llTeleportAgent

On an additional note about llMapDestination in the thread Keiki cited, James Linden wrote:



Source

This is good to hear, Torley.

Sounds like an honest mistake, but it underlines an ongoing misperception in the LL developer community. I don't have a lot to go on, but every now and then we see indications from Lindens that there is a wish or an understanding that high altitude building is some kind of aberration, that it's not desirable, and that it will go away when other aspects of SL such as frame rates and draw distances are improved.

This is simply not the case.

It's true that people build at altitude for better performance. Frame rates and draw distances are much better and particles work much more reliably. btw, the 1.9 release seemed to improve particle performance quite a bit.

But people also build at altitude for privacy and for building freedom.

If you want to build a TARDIS, the only way to do it is to put the inside of the thing in the air. Ditto for caves in most cases. Building in the air removes terraforming restrictions without clashing with the surrounding area. It allows you to focus on the inside of the build without concern for the outside and how it will blend with the terrain.

In the sky you can build space stations and create alien landscapes. The physical terrain in SL is wonderful, but it's also limiting and the sky is where all things are possible.

The list goes on and on. I'm barely touching on the applications here. And when we finally get llTeleportAgent(), the amount of sky building will increase.

So, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to discuss this some more within Linden Lab. It doesn't seem like the development team is on the same page with the building community.

Yah, I think there needs to be something better than "skyboxes" for llTeleportAgent() destinations. Basements... private underground spaces accessible only by an llTeleportAgent() script owned by the landowner... are my idea of how that should go forward...

Soooo many things that can be done with llTeleportAgent. In fact, I suggested this feature back in 04-2005 (a full year ago): /invalid_link.html

At the time, I was working on a Stargate network, including full correlative update program, automatic network building, real dialing system... but the thing that stopped me was the simple lack of long-range scripted teleporting. So at the time, I started working on various autonavigation systems... which were further complicated by a combination of LSL limitations and the sparse nature of the grid (swiss cheese comes to mind).

Just please, remove some of the limitations that hamper llMapDestination. I'm going to need llTeleportAgent to work from a collision event. If possible, the broken behavior of teleporting while in a vehicle should be fixed too (the vehicle gets left behind...).

So HECK YES.

Ok, I know, I read through the forum all the time, but I've never posted here before. I just dont understand how this feature could have been left out of this next version, 1.9.1. I know of so many who are waiting for it, myself included. Dont get me wrong, flexible prims are great, especially for my tail, and Argent made some really good looking tentacles, but I for one would have much prefered llTeleportAgent to have been given another look.

I want llTeleportAgent as well.

llTeleportAgent() would be right up there with being able to poll if physics were enabled without causing a 0.2 sec delay. (llGetStatus() does that, half way there...)

llTeleportAgent is a good idea.

As a newbie I was amazed that this function is not available. Come on Linden this should have been there from day 1.

It should have been released same time OR BEFORE p2p teleporting was enabled via the map. There is more justification for it to be a script-only feature than for scripts being the only means NOT capable of the action.

Adding my llVote to llTeleportAgent.

Lewis

Has anyone got a vote out for "let's implement llTeleportAgent in 1.10", or anything like that?

I didn't see one but I haven't done much searching...

Does Adam Curry (Adam Neumann in SL) know more than the rest of us ?

In one of his recent podcasts he mentioned that the ability to teleport to any destination would soon be available.

I know he is a man of some influence - he is on our side. Hooray !

I will confirm firsthand llTeleportAgent is in the development queue. It hasn't been lost, hasn't been forgotten--and thanx to everyone who voiced support. One of the best things I've ever seen here.

Once some major ongoing projects (e.g. new Groups system) are out of the way--and hopefully released!--llTeleportAgent is going to be worked on. No specific date for now, but any new info that comes up, I will certainly post.

Thank you Torley - we will not let you forget

Thanks as always Torley!

I know you know this and certainly everyone writing in this thread does, but for the record I just have to say one more time that this is astounding.

If you look at the history of this issue and how much LL seemed to want to get rid of the Sit Teleport hack and how much the community fought back against having that removed. It defies the imagination that llTeleportAgent didn't immediately follow P2P.

Thank you - it'd be good to see a better way of handling teleports via scripts

No news is bad news

Has anyone noticed that llteleportagent() has been promised since 1.8?? ... Call me ungrateful if you want, but my perception is that LL seems to implement eyecandy stuff rather than the things that active residents want... I'm sitting here on my one day off from RL work, prime SL building/scripting time, with a grid that's down, for whatever reason this time, and I'm relegated to posting in 'drama-central', better known as the forums... Oh well, rant off....

Tas

I've been waiting and waiting for this. It sure would be nice if promises were kept instead of more bug ridden glitz being added to the client.

Know its been promised for awhile and will prolly be another while before its actually even worked on. Ya know, will all the new 'Features' gah...have to fix those first, bad bad mojo. In any case, I want this too...so add my name to the petition so to speak.

GIMME llTeleportAgent!!!!

I want llTeleportAgent. ^_^ But please no permission dialogues if its to a destination within the same parcel by an object that is owned by the parcel owner.

Reguarding llTeleportAgent() and landing points here are my thoughts.
Please tell me what you think.

IF NO LANDING POINT SET:

* Any llTeleportAgent() call made from an object anywhere in world can arrive at any coordinates on a parcel that has no landing point set.

IF A LANDING POINT IS SET:

* Any llTeleportAgent() call made by an object outside the parcel that is *not* owned by the parcel owner will be restrited to only arriving at the parcel's landing point.

* Any llTeleportAgent() call made by an object on the same parcel *not* owned by the parcel owner can arrive at any coordinates on that same parcel reguardless of landing point.

* Any llTeleportAgent() call made by an object anywhere in world *owned* by the parcel owner can arrive at any coordinates on a parcel reguardless of landing point.

To much of a hassel to implement exceptions. If there is a landing point they should teleport TO the landing point. If there is NO landing point they should be teleported to the destination given.

Yes. For instance, the time spent breaking the function of the enter key could have been more properly used to work on llTeleportAgent.