Recent Comments:

The hundred gadget giveaway: round 3

Engadget

Sep 4th 2007 1:12PM This is a great idea, I should do this at my blog! Anyone want a pair of old shoes?
;)

libSL transcript shock

Second Life Insider

Nov 16th 2006 8:57PM Again, we're eviscerating a group of reverse-engineers who operate largely above board. The alternative are agencies that operate in the dark and exploit the environment for their own gain without sharing any intelligence with Linden.

The same argument has been put forth in the rest of networked computing. Between those who actively seek holes in Microsoft Windows (and other programs,) and Microsoft. There has been an ongoing debate about "responsible disclosure." In the IT security world (where I am employed,) one views responsible disclosure as notifying the software vendor of a newly discovered security hole and NOT releasing the information to the general public until the vendor has come up with a fix.

Many security researchers become disillusioned with the slow pace that vendors take to fix their products. Often times they go ahead and disclose the unpatched security hole in hopes that the community will work around the issue and protect themselves before the "evil" folks come through an exploit the holes.

Simply put, your reaction to libSL discourages them from being forthright. We are fools if we believe that only libSL has Linden Labs in their sights. Without someone actively probing the system for vulnerabilities, it will eventually become compromised in a way that may not be recoverable. I doubt that anyone employed at Linden today has the time to be as diligent about code audits as libSL.

I am not involved with libSL, but I am employed full time protecting my employer from these types of risk by working with vendors to repair known security holes and to actively seek security holes in our systems which might disclose customer secrets. For that reason, I understand the value of having a problem out in the open rather than in the dark. While early disclosure to Linden is clearly the "right" way to address these problems, it doesn't appear that libSL as a group intended for their code to be abused like this.

So I call for moderation, not attacks. We must pressure Linden Labs to push remediation of these property controls to the top of their to-do list, and we need to keep on top of it until the problem is demonstratably resolved. We know that the client can be compromised to exploit holes in the copy protection - we've seen it happen with iTunes and with Windows Media. The solution is to provide strong server side protection for identifying genuine authorized articles from duplicated articles. It may not solve outright duplication - but will provide EVIDENCE of duplication that could potentially be detected automatically.

Also think ahead - it won't be that far off before we start having very portable virtual experiences, and we'll want to be able to take those goods with us. Support efforts to make your creations portable while retaining authenticity. My personal gut feeling is that digital signatures are the way to do this, but technical hurdles may dictate differently. Just keep it in mind.

Take care,
Williem

CopyBot anger rises

Second Life Insider

Nov 15th 2006 7:13PM I've been fuming about this all day, but at this time, the point I wish to make softly is best this:

"See!? You don't like it either!"
- Recording Industry Association of America

I recognize the desire to make money from your efforts. And I recognize the gravity of going from a cost-to-copy to free-for-all.

But in reading through this, I am afraid that the backlash that supports the wicked legislation of the DMCA (which has done more harm to innovation, free speech, and creativity than any amount of digital copying) AND the venom directed towards the reverse engineers who cooked up this controversial tool --- will result in a dangerous slide into accepting what amounts to "authoritarian-sanctioned creativity." That we should only create what we are "allowed" to create and only if it doesn't threaten someone's business model.

Take a step back from this specific incident and look over digital "property" as a whole. Look at patent law, copyright law (which has been extended far beyond the life of the creator,) and laws like the DMCA which have been retrofitted to curtail fair-use. And please take some time to fathom how we can rationally react to this design challenge for Linden and ensure that we continue to support our creative SL friends and ultimately restore a vibrant economy.

It's not about "communists" versus "capitalists" and I don't believe it ever has been. I think there is a deep divide between those who value intellectual property and those who see it as an unwanted custom. More importantly, how do we build systems that will survive the constant onslaught of the curious? If not LibSL, then someone else will eventually circumvent the system because it has value to them. And finally, we need to be certain that we absolutely WANT to build such fences?

I don't have the answers to those questions, but I would ask that we - as intelligent citizens of a new world - take a more measured approach to this problem than simply calling for the heads of programmers. And we can also now appreciate the point of view of the RIAA.

:)
- Williem

SL on a 24" iMac

Second Life Insider

Oct 7th 2006 10:53AM Hi - the Mac can run at full-screen and windowed resolution up to the limit of the display. I use a dual G5 PowerMac on a 23" Cinema display, and it runs fine in both modes.

An earlier poster is right, try dragging the bottom right corner (the handle is not visible until you click it) and resize the window that way. Full screen mode is controlled under the Preferences for Graphics. Unless you change the preference, it will always switch to 800x600 when you invoke full screen mode.

The computer is entirely capable of doing it full screen.

Free stuff

Second Life Insider

Sep 7th 2006 8:35PM Thanks for the links, Caliandris. Definitely good stuff. :)
- Bill

Age play rights and risks

Second Life Insider

Aug 22nd 2006 11:52PM Morality/Ethics aside in this debate, there is a much more pragmatic and practical issue: Linden Labs is a company, and publicity matters.

They can tolerate, and support, freedom of expression to an extent - and let us not forget that despite the aberrant nature of pedophelia, all expressions in Second Life are ideas given a non-corporeal representation - they will probably not stand firm on topics so extremely disliked by their mainstream audience that it would impact potential revenue.

I would expect that, while they will continue to uphold largely admirable goals for a sustainable, libertarian-minded society - you have to realize that they will balance that with their need to maintain a largely positive image.

We should recognize this, and enjoy ourselves with reservation. On my blog, I pointed out that Prokofy Neva brought up some interesting points about the benevolence of Linden leadership - and what I think are insightful comments about the domination of the minority by an unchecked majority - the gist of his message was that the utopian ideal of SL was tainted by absolute power in the hands of the company that runs the grid.

I don't agree with all his sentiments, but it helps to have views from all sides to bound a conversation. So to comment on the ideas in your post, Caliandris, I can understand the need to back up the ideal of one's freedom to express themselves - even when it may offend many others - but we must also take the pragmatic view (regardless of the subject in controversy,) that a company will ultimately take steps to protect its assets and thus we must choose our battles wisely.

One can hope that with the advancement of technology, eventually Linden would be able to de-centralize the grid while retaining a return on investment. By decentralizing control and ownership of the grid components, perhaps we can migrate to a community where expression is not bounded by corporate self-interest and that those who derive revenue from that system can be secure in making money without the risk of bad publicity from others' behavior.

Or something like that. Sounds good in my head. ;)

Bill

Secret Police

Second Life Insider

Aug 22nd 2006 10:55PM Caliandris, it seems that the world is abundant with those who believe they are born "hall monitors." Even when the rules of the hallway aren't clear. It's discouraging (but not surprising, on reflection,) that this behavior makes its way into SL.

I would imagine that the Linden crowd would look at ARs with a critical eye given the source. Those who have a habit of submitting ARs don't necessarily go without scrutiny.

What do you think?
Thanks for writing,
Bill