I agree; In fact, people have been trying to communicate with Lindens
in some meaningful way (as is required in Open Source projects) since
the beginning of the open-sourcing of the viewer, but it seems that
Linden Lab seems more inclined to dictate what changes WILL be done
rather than gathering
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> This is a company with an open source project, not an open source project
> with a company.
That statement I think reflects an important difference in perception.
That sentence would be fine in an internal Linden Research
communication. But
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
>
> If Linden Research continues to project the attitude that open-source
> is no more than a convenient way to get some free grunt labor from
> "enthusiasts" (which stri
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
>
>> A totally healthy open source project usually can be developed
>> completely in the open, and in a way that's aligned with everybody's
>> interests. But that takes a
Soft Linden said:
"Content theft, griefing and resource abuse have been
long-term problems."
I've been a lurker here but are you KIDDING ME? When Linden Labs open
sourced Second Life, they were right along side us saying to
proprietary content developers YOU CANNOT PROTECT YOUR CONTENT.
Has that
I have to agree, the state of both SL and OpenSim is a royal mess. SL
has already been forked, dozens of times. At SLCC '08 we spoke with Rob
Lanphier about our announcement and presentation of the Meerkat viewer
and were met with quite a bit of hostility. Linden simply did not want a
competing
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
>>
>>> A totally healthy open source project usually can be developed
>>> completely in the open, and in a way t
Err... Content theft has always been a problem, will always be a problem,
and LL better be on the same page with developers, content makers and
customers here. Content theft is not to be tolerated and must be fought. But
some critical parts of the whole system have been put on the client side at
a
On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Marine Kelley wrote:
> However it is true that LL has delivered a bad message recently, by
> publishing the TPV and the closed-source SL 2.0 the SAME day. The TPV burdens
> us developers while freeing LL's hands, and the viewer 2.0 is going to be
> adopted by newco
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>
> LL unilaterally designs and implements code behind closed doors, where
> it is accepted and merged then deployed -- all without any outside
> participation. In the linux kernel, design is discussed in the open,
> occasionally implemented
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
wrote:
>
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Marine Kelley wrote:
>
>> However it is true that LL has delivered a bad message recently, by
>> publishing the TPV and the closed-source SL 2.0 the SAME day. The TPV
>> burdens us developers while fr
Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
> Lindens should be staying with their promises
>
related question, where's the svn repo to check out the server code?
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Op
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>>
>> LL unilaterally designs and implements code behind closed doors, where
>> it is accepted and merged then deployed -- all without any outside
>> participation. In the linux kernel, d
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
wrote:
> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>> Lindens should be staying with their promises
>
> related question, where's the svn repo to check out the server code?
How is that in any way related?
We're closer on some of the tech, but don't ye
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>
> Perfect example of where your understanding is misplaced: no, open
> source license != open source project. An open source license only
> requires source code drops. A true community requires equal
> participation. It's the difference bet
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
wrote:
> We actually believed we were doing something the community would really
> appreciate -- getting the source out there the same day as beta. And yet
> somehow that became something bad. People keep repeating that "it's closed
> sou
What worries me is that before, correctly, it was stated: copybot
is not illegal, copying something and then SELLING it is.
If some really good hacker does exactly that what everyone says:
get content that simply can't be protected, then that doesn't mean
he will start a business with it and make
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>>
>> Perfect example of where your understanding is misplaced: no, open
>> source license != open source project. An open source license only
>> requires source code drops. A true commun
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Carlo Wood wrote:
> What worries me is that before, correctly, it was stated: copybot
> is not illegal, copying something and then SELLING it is.
No. Copying non-permissive content has been against the ToS since 2006
or so, regardless of what one did with the cont
I'm sorry Kent, I didn't want to upset you. Yes you are getting a lot of
flak, and you are not alone in this case. This TPV does add heavy
requirements upon us developers, and I'm not even talking about the Viewer
Directory which requires us to publish our RL names out to the open. Which
is not goi
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>
> I'm not interested in how to humbly coax LL's
> good will on bended knee
And that's not what has been asked of you. The rest of your post hangs
on that mischaracterization.
When you're on the realxtend list, you're civil and encourage
pa
Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
> wrote:
>
>> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>>
>>> Lindens should be staying with their promises
>>>
>> related question, where's the svn repo to check out the server code?
>>
>
On 2010-03-14, at 14:09, Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote:
> What's frustrating about this for many of the Lindens is that we as
> an organization pushed hard -- and Merov in particular worked nights
> and weekends -- to get the Snowglobe source out on the same day that
> beta was released, rather
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Lance Corrimal
wrote:
> Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>>>
Lindens should be staying with their promises
>>> related question, where's t
Soft Linden wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>
>> I'm not interested in how to humbly coax LL's
>> good will on bended knee
>>
>
> And that's not what has been asked of you. The rest of your post hangs
> on that mischaracterization.
>
> When you're on the rea
Tori C. wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
> wrote:
>
>
>> We actually believed we were doing something the community would really
>> appreciate -- getting the source out there the same day as beta. And yet
>> somehow that became something bad. People keep repeat
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> You're putting a term in quotes when you're the one who introduced it
> to the discussion. You're then picking apart another party at length
> for your selection of words.
I most certainly did not introduce either "throttling" or "enthusiast
Lance Corrimal wrote:
> Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>>>
>>>
Lindens should be staying with their promises
>>> related
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Lawson English wrote:
> Lance Corrimal wrote:
>>
>> Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
>>> wrote:
>>>
Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>
> Lindens should be staying with
then what are you doing on an opensource list if you want your content
wrapped in DRM.
sl will die if its not open. and you can't compare rl doors to the
internet. if you dont lock your rl door I can come in and take
something of yours that isnt replaceable.
but on the internet as a content maker
New Hax wrote:
> then what are you doing on an opensource list if you want your content
> wrapped in DRM.
>
> sl will die if its not open. and you can't compare rl doors to the
> internet. if you dont lock your rl door I can come in and take
> something of yours that isnt replaceable.
>
> but on th
there shouldn't be. if SL is to be open, and really open source, then
the scripts on it should be GPL as well. But it's different because
scripts CAN be protected FOR NOW but blobs of binary and graphics ,
textures, and blobs of prims cannot.
If i take a sphere prim and put a happy face texture on
You are kidding here, right ?
On 14 March 2010 23:27, New Hax wrote:
> there shouldn't be. if SL is to be open, and really open source, then
> the scripts on it should be GPL as well. But it's different because
> scripts CAN be protected FOR NOW but blobs of binary and graphics ,
> textures, and
No im not kidding, whats going to stop people from taking your
scripts, when you can hop from one grid to another? Interoperability?
The sim owner can take your scripts. For now scripts are protected
because Linden Labs owns the code.
On 3/14/10, Marine Kelley wrote:
> You are kidding here, righ
Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can assure you.
Nor are you putting food on the table RL except perhaps by manual labor,
which cannot be copied. Ex: Ditches need to be dug. The ditch-digger can
be changed out, but that doesn't change the fact that even if you get a
new dig
I know better than to try to get rich off of selling ones and zeroes.
On 3/14/10, Glen Canaday wrote:
> Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can assure you.
>
> Nor are you putting food on the table RL except perhaps by manual labor,
> which cannot be copied. Ex: Ditches need to
Simply the facts that my scripts are NOT to be ported to other grids unless
I am certain the source code, which would be uploaded by me only, is
protected. Any other way of porting my scripts to other grids and to use it
there is theft.
On 14 March 2010 23:29, New Hax wrote:
> No im not kidding
That's what I do for a living. And I earn my living well with it. You should
try it.
On 14 March 2010 23:32, New Hax wrote:
> I know better than to try to get rich off of selling ones and zeroes.
>
> On 3/14/10, Glen Canaday wrote:
> > Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can
Then what are you doing here?
On 03/14/2010 06:32 PM, New Hax wrote:
> I know better than to try to get rich off of selling ones and zeroes.
>
> On 3/14/10, Glen Canaday wrote:
>
>> Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can assure you.
>>
>> Nor are you putting food on the tab
I want a grid where people can have the freedom to develop what they
want and do what they want, without being told whats allowed, and
without being watched because you might move the wrong bits from one
place to another. and without lindens threatening if we dont "play
nice" with draconinan DRM. T
agree to disagree yea but then your days are numbered in SL. If the
project forks then there will be a VW without all these restrictions
and lindens threatening people for asking them to keep their promises?
On 3/14/10, New Hax wrote:
> I want a grid where people can have the freedom to develop w
anyways im done here, Linden Labs is going to close the code and
become big brother. Just watch. I thought i'd come out of lurking but
i guess that was the wrong idea. have a good time while SL swirls
around the drain when it could be taking the world over, used
everywhere like the web, if it were
Don't forget to reply to all, everyone is getting only part of the
conversation when you reply to me only.
We're not talking about the same thing at all anyway. We were talking about
content theft issues, which has nothing to do with the viewer. It has
nothing to do with this mailing list even. Th
New Hax wrote:
> No im not kidding, whats going to stop people from taking your
> scripts, when you can hop from one grid to another? Interoperability?
> The sim owner can take your scripts. For now scripts are protected
> because Linden Labs owns the code.
>
THere are plenty of ways in which
You can find grids exactly like you want already, but they have online
concurrencies that can be counted on one hand and are slow as molasses, plus
no one makes any content there for exactly the reasons you would like to use
them.
It would be narrow-minded to think that open source is the only bus
I own three Sims in SL, that's ~$600 a month or so to the Lindens, and
that's supported off DRM'ed content creation that I sell. If my income was
to vanish because of widespread content theft then I'd be out of SL.
I find Hax's attitude extremely concerning.
In fact I think we should now recogn
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:41 PM, New Hax wrote:
> anyways im done here, Linden Labs is going to close the code and
> become big brother. Just watch. I thought i'd come out of lurking but
> i guess that was the wrong idea. have a good time while SL swirls
> around the drain when it could be taking
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Kevin Woolley wrote:
> I own three Sims in SL, that's ~$600 a month or so to the Lindens, and
> that's supported off DRM'ed content creation that I sell. If my income was
> to vanish because of widespread content theft then I'd be out of SL.
>
> I find Hax's attitu
I think the majority of viewer and server developers are on Lindens side
with this. OpenSim will never be a replacement for what the Linden grid
provides, and is a wonderful tool that I hope a lot of client devs are
using to enhance their development process. The fact still remains that
the bul
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 7:45 PM, k\o\w wrote:
> .. OpenSim will never be a replacement for what the Linden grid
> provides, and is a wonderful tool that I hope a lot of client devs are
> using to enhance their development process. ...
And of course since OpenSim is dirt cheap a company that is th
Agreed. Lack of a basic working knowledge of economics is a sad thing
when combined with uninformed ideology. I was in the same boat as him
about 15 years ago after reading The Cathedral and the Bazaar and not
understanding what was really up.
Anyway, back to business. I'm actually glad for the
This post is likely to incur some feelings of emotions in a lot of you;
I ask that you bear with me and be open minded towards these words. I
recognise that many of you won't agree with me; it is but an attempt to
try and shine a searchlight into the hysteria.
*The Stark Truth*
Firstly, a remi
Le 15 mars 2010 à 02:29, Thomas Grimshaw a écrit :
> - Don't intimidate your customers. For goodness sake, shut off those
> stupid "copybot protection" scripts (they don't even work), and take
> down those copyright notices. If these people are in YOUR store, it
> means they're not in a store
Now you mention it...
Yes, a few people are making thousands of dollars per month
and are having their RL day job in SL... so, now they would
kill to protect that income, but...
Imho, SL would have have had better products if everything
had been free and open (no permission system). Then one coul
On 3/14/10, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> Imho, SL would have have had better products if everything
> had been free and open (no permission system). Then one could
> learn from others and improve things, build upon the experience
> and work of others, and nobody would make money of it or have
> to be afr
Thank God for those who have the luxury of a steady paycheck and the ability
to pontificate.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmodera
You're very, very delusional.
Fred Rookstown
On Sun, 2010-03-14 at 21:01 -0600, New Hax wrote:
> On 3/14/10, Carlo Wood wrote:
> >
> > Imho, SL would have have had better products if everything
> > had been free and open (no permission system). Then one could
> > learn from others and improve th
VERY well written Thomas - kudos!
And since I'm delurking briefly, kudos also to Soft for the patience he
has exhibited in the the recent discussion.
[goes back to lurking]
On 03/14/2010 09:29 PM, Thomas Grimshaw wrote:
> This post is likely to incur some feelings of emotions in a lot of you;
>
Wow! well some people really don't give a dump about intellectual
properties.
What if your prim inSL contain a script with user / password to your twitter
account?
What if your prim inSL contain a script with user / password to your online
database?
you don't believe in sharing that as well d
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Ryan McDougall wrote:
>>
>> I'm not interested in how to humbly coax LL's
>> good will on bended knee
>
> And that's not what has been asked of you. The rest of your post hangs
> on that mischaracterization.
60 matches
Mail list logo
