animation without sit / wear

Hi, to my surprize i was offered a 'xxx want to aimate your avatar... bla...' popup as i was -walking- along a beach. I thought animations only was an option if the av either was sitting on an item/object or was wearing an object.
What are the secrets behind animating an av without sitting or wearing?
BR
ab

There are more option to start an animation like AO or danceballs.

but most works like this:
- Detected name or key avatar (example Touch, Sensor, Attach)
- Ask permission to start animation ( llRequestPermissions)
- Start/Stop animation (llStartAnimation)

for a example code look at http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlStartAnimation

the Hug script does this also

thx Kaylan -but danceballs they do work with sit -dont they? mm.. the touch then animate i think i can grasp, -sensor , then animate will be trickier -How can the 'right' person be focused, or better : How can simutanous interference be avoided ..hmmm...
BR
ab

Poseballs do, but group dance machines where you just click the object to join in are pretty common.

All an object needs to animate an avatar is permission to do so. Sitting on or attaching an object just automatically grants that permission (though only for the root prim).

Annoyingly, you can't actually give up the animate permission, or specify who you want to animate. So whenever a script calls llStartAnimation, it will animate EVERYONE it has permission to animate. The only way to release the animate permission is by resetting the script. Which if you want to keep animating other people without asking them for permission again, is a pain in the ass.

The only time you can specify a specific avatar to animate is in the run_time_permissions event. I should note that llStopAnimation ALSO requires permission to work.

Basically, to add/remove people to a group you want to animate, you'd have to keep track of them, and use a lot of llRequestPermission(PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATION, key id) calls.

If you want different people doing different animations, it gets more tricky.

Erm...not quite. A script can only have permissions granted by one resident at a time. That's why shared dance machines have multiple scripts in them. Boy, don't animators WISH you could start an animation on multiple avatars at once with a single function call.

But you are right that the only thing required to get the PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATION permission granted is that the avatar has to be in the same sim as the object (not true of PERMISSION_DEBIT, interestingly enough). What attaching and sitting can do for you is have that permission granted automatically, without the blue window popping up.

I agree with Hewee.

Thank you all for the explanations.
I do have one additional question that came as i read Hewee's :

Animation and controls permissions are granted automatically. I'm not sure what others are. This should be on the LSL Wiki; did you check?

NO! Not PERMISSION_DEBIT.

As far as I know it only applies to PERMISSION_TAKE_CONTROLS, PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATION, PERMISSION_ATTACH, PERMISSION_TRACK_CAMERA, and PERMISSION_CONTROL_CAMERA.

Hmm. And I have no idea what PERMISSION_REMAP_CONTROLS, PERMISSION_RELEASE_OWNERSHIP, PERMISSION_CHANGE_JOINTS, PERMISSION_CHANGE_PERMISSIONS are or if they apply. I assume they aren't used yet by publicly available functions. Hmm.

See http://www.lslwiki.net/lslwiki/wakka.php?wakka=llRequestPermissions

Thanks Hewee!
Lear, its not stated in the files, there are some 'gabs' in the wiki, and the page that Hewee referes to unfortunally has many.

(Even the main page for the functions are in need of an update -all the 1.21 revisions are left empty)

BR ab

i seem to remember an object that was getting passed around that would take people's money. it would look like a normal object and it would have the instructions"wear me" so people would wear it and it would take all their money. i never got it, so i don't know if it was just a rumor. but yeah, i think it is/was automatically granted on attach/sit like the other permissions. maybe LL changed it after that?

Nope. You not only get a popup to take your lindens, it's now big and yellow/orange to catch your attention. The change to the yellow/orange popup for debit permissions was changed from the normal blue one as a result of these kinds of objects.

A lot of people claimed that this thing would simply take your money, but I have not yet seen a single credible claim. Nobody has ever produced an object that will do this, on request.

We periodically see scare messages in group IMs and notices about this. People who post these scare messages have the best of intentions but are doing everyone a disservice, because they generally mention the object name and creator. These things can be easily changed, so are of little help. Far better advice is "Never allow debit permissions unless you know what you're doing."

Please, let's put this false rumor to rest.

The SL Wiki says


Close, but not quite accurate: for example, animate permissions are automatically granted when sitting. When I get time, I'll test and update.

Oh no. It's not entirely rumor. It WOULD take your money if you were stupid enough to grant it the debit permission. You're right that it couldn't do it unless you hit "Yes" in the permissions dialog, but unfortunately there were some poor dupes who did (hopefully they all got resolved by LL). It used llGiveMoney() to send all your lindens to a particular resident identified by key in the script. It would use an exponential scheme for the amount of money to give because it's a simple NOP if you try to give more money than you have (stupid no-feedback monetary script transactions! Anyway...). I'm not going to post the source code simply because it can only be used for ill purpose. I could send you a notecard copy in-world though if you want.

I didn't ever deny that objects can take your money.

The rumor that they can do so without your explicitly granting permission is false. Let's put that rumor to rest, please.

Though well intentioned, people who spam warning messages like "WARNING!!! XYZ, created by Joe Avatar ..." are not addressing the real problem, while contributing to noise and disinformation, and I recommend against it.

If anyone feels the need to spam a warning, I request they keep it simple, accurate, and effective, and just caution against granting debit permission to the big yellow-orange popup.

BTW, I updated the LSL portal page for llRequestPermissions().

The source code is already out there, posted in at least one very obvious public spot that I will not identify. The real problem, unfortunately, is that a small percentage of the general public will click anything, no matter how outrageously stupid it seems to the rest of us.

(a) People get distracted and click when they don't mean to,
(b) they read quickly and don't grasp what they're reading,
(c) they don't speak the language, so they don't know which button to click,
(d) they don't believe warnings, or think that they are invulnerable,
they are fatally curious,
(f) they are terminally dumb,
(g) add your own variation on the theme.

This is why spamming stock brokers and fake pharmaceutical hoaxers are so sucessful. You only have to find a few people in a-g to make a profit.

Those aren't even implemented, and might never be.

They're most likely abandoned projects. Things they started working to implement, but canceled, and just left as is, in case they go back to them.

IIRC animations that are started by a script continue to play, even if it later receives new permissions from another source. I've seen a few dance ball schemes use this to avoid limits on # of Avs. It's an annoying technique though, since it has to re-request permissions on each change, and even to stop the animations.