. Talking to me is like kissing a cactus right now. I do apologise.

AD

If you're trolling for someone to say "virtual sex" or "porn", then I'll be the trollee.

I didn't vote at all because none of the answers was even vaguely close to "yes, we need better privacy, but camera limitations are neither effective nor desirable".

Seriously.

This proposal can not be implemented in a useful way in any practical design for SL.

It's simply not feasible with the way the game works, and considering how minor changes tend to break it for weeks, a complete re-tool of the camera and streaming system would be horrid.

Sorry, hun.

It would probably be easier for LL to just go back to the time before custom animations, when there were no sex beds. That's ALL this is about, no one wants people looking at them while their polygonally-malformed penises penetrate their partners in all sorts of odd places that you don't need to be an anatomy expert to say aren't vaginas.

I guess it's the conservative in me (and I'm usually quite liberal), but if people watching your avatar and someone else's contorting at 0.4 frames per second bothers you SO MUCH that you need to insult people who know for a fact that implementing your "camera privacy" system is unfeasible, you really need shut off your computer for a few days and come back after someone sodomizes some sense into you.

Summary: Animated sex in SL actually didn't exist for quite some time, and it's certainly not meant to be one of SL's "highlights". Just because you're allowed to do it doesn't mean LL has to break their backs to implement privacy systems for you. If avatar sex is that emotionally important to you, you should feel lucky that you're able to make your avatar's hips move at all. You're just taking another SL feature for granted and raising a stink about it when there are seriously, and I emphasize here...

SERIOUSLY

...far more important things for LL and its userbase to worry about than your libido.

By the same logic, ability of private text communication implemented pretty much since dawn of the 'net is there only so no one can see people cyber, and when someone uses IMs then it's "ALL this is about".

Except oops, it's not.

Maybe try not to project own narrow-mindedness on everyone around so hastily... they can have lot of reasons for desiring privacy, that have little if anything to do with your own fixation on pixel slapping.

This is about more than just the pixel-slapping you seem to think those who wish privacy are concerned about.

As I mentioned in a thread about rude people, my SL wife and I were in our home, NOT HAVING SEX, fully clothed, having a conversation, when some moron promoting a discussion about anti-social behavior in Second Life had the gall to use his map, find two green dots on the map, and choose to teleport to our location to invite us to attend. Right in the middle of our bloody living room.

We own that property, we own that home, and it is not there for him, you, or anyone else to just teleport in anytime you damn well please, Fox. That is also privacy. (adding some relevant information here I forgot to include the first time) Sure, we can set a teleport routing location on our property, but that won't stop the person who teleports in, rezzes a box and sits on it, then slides the box through the wall. So we turn off build. Great, so they slide it in from another parcel. Turn off that ability. Now we can't even rez our own objects from our inventory on our property without getting an error that the item is being brought in from an outside parcel and this is not allowed (I have reproduced this effect in two different sims, so either it is a reproducable bug or a "feature" that should be left out. I'd still like to know WHAT parcel these items are supposed to be coming from. We're standing on the parcel we're rezzing it on, for crying out loud). Great. So we did the only thing we have the ability to do: I subdivided the lot, leaving a parcel that includes our house and a small amount of land beyond it, and banned everyone from that parcel save those who I choose to grant access to it.

Now how do we stop the person working for some tabloid who is running around taking pictures of people who were never consulted first, and using images of their avatars for their own commercial gain (selling it to the publications who they are associated with) without any compensation passed on to those who paid for the avatars, property, and objects that made it possible for them to take that specific picture in the first place? This has occurred in Second Life, even if it hasn't happened to you. The papparazi are present in-world, and you don't even have to be Britney Spears to have them coming after you for your photograph.

Many people, as also posted in other threads, hate ban lines. You know what? I do too. I'm still going to put them up anyway, because as long as the people who use Second Life cannot respect our legitimate wish to have our own private place where we can be left alone, sex or no sex, we will seek other remedies. Respect us, and we'll get along just fine. Refuse to, as so many people inside of Second Life do, and rest assured, you will be forced to, one way or another.

So, since respect and common sense clearly are not practiced by far too many people in Second Life, discussions such as this one about the need for privacy, whether it is real or "merely" a perceived need, are unfortunately necessary.

For real privacy in sl (using tools we already have, with some small modifications) see my sig.

At no point did I say privacy issues were non-existant. If you had bothered to read the OP and most of the thread (including my post), you'd have seen that majority of the discussion is on camera behaviour because the OP doesn't want to be seen at all on his land. That is far, far different from someone actually teleporting into your home to solicit. You know, you CAN ban individuals from your plot, although "many people don't like ban lines" is not the same as "there are no tools to help enforce privacy on my plot if I wish to do so."

As well, the whole analogy about IMs makes no sense at all. Again, we're talking specifically about camera functionality because people don't want to be seen. If someone otherwise has no problem being seen out in public in SL (I hope), what possible thing could that person be doing in their own home where someone else viewing them is an outrageous offense? If you've seriously got nothing to hide and you simply hate the fact that people are able to put their cameras on your property, you've got quite a bit more than just privacy issues.

"Privacy" is a relative term, and SL's features are more than capable of handling as many definitions of it as possible. Yes, it would be nice if LL could find practical solutions to all privacy issues, but the line between what's nice and what's practical has to be drawn somewhere. If you can come up with some legitimate reason why people being able to look at you is a greivous offense, then by all means tell me I'm wrong (I think we could be more specfic than "I should just have absolute right to privacy whether or not I actually need it"

Certainly if someone is harassing you, then it's a problem. But for the most part, how would you even know you're being watched? If LL could design an easy and practical way to limit cameras, then I'm not going to complain, but this is obviously something far more arduous, which begs the question: "Why?"

That's because the stance "if it's about visuals then it must be about pixel pr0n" is absurd, and this analogy highlights it. If it doesn't make sense to you then it's simply because your original point is just as senseless, and you don't even realize it.

Visuals ("being seen" aren't necessarily about sexual material, just like text ("being heard" isn't always about sexual material. People have very different takes on where their sphere of privacy begins. Lack of empathy to realize it and only simplifying it to pixel slapping is your mental shortcoming, not theirs.

Fox Absolute,

I have no sex bed. I have no xcite, I have no sensations, and no detatchable toy parts for my anatomy. The kinkiest shit I got is a bed where I can lie "spoon". Sorry, that I don't fit your mold. If you think that means I'm any less a target of intrusions, harrassment and abuse - you are dumber than you appear.

And you know you are being watched, when you see the 10x10 prims outside - with a screenshot as texture - from within your house, centered on yoru naked avatar.

Now, with all due respect, swallow that attitude of yours - and blow it out your ass.

Respectfully,
Ariya Draken

*****************************************


On a second note, yall can leave this thread alone now. It's blatantly obvious after some discussion that there are better solutions - and more hack proof. Let's guide our attention towards those, shall we?

AD

This once again fails to explain what it really IS about if it's not about the "pixel pr0n".



I totally didn't realize that having pictures taken of you naked and blown up outside your house isn't sexual harassment.

Fox you are being unreasonable; just as people may not wish to have their "pixel slapping" observed by others, so might they not wish private conversations to be overheard, or their building to be watched.

I like inviting friends over to my skybox to hang out and talk, or to build things in privacy. I don't want people floating around outside asking me what I'm building, or butting in to conversations I'm having with my friends in my own home, that is every bit harassment and I want privacy features for these things too. My custom coded security scanner in my home defines my skybox, and also reports to me if anyone is within 20m (listening distance) of it, so that I know when someone is in range to eavesdrop on my conversations with friends, as I consider that to be unacceptable.

Nudity is not necessarily about sex. Most fems would change at least once a day and most would want some privacy while doing so.

/me goes away smelling state of my 10 week worn pants.

So let me get his right..you are upset about people seeing your naked VIRTUAL body, as in a game?

Uh...ok...

If you think everyone who would object to this idea is a perv, then you're a bigot.

Or is it the Pervs that want the privacy? LOL ,this is a funny thread
-LW

...But in those cases, folks in such ahem glass houses as simulated onscreen sex on the Internet wouldn't want to throw the "pervert" stone at anyone else now right? That couldn't be the kind of "intimate moment" alluded to at the beginning of the thread? *blink*

With all sympathy to folks' personal situations or emotional issues, if what's needed is counseling or therapy, that is something a feature enhancement can't provide unfortunately. And the best defense against something as trivial as a paparazzi moment is not let it get to you. Folks can't be guaranteed that kind of "privacy" in RL, let alone an imaginary world like SL with far fewer physical limitations to one's incarnate entity.

Its just like Iraq with some folks wanting to limit freedoms to battle terrorists. Except these terrorists cant kill you, they can just annoy you really really bad. With pictures. Cameras are such deadly weapons. >_<

Confront the terrorists.. I agree with that.. they can start with requiring ID validation again.. just leave the freedoms alone, thanks.

That would be because am not trying to explain what *specifically* "it is about". As this would be, like mentioned earlier, pointless -- you are now asking for what's equivalent of "But why do you dislike green, _i_ find nothing wrong with it".

It's a matter of personal preference, upbringing or whatever. It can and does vary from one person to another, so there's no single good explanation for it. (beyond generic explanation i've already provided you with) And finally, it's not something that you must have specifically explained in order to respect another person's right to hold different view on the issue. Or do you go and demand people of say, different sexual orientation to also "explain what it really IS about" because your own preferences are different and you don't understand what makes them like something else? o.O

Actually, since unlike in RL all the information you receive about state of virtual world comes from 'authority' that is the data server, it's something that can be done much easier in virtual world than in reality. In RL there's nothing able to decide "so and so was not granted permission to see content of plot X, therefore they won't get to see it, literally". In SL it's quite to the contrary.

Something you realize rather quick as soon as you try to access internet site that blocks you the access to information it contains.

I didn't vote because the choices were idiotic. If you already have your opinion cast in stone, why bother posting a poll? Hopefully next time you'll think it through a little more carefully. And always provide a "none of the above", because you rarely exhaust the possibilities. (Goedel's incompleteness theorem proves that you can't exhaust them! -- but the "other" category doesn't help there. Ok sorry, nerd note done back to the post.)

I vote for Haravikk Mistral's boundary box.

Cheers
Jeff

And right, Joannah, in theory SL could be more protective than RL. In practice, it's a matter of LL policies. As long as there are enough SLers who don't care about privacy, LL can safely assert the laissez faire principle.

well, you don´t think that´s taking your computergenerated avatar "feelings"alittle tooo serius? I meen after all - if one avatar is peeping on another avatar its not like someone is looking at you in RL!
My avatar is very good looking and I have men around me all the time. In the beginning I was irritated by the complet lack of politeness preformed by some men in here, but now I got used to that and don´t really care anymore. I meen.., it´s not actualy me, its just a cyperspace figure, so ... - no big deal! To me anyway!