Automated Burglary

Hey what happened with that guy who bought a sim for peanuts, because it was set "For Sale" on an accessible, just not publicised auction webpage on secondlife.com

I mean there's no argument there, right? That was a clear cut "it was for sale, I bought it, STFU" deal, right? I mean it's not like there are any lengthy and costly legal precedings. Linden Lab was just told "you had it on sale, just suck it up and deal with it."

Right?

Anyone?

It actually wasn't so clear cut, for sale, I bought it, so STFU.

The plaintiff found and used an exploit in the web based auction system to somehow swap IDs around to insert a sim that wasn't actually up for sale yet into a live auction. A lot closer to actual theft than finding an item set for sale in an offworld search engine, and going in and buying it. In both cases, the "item" was set for sale. In the Bragg case, he exploited the system to manipulate the price in his favor, bypassing the minimum bid, and defrauding Linden Lab.

Apples and Oranges.

it wouldnt be second life though.

Interesting,

What if the person who cant differentiate the difference is the one that wants to track you?

Well since im going get scanned against my wishes anyhow - I think Ill use the searchbot for advertizing.

Seems an easy enough system to get to the top of the listing on.

Easy. Just use an alt for a week. That way I get to be in SL, and the would-be stalker gets to stare at a 3rd party website, hitting refresh, and getting bored out of his mind.

Or I take a break for a couple of days. Nobody is forcing me to be in SL. That way the would-be stalker gets to get bored out of his mind at his computer while I get to read a book, sit on my balcony and build a tan.

The main point: SL is a game. Treating it as such can safe a whole lotta headaches.

Opting out didn't work for you?



That's how I approached the whole searchbot thing. I actually opted in, so my vendors would show up as well. Unfortunately the bot is still very very beta. About a day after opting in, all of my in-world items disappeared from their index.

Why should I have to opt out? - I never asked to be included.

And you miss what I mean by advertizing.

Ill just use "for sale" prims with my advertizing in the text portions.

Hmm someone could create a whole new kind of Ad farm.

This would be one of those freedoms being denied by someone else other than the Lindens situations.

Ah, I see. When you say 'against your wishes' you mean you have no intentions whatsoever of making your wishes known.

You are entitled to objecting to the opt-out system. But refusing to use the opportunity you are given to opt-out if you wish not to be included, is just stubborn and childish IMO.



I can't wait for the first noob to come around who hasn't learned how to check the contents of a prim. How do you think that noob would classify being mislead by the name of an empty prim? A scam maybe? Please, for someone who supposedly is taking the high ground of manners by opposing this searchbot, you are rather quick to abandon good manners yourself. Luring people to your land under false pretences is definitely not good manners, even if you don't trick them into actually buying those prims.

Why? If someone scans and lists my prims without my consent- Im not responsible for what those prims say. The person who listed them without asking is.



A very clearly labeled Avertizement is not false advertizing anything to anyone.

Again I didnt ask to be included in the search.


Example-

"Come to the Tea Party event at 9pm Linden time"

On a prim for sale for 0$L


Are you - the defender of the Search Bot owner's right to scan people's property and list it without asking - Telling me I cant sell Prim for 0L called whatever the heck I want to?

Consider yourself lucky. My first name was all it took for me to get stalked from online to RL a few years back (my uni had the ingenious idea of including the dorm appartment number in everyone's net addie).

It also had nothing to do with revenge, nor was it even someone I really knew. For whatever reason he had decided to become obsessed with me and since I wouldn't talk to him online, stalking and harassing me in RL was the next best thing.

Just because you wouldn't do it, or can't imagine anyone else doing it, doesn't mean some people aren't sick enough to do it anyway. It really doesn't take all that much for anyone to track you down, especially when you're living in a small RL community.

Surprise: I think luring people to your land under the false pretence that there are freebies to be had, is bad manners. As bad manners as using popular keywords that have nothing to do with your business in your ad in search just to boost traffic. Not illegal, no. Not thievery. But certainly less ethical than simply noting which objects in public spaces that are visible to public view are set for sale and telling others about it.

Ahh .. so a clearly labeled Advertizement is somehow misleading. Or simply the fact that something is for sale for 0L is now a freebie, reguardless of what the item is called?

What if someone includes some freebies in the advertizement box? Does that somehow gain "Ethical" value.

I think listing objects no one asked you to on a website is less ethical than someone using that same space to advertize on.

If someone Installed a webcam to look at the outside of my house 24/7 without asking and I put a banner up with an Ad on it - I wouldnt consider that unethical either.

I know a man who's jilted online lover tracked down his grandmother called her up and told her she was pregnant with his baby. (theyd never even met in real life)

I know someone else who's online love decided to make a surprise RL visit. She is married.

Luckily I havent been stalked so far in my time online. But its really scary.

I think for many people though until it happens in their circle of friends or to them , they simply cant process the difficulty of the situation.

Id totally object to a tracker bot - But I dont see anything thats going to prevent it.

Clearly labelled? I do hope you will be honest enough to come back here after the umpteenth angry buyer has complained about expecting the box to contain a picnic tea set.

And by the way, you do know something set for sale at 0$L is free right? Now what do you think the word 'freebie' is meant to describe?



Some, sure. Still too bad for the person who teleported onto your land expecting that tea set and getting a flight feather.



Not the same situation. That banner doesn't invite people over to realise after they have made the trip that the free stuff that was promised is not there.

Ah I see

What If i name the prim "Electric Sheep never asked me if they could list this" ?

Still an unethical promise of a freebie?

Or that would be okay becuase its not advertizing?

The distinction between your unfortunate experience and the fundamental arguments in this thread is that one deals with the notion of privacy inside of Second Life, and the other with privacy of real-world personal information. The latter, Linden Lab is deeply committed to protecting, and the policy is spelled out in terms of service and community standards. The former, in-world privacy, they seem less concerned with, if at all, and in fact there's barely mention of it in either policy document, with the exception of sharing or recording chat or IM conversations.

Given the lack of official policy, the best residents can do is simply define for themselves the level of in-world privacy they wish to have, and use the provided tools, which admittedly are pretty weak, to protect and enforce that privacy.

I firmly believe that the statement in CS(4) regarding the "reasonable level of privacy" is about prohibiting real world information about a resident from entering Second Life without their consent. The rest of the paragraph bears that out.

I'm glad everyone seems to be noticing that the same small handful of repeat-posting apologists is continually trying to spin the thread to focusing on their blame-the-victim contention.

It is a red herring.

The problem here is not the victims. The problem here is an irresponsible, bungling and arrogant company forcing a product on SL Residents that so deeply fails in its alleged purpose it verges on fraud (and quite possibly more than verges, but that's another story) and in fact hurts Residents and places risk and unnecessary burdens on most Residents for its own profit. Remember, this is supposed to be a tool for finding items for sale throughout SL that is unable to read the contents of vendor devices and so CANNOT locate the large majority of items actually for sale. All it can do is invade Residents privacy and give grifters the chance to exploit innocent-but-unwary people.

It is impossible to pretend that this company does not and did not realize its product is a failure from the start and continuing to offer it is fundamentally dishonest.

If anyone still believes these apologists don't know all this as they seek to drag their red herrings through this thread, I am sure at least one of them will be glad to sell you a bridge that connects to Brooklyn. If they won't, I'm sure the reprehensible company they are defending with their disinformation campaign will be happy to, judging by its record so far.

These apologists keep condescendingly telling us that we ought to deal with it and protect ourselves. All right, let's take their advice! Let's deal with this malignancy that has appeared among us. One way is to make sure that a grifter who rushes in to buy something for L$0 gets his money's worth. Let HIM "deal with it" for a change. There are plenty of other ways. Let's focus on them, and on doing this.

Keep on subject - which is this crummy imposition and the crummy company behind it, and what to do about its contemptible malbot and the malware yet to come.

Remotely monitoring conversations, posting conversation logs, or sharing conversation logs without consent are all prohibited in Second Life and on the Second Life Forums.

Except for this tricky little bit. This doesnt specify the conversation has to be about Real Life. And its a large part of the paragraph since the Paragraph you are refering to is only 4 sentences.

I do think however - if enforcement means anything - Linden Labs would agree with you.

However its interesting to note you cant technically Bug someone with a Scripted Object. But you could Track someone with a Bot.

I've been on-topic in almost every post. But, then you would know that if you bothered to read. Of course, that's assuming you CAN read; I know that's a big step for you. I think you can do it, though.



So what? Not the bot's fault. Get over it. The Lindens didn't change anything significant in the wake of CopyBot in terms of policy; neither will they in this case, either. Tough luck for you, though; I guess you'll just have to get over it.

Except for the fact that I think I already bought that Bridge in Brooklyn, I don't find much wrong with your sentiments.

The point? It doesn't HAVE to be.

The point was Coco was saying the customers of Second Life matter to Second Life.

So do the coders, which was MY point.

Maybe you should stop trying to divide everyone into camps and try to work with folks instead of finding reasons to sow seeds of prejudice and segregation, as you did earlier and are apparently continuing in other guises.