Automated Burglary
|
Ceera Murakami
Texture Artist / Builder
Join date: 9 Sep 2005
Posts: 7,750
|
04-18-2007 07:49
A question for those defending the content thieves in this instance. And yes, they are thieves, if they TP somewhere and immediately take a no-copy item at what is obviously far below a fair-market price, from a location that clearly is not a retail location.
How would you propose resolving the problem of safely transferring in-place content to a specific user?
Sim owner and a sim manager (or contracted Builder) are each placing no-copy content in the sim. At the end of the process, all of the content needs to belong to the sim owner.
It is not necessary to set the "for sale" property on the items for the sim owner to give half the content to the sim manager. That can be done, as was in this case, by dragging the items from inventory to the manager's avatar or the appropriate spot on their profile. No risk there.
But once the items are placed? How does the sim owner regain posession of the items? The only available mechanism is to sell those items back to the sim owner. And that is usually done by going around the sim together and setting items for sale at L$0 or L$1 each. And usually when no one else is in the sim.
Now, with bots that can instantly spot, TP in, and harvest low-cost prims like this, what are we to do? Pass tens of thousands of L$ back and forth to cover each transfer at or above full value? That's insane.
This is going to really hurt any Builders who do landscaping or who place builds in-world as part of their services. It essentially makes it impossible to safely hire anyone to place and position in-world no-copy content. The owner of the content would have to drop everything themselves, and allow someone with mod-rights to fine-tune the positions. At that point, they may as well not bother with hired help, as they still need to do most of the work themselves.
_____________________
Sorry, LL won't let me tell you where I sell my textures and where I offer my services as a sim builder. Ask me in-world.
|
Marie Gateaux
Registered User
Join date: 26 May 2006
Posts: 19
|
04-18-2007 07:52
From: Tyci Kenzo when YOU set something for sale to $0L thats not a trick...you set it for sale its set to 0 i am sorry if someone comes by and buys it but you should not set things for 0 unless you mean it....i do it to hand over things on our land to my partner but i make sure he is standing right there to buy them immediately
to me it is just common sense
and the website that is showing things for sale is behind at least a week so there is no way anyone used it to know those things were put up for 0 unless it was done a week or so ago
i saw things onthere that were not meant for sale because we set them out and they kept the default for sale so i fixed it but it is still showing themfor sale so i know their site is behind
it is sad that these things happen but it just takes being patient and some common sense when doing things Actually there is an issue tha maybe LL could address. I have to check the for sale box before I can type in a price. Theoretically your item is set to sale for 0L (10L?)for the short time it takes to change the price. I could see someones item being swooped during that time frame and it in no way being the fault of the seller. Simple fix on LLs part...let us type in a price BEFORE we check the sale box (I believe it used to be that way).
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-18-2007 07:53
From: Ceera Murakami A question for those defending the content thieves in this instance. And yes, they are thieves, if they TP somewhere and immediately take a no-copy item at what is obviously far below a fair-market price, from a location that clearly is not a retail location.
How would you propose resolving the problem of safely transferring in-place content to a specific user?
Sim owner and a sim manager (or contracted Builder) are each placing no-copy content in the sim. At the end of the process, all of the content needs to belong to the sim owner.
It is not necessary to set the "for sale" property on the items for the sim owner to give half the content to the sim manager. That can be done, as was in this case, by dragging the items from inventory to the manager's avatar or the appropriate spot on their profile. No risk there.
But once the items are placed? How does the sim owner regain posession of the items? The only available mechanism is to sell those items back to the sim owner. And that is usually done by going around the sim together and setting items for sale at L$0 or L$1 each. And usually when no one else is in the sim.
Now, with bots that can instantly spot, TP in, and harvest low-cost prims like this, what are we to do? Pass tens of thousands of L$ back and forth to cover each transfer at or above full value? That's insane.
This is going to really hurt any Builders who do landscaping or who place builds in-world as part of their services. It essentially makes it impossible to safely hire anyone to place and position in-world no-copy content. The owner of the content would have to drop everything themselves, and allow someone with mod-rights to fine-tune the positions. At that point, they may as well not bother with hired help, as they still need to do most of the work themselves. This is true - IRL You can sell your brother a car for 100$ without fear of someone rushing along giving you $100 first and driving off. Not everywhere in SL is a retail loation. Usually is something really for sale it has accompanying display signs, etc.
|
Brenda Connolly
Un United Avatar
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 25,000
|
04-18-2007 07:58
But how many people don't even know about this site? And we shouldn't have to opt out of something we never signed up for in the first place.And I shouldn't have to mark items in my home "Not for sale". This may not be illegal per the rules, but it's shady at best.
_____________________
Don't you ever try to look behind my eyes. You don't want to know what they have seen.
http://brenda-connolly.blogspot.com
|
Zaphod Kotobide
zOMGWTFPME!
Join date: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 2,087
|
04-18-2007 08:01
To be clear, this is not an issue of a "bot" being able to instantly drop in the moment you set the object for sale at $L0, and snatch it up. The "bot" in this case is the search crawler, who spends around 5 or 6 minutes per sim, crawling and indexing items for sale. These items then get listed on the search engine, which live humans search for things to purchase. There is substantial latency involved in most cases between setting the object for sale, and having it listed on the website. (Grid Shepherd can't be everywhere at once) The issue as I see it is that people were not well informed of this new service being offered by ESC, and conducted their affairs the way the always have, in most cases the only way it could be done, with no expectation that someone would pop into a private residence and buy the stuff right under their noses. Yes, it's one thing, as previous posters have said, to use a little common sense. I expect that in the future, these people will be alot more cautious about transferring items in this way, because now they know. The point is, they didn't know before, because ESC has been a little too much on the down low in how they chose to roll this project. I suspect there are many folks out there who still have no idea this search engine even exists. Since it is causing these problems, ESC have a responsibility to get out in the public spotlight and talk about it, and work a little closer with the community on adjusting its finer points, as well as educating the community about how to participate, or how to decline to participate.From: Ceera Murakami A question for those defending the content thieves in this instance. And yes, they are thieves, if they TP somewhere and immediately take a no-copy item at what is obviously far below a fair-market price, from a location that clearly is not a retail location. How would you propose resolving the problem of safely transferring in-place content to a specific user? Sim owner and a sim manager (or contracted Builder) are each placing no-copy content in the sim. At the end of the process, all of the content needs to belong to the sim owner. It is not necessary to set the "for sale" property on the items for the sim owner to give half the content to the sim manager. That can be done, as was in this case, by dragging the items from inventory to the manager's avatar or the appropriate spot on their profile. No risk there. But once the items are placed? How does the sim owner regain posession of the items? The only available mechanism is to sell those items back to the sim owner. And that is usually done by going around the sim together and setting items for sale at L$0 or L$1 each. And usually when no one else is in the sim. Now, with bots that can instantly spot, TP in, and harvest low-cost prims like this, what are we to do? Pass tens of thousands of L$ back and forth to cover each transfer at or above full value? That's insane. This is going to really hurt any Builders who do landscaping or who place builds in-world as part of their services. It essentially makes it impossible to safely hire anyone to place and position in-world no-copy content. The owner of the content would have to drop everything themselves, and allow someone with mod-rights to fine-tune the positions. At that point, they may as well not bother with hired help, as they still need to do most of the work themselves.
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-18-2007 08:02
From: Brenda Connolly But how many people don't even know about this site? And we shouldn't have to opt out of something we never signed up for in the first place.And I shouldn't have to mark items in my home "Not for sale". This may not be illegal per the rules, but it's shady at best. I agree - its really shady. Anything thats not owned by Linden Labs reguarding my SL persona should be automatically OPT IN, not OPT OUT. No one should be including my land or items or my reputation or anything in their third party site without my consent. People can reveiw my products those are commercially availble, but the rest of my SL-Life is my business.
|
Arksun Tone
Ark Designs, Sonyo
Join date: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 91
|
04-18-2007 08:03
In this particular instance though, the rl equivalent would be leaving your car on the driveway, with the keys in the ignition, so anyone could just take it. So don't act too surprised when someone does.
Again, like the land bot thread, this is basic common sense. I am dead against bots (and this particular bot based search system), but please, this is 18+ adult second life, lets not nappy wrap sl and turn it into Second Nursey School.
I had no idea this search system exists, but would never in a million years leave an item of mine for sale for $0 on my land (or anyone elses) just sitting there with the potential of some stray passer by to recognise a bargain. Not unless the intended buyer was right there next to me (and even then I'd prefer an inventory transfer).
Remember this is a world where thousands of people can teleport instantly anywhere, and view multiple sims away with draw distance.
If there could be an addition to make items for sale to specific person like land sales that'd be cool though.
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-18-2007 08:05
From: Zaphod Kotobide To be clear, this is not an issue of a "bot" being able to instantly drop in the moment you set the object for sale at $L0, and snatch it up. The "bot" in this case is the search crawler, who spends around 5 or 6 minutes per sim, crawling and indexing items for sale. These items then get listed on the search engine, which live humans search for things to purchase. There is substantial latency involved in most cases between setting the object for sale, and having it listed on the website. (Grid Shepherd can't be everywhere at once)
The issue as I see it is that people were not well informed of this new service being offered by ESC, and conducted their affairs the way the always have, in most cases the only way it could be done, with no expectation that someone would pop into a private residence and buy the stuff right under their noses.
Yes, it's one thing, as previous posters have said, to use a little common sense. I expect that in the future, these people will be alot more cautious about transferring items in this way, because now they know. The point is, they didn't know before, because ESC has been a little too much on the down low in how they chose to roll this project. I suspect there are many folks out there who still have no idea this search engine even exists. Since it is causing these problems, ESC have a responsibility to get out in the public spotlight and talk about it, and work a little closer with the community on adjusting its finer points, as well as educating the community about how to participate, or how to decline to participate. Aware or not , people shouldnt have to live their lives like there are spy satalites appraising everything they have for sale on their property. If they want that, thats something they should have to choose for themselves.
|
Marie Gateaux
Registered User
Join date: 26 May 2006
Posts: 19
|
04-18-2007 08:05
From: Ceera Murakami A question for those defending the content thieves in this instance. And yes, they are thieves, if they TP somewhere and immediately take a no-copy item at what is obviously far below a fair-market price, from a location that clearly is not a retail location.
How would you propose resolving the problem of safely transferring in-place content to a specific user?
Sim owner and a sim manager (or contracted Builder) are each placing no-copy content in the sim. At the end of the process, all of the content needs to belong to the sim owner.
It is not necessary to set the "for sale" property on the items for the sim owner to give half the content to the sim manager. That can be done, as was in this case, by dragging the items from inventory to the manager's avatar or the appropriate spot on their profile. No risk there.
But once the items are placed? How does the sim owner regain posession of the items? The only available mechanism is to sell those items back to the sim owner. And that is usually done by going around the sim together and setting items for sale at L$0 or L$1 each. And usually when no one else is in the sim.
Now, with bots that can instantly spot, TP in, and harvest low-cost prims like this, what are we to do? Pass tens of thousands of L$ back and forth to cover each transfer at or above full value? That's insane.
This is going to really hurt any Builders who do landscaping or who place builds in-world as part of their services. It essentially makes it impossible to safely hire anyone to place and position in-world no-copy content. The owner of the content would have to drop everything themselves, and allow someone with mod-rights to fine-tune the positions. At that point, they may as well not bother with hired help, as they still need to do most of the work themselves. Or force these marvelous builders to only work on private islands which can be litterally shut off from public view for as long as it takes. Not a good situation by any means. It cuts into the builders potential client list and it really deprives mainland owners from the services of some fantastic people.
|
Sys Slade
Registered User
Join date: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 626
|
04-18-2007 08:05
From: Ceera Murakami How would you propose resolving the problem of safely transferring in-place content to a specific user? Fairly simple solution for LL to implement. See the button next to group name on an object for changing the group? Apply exactly the same thing to owner. Setting an item for sale at 0 L$ is not designed for the transfer of items. Using it, you take the risks. Calling people who buy that item theives will not make the problem go away, so either allow group edit on items or lobby LL for a real alternative. If all builders who were likely to need to transfer in place had their own group, this problem would not exist. They give the object to the owner, who activates that group tag, places it and allows "share with group". Builder positions the object, then the owner can untick share with group and leave the group. 100L$ one off fee to avoid all the risks.
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-18-2007 08:05
From: Arksun Tone In this particular instance though, the rl equivalent would be leaving your car on the driveway, with the keys in the ignition, so anyone could just take it. So don't act too surprised when someone does.
Taking a car with the keys in the ignition is still theft.
|
Arksun Tone
Ark Designs, Sonyo
Join date: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 91
|
04-18-2007 08:08
From: Colette Meiji Taking a car with the keys in the ignition is still theft. Yes it is, but would you still do it?. If you left your cell phone on a bench in a busy street, and it inevitably got stolen, would you blame the city's councel for not doing enough to allow us to leave our items unattended safely?. No of course not, that IS basic common sense. This is second life, where there's teleporting, and scripts. It's the virtual world we live in 
|
Raudf Fox
(ra-ow-th)
Join date: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 5,119
|
04-18-2007 08:11
From: Colette Meiji Taking a car with the keys in the ignition is still theft. Yes, but the insurance company probably won't pay out on it if that's the case. Never had a car stolen though, even though I left the keys in the ignition AND the doors unlocked. I guess the beat-up old jalopy will always take ninth place to a nice newer BMW. Okay, that was soo off topic. Besides, what more really can be said about this? It's a problem, LL knows about it and won't do a thing about it. Well, they could, but adding more blue nag screens might hinder legit commerce.
_____________________
DiamonX Studios, the place of the Victorian Times series of gowns and dresses - Located at http://slurl.com/secondlife/Fushida/224/176
Want more attachment points for your avatar's wearing pleasure? Then please vote for
https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-1065?
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-18-2007 08:15
From: Raudf Fox Yes, but the insurance company probably won't pay out on it if that's the case.
Never had a car stolen though, even though I left the keys in the ignition AND the doors unlocked. I guess the beat-up old jalopy will always take ninth place to a nice newer BMW.
Okay, that was soo off topic. Besides, what more really can be said about this? It's a problem, LL knows about it and won't do a thing about it. Well, they could, but adding more blue nag screens might hinder legit commerce. the thing is this bot is Opt - Out if it was Opt - In, it wouldnt work since there wouldnt be enough scanend items to matter. Its a horrible demonstartion of how little privacy you have in Second Life.
|
Brenda Connolly
Un United Avatar
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 25,000
|
04-18-2007 08:25
From: Colette Meiji Aware or not , people shouldnt have to live their lives like there are spy satalites appraising everything they have for sale on their property.
If they want that, thats something they should have to choose for themselves. It seems evrything is shifting the responsibility to us, who haven't asked to be included in thie so called "service". And if I left my phone on a public bench shame on me. But if I leave my phone on my picnic table in my backyard, I expect it to be there when I return. This is just another profiteering scam. The creators of this one were probably the descenadants of the same people whole bought whole States from the Indians for a case of Whiskey and some Blankets (Smallpox included at no extra charge).
_____________________
Don't you ever try to look behind my eyes. You don't want to know what they have seen.
http://brenda-connolly.blogspot.com
|
Ceera Murakami
Texture Artist / Builder
Join date: 9 Sep 2005
Posts: 7,750
|
04-18-2007 08:34
From: Sys Slade Fairly simple solution for LL to implement. See the button next to group name on an object for changing the group? Apply exactly the same thing to owner.
Setting an item for sale at 0 L$ is not designed for the transfer of items. Using it, you take the risks. Calling people who buy that item theives will not make the problem go away, so either allow group edit on items or lobby LL for a real alternative. I agree that LL desperately needs to improve the mechanism for transferring in-world content form one owner to another. Your idea of a "Change Owner" button in item properties, similar to the "change group" function has merit. Another possibility would be a field for "Sell only to...", where you could specify an avatar name. That, I think, would be the best option for single-item transfers. They also desperately need a way to do that with thousands of items at a time. I once spent an entire real day slowly traversing an island sim from one edge to the other with the sim owner, transferring ownership of every last shrub, flower, tree, building and piece of furniture in the sim. It was not fun. And none of the currently available tools, including "sell land and objects on land", worked to get every last thing transferred. But at this time, selling is the only way to transfer ownership of in-world content. And we should not have to pass tens of thousands of L$ back and forth with each item transferred, when the client already owns and paid for the content, and the builder is just placing it for them. If I open the door of my car and start to hand my mate the keys, and some other person snatches the keys from me before they can take them, and drives off with the car, that's still a thief stealing my car. I shouldn't have to give my mate $20,000, and then charge my mate $20,000 to take the keys from me, just to let them drive the car. Anyone who takes advantage of this 'service', manually or with a bot, to take things at far below market value, IS a thief. From: Sys Slade If all builders who were likely to need to transfer in place had their own group, this problem would not exist. They give the object to the owner, who activates that group tag, places it and allows "share with group". Builder positions the object, then the owner can untick share with group and leave the group. 100L$ one off fee to avoid all the risks. This still requires the content owner to manually place each thing roughly where it needs to go. Try doing that with 40 sets of pose balls, or 20 homes worth of furnishings. Then ask why you need to bother paying someone to fine-tune the position of each thing. I made a point of opting out of the ESC search engine as soon as I became aware of it. Especially when it listed a lamp in my bedroom! But how many more bot-driven search engines just like it will there be, that we do NOT know about, and therefore can NOT opt out of?
_____________________
Sorry, LL won't let me tell you where I sell my textures and where I offer my services as a sim builder. Ask me in-world.
|
Sly Spicoli
just playing life...
Join date: 6 Mar 2006
Posts: 93
|
04-18-2007 08:34
Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes. Confucius
|
Arksun Tone
Ark Designs, Sonyo
Join date: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 91
|
04-18-2007 08:38
From: Brenda Connolly It seems evrything is shifting the responsibility to us, who haven't asked to be included in thie so called "service".
And if I left my phone on a public bench shame on me. But if I leave my phone on my picnic table in my backyard, I expect it to be there when I return. This is just another profiteering scam. The creators of this one were probably the descenadants of the same people whole bought whole States from the Indians for a case of Whiskey and some Blankets (Smallpox included at no extra charge). Would you leave that phone in your backyard if we could both teleport and engage objects from vast distances (even through solid walls) in real life? From: someone Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes. Confucius
Beautifully put
|
Tebow McMillan
Registered User
Join date: 3 Apr 2007
Posts: 15
|
04-18-2007 08:40
From: Dnel DaSilva The sim was not private, it was freely accesable from anywehre in SL.
The items were set to sale for $0, so anyone can buy it.
Lesson: Don't set stuff for sale you don't want just anyone to buy. If you want to sell something to another av for ease of transfer (like furniture, so you don't have to place it again) DO IT WHILE YOU ARE BOTH THERE. Leaving objects for sale a L$0 for any length of time is just asking to have them bought by Joe Avatar, no matter wehre you hide them in SL, scanning bots or not. Let me guess... you're a botter, right....
|
Brenda Connolly
Un United Avatar
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 25,000
|
04-18-2007 08:43
From: Arksun Tone Would you leave that phone in your backyard if we could both teleport and engage objects from vast distances (even through solid walls) in real life?
Beautifully put Maybe it's just me but I would not TP into someone's home, uninvited and proceed to buy something form that home, without their knowledge, no matter what it's marked as. I would at the very least send them a message'Hey if that chair is for sale, I'd like to buy it" or something along those lines. Maybe it is naive. I guess I am just an oddball..... 
_____________________
Don't you ever try to look behind my eyes. You don't want to know what they have seen.
http://brenda-connolly.blogspot.com
|
Arksun Tone
Ark Designs, Sonyo
Join date: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 91
|
04-18-2007 08:46
From: Brenda Connolly Maybe it's just me but I would not TP into someone's home, uninvited and proceed to buy something form that home, without their knowledge, no matter what it's marked as. I would at the very least send them a message'Hey if that chair is for sale, I'd like to buy it" or something along those lines. Maybe it is naive. I guess I am just an oddball.....  No you're a good person, as like myself I wouldn't do that. Keep seeming to miss the point though. Just as its stupid to be so naive as to think everyone on real life is a good person that never steals or takes advantage of an opportunity. guess what second life is full of REAL PEOPLE!. A**holes will be a**holes in any world, hence common sense  Just be aware of the world people.
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-18-2007 08:52
From: Arksun Tone No you're a good person, as like myself I wouldn't do that. Keep seeming to miss the point though. Just as its stupid to be so naive as to think everyone on real life is a good person that never steals or takes advantage of an opportunity. guess what second life is full of REAL PEOPLE!. A**holes will be a**holes in any world, hence common sense  Just be aware of the world people. Yeah but at least IRL the a**holes of the world dont have spy satelite photography which precisely lists everything you forgot to lock up on your property.
|
RobbyRacoon Olmstead
Red warrior is hungry!
Join date: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 1,821
|
04-18-2007 08:53
I'm sorry to hear about how this happened, and regardless of whether the items were set to sale or not the people who knowingly searched for and bought up a very expensive item for $0L clearly had the intention of taking advantage of another person's mistake. We can talk about whether that is technically theivery or not all year long, but people that do that are the lowest of scum. They know that someone will be upset/angry/sad, and justify it with a bullshit "It's fine because it's your fault for making a mistake" mentality. I am curious about how long those items were out and set for sale, though, as I doubt they appear in search within seconds like land sales do. .
|
Tebow McMillan
Registered User
Join date: 3 Apr 2007
Posts: 15
|
04-18-2007 09:00
From: Brenda Connolly But how many people don't even know about this site? And we shouldn't have to opt out of something we never signed up for in the first place.And I shouldn't have to mark items in my home "Not for sale". This may not be illegal per the rules, but it's shady at best. Agreed, Brenda. Where do I go to "Opt-Out" of a raping?? In case that "service" ominously lurks out there as well??? Sooo, let me get this straight... IF I leave my front door unlocked (because a family member forgot their key), and I return home to find I've been robbed... I should shrug and "chalk it up to a mistake"? Wow. Why do we even need the police? Especially since apparently, buying a 42" HDTV from the back of a van for $5.00 is JUST A GOOD DEAL...
|
Kitty Barnett
Registered User
Join date: 10 May 2006
Posts: 5,586
|
04-18-2007 09:03
From: Tebow McMillan Where do I go to "Opt-Out" of a raping?? In case that "service" ominously lurks out there as well??? That's tasteless beyond words.
|