Automated Burglary

I don't need to be educated as to where you think the responsibility belongs.

I believe the responsiblility for the whole thing is squarely in ESC's lap. It's also their responsibility to fix it.

I think they should make this opt-in, then it would be a wonderful thing for everyone.

coco

Libel also applies if you have no reasonable cause to believe the statement is true. Proof of malice is not required. If they sustain damages, you are liable for them if they decide to pursue it.

Suzanne probably can confirm this, assuming it is her branch of law practice.

You evidently don't understand the meaning of "responsibility". No insult intended, most people don't.

It is your responsibility to protect your interests. If you think anyone else will, you're sadly mistaken or else very lucky. Talarus makes this point and he's dead right, even though we disagree vehemently on the ethics of the "buyer" here.

ESC has exacerbated an existing problem, and bears some responsibility. If they shun that responsibility, well, we'll find out what kind of outfit they are and we should act accordingly.

ESC may not be reading this thread, but if they are, I suggest they stop listing sales at or below $10 until we can come to a better solution. Either that or 'opt-in' only for commercial property, if that's feasible.

I do understand why they need to start with a system that scans by default. Anyone who doesn't see the benefit there simply isn't looking at it from ESC's point of view. And you won't get far negotiating a solution with a party if you're unwilling to look at things from their point of view.

Yes, they were. When the owner set them out and ticked the FOR SALE check box, they were specifically and intentionally set FOR SALE. It is a technically-enforced open purchase contract, available for anyone to complete, as that was its purpose in its design AND implementation. Using it for any other purpose does not change that fact.

In a way, it is expecting everyone to accept a de facto standard as a canonical one, and that is a notion I will reject out-of-hand in many cases. No, I don't do a lot of building, so I am not in the "clique" which knows and accepts this practice amongst its members. I am betting that there are a lot of people out there who aren't, either, and they have no more reason to know and/or respect it than anyone else. I realize that it CAN be used for such, but I sure as hell wouldn't use it that way from its obvious risks without some serious attempts to mitigate them beforehand.



As a potential buyer, I can't simply look at an object and discern intent and purpose for the act, and neither can you or anyone else. You ASSUME, sure. So do I. In any given situation, one of our assumptions is right, and the other one is probably wrong. Absent any other info, I can see someone feeling quite justified in getting a "good deal".

Uhh, I have been around longer than you have, and yes, I have seen all nature of weirdness, including permissions bugs, disappearing servers, you name it.

However, that's not what I am referring to. I am talking about where someone is misusing the system by setting something FOR SALE as a workaround for another problem. It was INTENTIONALLY set FOR SALE by the owner, and thus, is FOR SALE.

For those situations where it was caused by a bug, it is LL's responsibility, and they *should* replace it. The buyer still is not necessarily a "thief", nor the most responsible party.

I know everyone's gonna be angry about this but the SL bunch is generally an angry bunch anyway!

I think the ESC is doing a good thing considering how badly search usually works in SL these days and how many stores don't list things in SLbotique or SLexchange.

What this is is people getting used to using a work-around (that honestly makes no sense to me) and getting mad that someone is using the system as it was intended (through unique means). Get over it. Figure out another way.

As far as people "breaking in" to someone's house to buy the item that's more a matter of common sense on the part of the "buyer" in this situation, although one has to consider the fact that there are plenty of stores that are made to look like homes or other facilities where the items for sale would naturally be laid out. There's also the fact that these people may not know that this is a "problem".

If you don't want something bought then don't make it for sale.

There are really actual tools that are illegal to own Talarus

This thread was started with the point I agree with. The point is this device enables theft grid-wide. You argue against it. Not me.

No, you're called an "accomplice".

Even ESC in this situation doesn't even rise to the level of being an accomplice, because there was no legal theft to begin with. The owner set the objects FOR SALE. Someone bought them; they fulfilled the legal and binding sale contract enforced by the system.

Does it suck? Sure it does. Does it make the buyer a cad if he knew better? Probably so. it doesn't change the fact that NO ACTIONABLE THEFT OCCURRED.

Depends on where you live. Not all states/provinces have laws against owning lockpicks. Using them, yes. Owning them, no. One of my roommates used to own a set of SlimJims he bought to help friends who kept locking their keys in their cars. Quite legal to own and use on your own vehicle or, by consent, another's vehicle.



You're right. I argue against that point, because it isn't true to begin with.

Keep in mind: People engage in role playing in secondlife.


Some of them role play thieves.


The day that secondlife possessions count as real-world possessions in the eyes of the law will be the day the IRS starts collecting sales tax in our world.


I don't want that.

Do you?

I'm sorry, but I don't see things as being so black and white as you apparently do. I do agree that no one's mind is being changed here, and the only thing happening is that we are polarizing. I know I feel a lot more sympathy for the buyers than the unintended sellers as a result of the argument. Probably not what you want to hear, but I still in no way condone reprehensible behavior such as REAL theft, which has yet to be demonstrated here.



I hope they are as well, and take into account the more moderate voices and leave the polarizing opinions on the trash heap where they belong.



I share the same sentiment, but I don't except anyone.



Come visit the Isle of Wyrms sometime, and I'll be happy to demonstrate.

Unfortunatley that is an expense I cannot bear. Care to sell me a plot on your Island?



Please, educate me. What is Blizzrad, and what have they done?

Looks to me we are reduced to debating two things: debating responsibility is the important one. Yes, now that we know this danger is out there we are indeed all now responsible for dealing with it, each in our own way. No, you were not responsible when you didn't know your object was marked for sale, or when you applied what have long proved good safeguards and got blindsided by a new hazard you didn't know existed.

Fine. People who are demanding people take responsibility for their actions and their consequences are dead right. All of us Residents need to. ESC does too - and so far has done nothing significant. LL needs to take responsibility for fixing design flaws that have led to some of these problems. OK, let's deal with the problems created.

Remember: We are on our own on this one. LL is overburdened with just dealing with the grid and with surviving in RL, and cannot be counted on for much. Individuals who seek to profit by doing things demonstrably bad for SL and us Residents will show no mercy; to them, we are roadkill. Don't expect help there. There is only us. Let's take responsibility. We need to do this.

(The other thing still being debated is exactly what hard names to call this execrable product, its irresponsible and bungling creator, and the grifters who have abused it. That may be fun for some, but it doesn't matter much what we call them other than, eventually, dealt with.)

Looks to me like time for Residents to take appropriate actions. Numerous ideas have been broached; some seem like very good ones. More are welcome.

Notice to would-be meatpackers: SL Residents are not sheep.

I defend the buyers from being called THIEVES, especially those in situations where they COULDN'T know better. It's unfair and wrong to call them something they aren't. Buying a FOR SALE object is legitimate and legal, as enforced by the system. Do you dispute this? If so, then we have nothing else to say to one another, because I don't see it any other way. THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS ETHICAL OR MORAL. Those are COMPLETELY SEPARATE issues to my point. Ethics and morality does not affect the SYSTEM as it was designed and implemented. It is only ILLEGAL in TOS terms if you circumvented the system.

After all, where does this end? Let's say someone has a store set up, things in it are obviously for sale, and it is a commercial store where things of the same nature are being sold. Someone comes in and buys an object. The store owner claims "thief! I set that out to sell it to Joe Blow! You weren't supposed to buy that!". Are we going to extend this to situations as absurd as this? No? OK, so WHERE do we draw the line, then? Where CAN we draw the line where it is FAIR to BOTH the BUYER AND THE SELLER? You automatically are labeling people as thieves, when they may not have known better. *I* simply refuse to do that, yet you call me an "apologist for thieves". I'm sorry if my defense of people without prejudice leads you to think so low of me, but that's just the way I see things. I want people to take responsibility for their actions, right or wrong, good or bad. I want them to accept that they take bad risks that get them burned, and want them to learn from them as opposed to slamming everyone else in the world with blame and fault, without taking even a first glance in the mirror first.

Wisely, LL drew the line at the point where you put the object up FOR SALE. If you didn't want to sell it, then you wouldn't put it up FOR SALE, right? Makes perfect sense to me. That's where I think it should stay, regardless of it being abused as a shortcut.



You both need to go back and read my posts, too, where I said SPECIFICALLY public access or allowing someone into your home. However, in SL, we have a much more concrete situation. There's a FOR SALE setting on objects. The judge would say "Well, if you didn't want to sell it, WHY did you set it FOR SALE? Case dismissed!". Since LL is judge and jury, that's what happens, thus, the response is correct.

Well thats SL for ya.

How many times am I going to have to repeat myself and say that if you are on the Mainland, access controls will not keep you from being searched or listed, and will not keep anyone from moving their camera onto your land and buying what is for sale?

How much of the hot air in this debate is due to ignorance of how things really work?

If I can camera over to your prim set for sale, I can buy it.

In the same way a bot or any other avatar can make a note of it.

Access controls make NO difference. They are not an opt out, they don't prevent anything.

The only way we were given to opt out was to go in person, in world, and opt out.

Again, I'd approve of the Sheep search if being listed in it was voluntary. It would in fact be very nice to have a Search of all items that really ARE for sale in SL.

It wasn't voluntary, and I don't believe in making newbies and builders into inadvertent losers. Many of whom still don't know about this. If they knew, it wouldn't matter.

--Brenda Archer

And that is where you keep arguing in circles. It has already been established that this device enabled theft from the OP. You just refuse to accept it.

I also don't need an explanation of the word "responsibility."

I do protect my interests. And no, I don't need a lecture about how I should protect my interests.

And yes, I do see the benefit to their having a system that opts others in by default. I have no problem whatsoever understanding their point of view. I've spoken to that several times.

The benefit, though is largely to them, and very little to us.

I have no motivation to put ESC's interests above my own, or those of other residents. Should I?

If they made this opt-in, it would be truly a service to us. I was thrilled to have a free search engine, but didn't like that it was forced upon us, without even telling us about it. Once I heard what all was happening (in addition to the incident involving my item), I became more alarmed about it.

People have suffered losses, and we have heard nothing from ESC about it. Zero.

That doing something one way (opt-out) may be an easier and quicker way for them to do it, basically not requiring them to lift a finger publicizing it, for example - doesn't make it okay to invade people's privacy, list their items on a public page (along with TP's directly to them inviting others to invade their privacy), not tell anybody about it, and cause people financial and time losses. The balance just is wrong.

It's pathetic, really, because we can all agree (I think) that a free search engine would be a good thing. But even a good thing becomes distasteful if people don't want to be in it, or are harmed by being in it without their permission.

If they made it opt-in, there would be no problem (aside from the occasional bug), and everyone would be happy.

Pretty much a no-brainer, if you ask me!

coco

No, it has been alleged that the "device" enabled theft from the OP. You just refuse to accept that.

From first Post:



OK, we have established (once again) people told him that they got it from this ESC bot site. He was made aware of this bot by the thieves that stole his items. So now, once again, it has been established that because of this device the OP was robbed.

It's been established that a few people are assholes, when they were informed that the sales were in error, and asked to return the items. That they didn't, or wanted money for them in return, does not establish them as thieves. It establishes them as assholes.

All in all, someone was affected negatively by this. Probably not intentionally,perhaps due to a mistake on their part. Perhaps more than one person was affected but is hesitant to admit it here for fear of ridicule. It launched a fusillade of accusations, vitriol, personal attacks, unfounded allegations, ouright lies, and hysteria.(And that was just in my posts). But this "Thing" has uncovered some flaws in both it's working and perhaps in the working of SL itself. What is distressing is the lack of compassion on some peopls part, not agreeing necessarily they were wronged, but of even a general "I feel your pain". Also distressing is the view that "nothing " is wrong (equally is the Boogeyman on every corner view). As in most things the truth lies in the middle, sad that many of us sometimes don't want to meet halfway, myself included.

One positive: This thread has shown that there are some great Orators, Ranconteurs and good ole Bullshitters here. Why not give us a forum here where we can let ourselves get on oursoapboxes and let loose. Make it Opt in, you have to subcribe..or be invited or something like that, as I have experienced on other forums. This way the squeamish can stay away if they prefer. I would even consider helping to moderate if it came to be. (/me imagines eating those words)

Pardon me while I raise my voice:

IT IS NOT THEFT.

It is, at worst, "opportunism "

There IS a difference.

So said General Custer to the Indians.......... We all know how he fared that day.

KK then the ESC bot assisted them being bigger those