Cool VL Viewer forum

View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently 2017-05-23 08:49:34



Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
RLV "forced" chat. 
Author Message

Joined: 2012-01-19 03:18:40
Posts: 100
Reply with quote
I'm using RLV for non-BDSM* purposes, and I have a question about RLV's capabilities. I want to have a script make my avatar say something in Local Chat on a non-default channel. It is, of course, trivial to make a scripted object talk on Local, but the chat will not then be identified as coming from my avatar which is what I need.

I have read lots of RLV doco, and I suspect that what I want to do is not possible, but I thought I should consult more experienced people.

*By the way, what is the most respectful way to refer to the scene with which RLV is most often associated? Is BDSM OK? I am not into that, but I don't want to be inadvertently insulting.


2014-02-08 01:02:38
Profile

Joined: 2009-03-17 18:42:51
Posts: 3558
Reply with quote
Oops... Sorry for this late reply, but I somehow missed your post...

linyifei wrote:
I'm using RLV for non-BDSM* purposes, and I have a question about RLV's capabilities. I want to have a script make my avatar say something in Local Chat on a non-default channel. It is, of course, trivial to make a scripted object talk on Local, but the chat will not then be identified as coming from my avatar which is what I need.
I'm sorry, but this would mean that it would become impossible for others to tell the difference between the human at the keyboard and what a griefing script could issue... I won't implement such a dangerous feature since it could cause a user to be the victim of it (such as getting banned from a sim or even from SL, since even LL won't be able to tell where the TOS-infringing chat lines came from by looking at their logs: human or script ?)...

Quote:
I have read lots of RLV doco, and I suspect that what I want to do is not possible, but I thought I should consult more experienced people.
It's possible, but it's definitely not something that should be done !

Quote:
*By the way, what is the most respectful way to refer to the scene with which RLV is most often associated? Is BDSM OK? I am not into that, but I don't want to be inadvertently insulting.
I see no problem with associating RLV with BDSM, since it's what it was designed for in the first place, even if there are more practical use cases than just BDSM roleplay for it.


2014-02-18 09:37:28
Profile WWW

Joined: 2012-01-19 03:18:40
Posts: 100
Reply with quote
Thank you for your reply, Henri. Yes, I see the security issue, though I think the griefing script would have to be in an object I owned and attached to myself, wouldn't it? I don't use a relaying object to allow other people to issue RLV commands to me, but only use it to issue commands to myself.

My problem is that I have created a variety of toys and tools that are designed to interact with my dog in SL. Unfortunately the creator of the dog is steadily "closing" his dogs so that they will only respond to commands issued either by an avatar (the owner or a named friend) in chat, or by scripted objects built by "approved" commercial creators of toys, beds etc. I was hoping to find a way around the problem using RLV, but I can see that it would probably be too risky.


2014-02-19 03:02:02
Profile

Joined: 2009-03-17 18:42:51
Posts: 3558
Reply with quote
linyifei wrote:
Thank you for your reply, Henri. Yes, I see the security issue, though I think the griefing script would have to be in an object I owned and attached to myself, wouldn't it?
Not at all... All what is required is that the object pertains to you.

Quote:
I don't use a relaying object to allow other people to issue RLV commands to me, but only use it to issue commands to myself.
There are two ways of tricking you into owning a RLV-based griefing object:
- The first one is for the griefer to set their object for sale for L$0 as original (not as a copy), so that the object stays rezzed after being bought instead of having a copy delivered to your inventory, and then put an incentive for you to "buy" it (such as advertizing it as a freebie of some sort): as soon as you buy it, the object becomes yours and can immediately issue RLV commands to restrict you: it can even attach to yourself after issuing an @acceptpermission command that removes the attach autorisation dialog...
-The second one is for the griefer to use the new temporary attach feature that has been recently added to SL... Granted, you will get a persmission dialog, but here again the griefer can trick you in believing the object is just a demo of a super-duper gadget...

Quote:
My problem is that I have created a variety of toys and tools that are designed to interact with my dog in SL. Unfortunately the creator of the dog is steadily "closing" his dogs so that they will only respond to commands issued either by an avatar (the owner or a named friend) in chat, or by scripted objects built by "approved" commercial creators of toys, beds etc. I was hoping to find a way around the problem using RLV, but I can see that it would probably be too risky.
I'd suggest that you contact the "dog" maker and explain them your issue with their scripting choices... It's not to the viewer developers to work around issues that can trivially be resolved with proper scripting, and certainly not by implementing broken and vulnerable work-arounds...


2014-02-19 20:12:28
Profile WWW

Joined: 2012-01-19 03:18:40
Posts: 100
Reply with quote
Thank you for your RLV advice, Henri. I will bear it in mind.

As regards the dog, I have corresponded with the creator on several occasions. He fully accepts, and I think regrets, that his changes have a negative impact on people like me who enjoy making their own dog-toys and other gadgets. His stated concern, and reason for "closing" his dogs, is that some people were apparently making gadgets that caused their dogs to grief other people, or otherwise behave in a manner that draws negative attention to his products. This is a policy-change that I think he's entitled to make as a creator, but I do regret it. I agree with you that it is not the business of viewer developers to work around the problem, and given the risks you've described, my original idea was obviously a bad one. Thank you for your help.


2014-02-21 00:41:19
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 5 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.