Thread

aw now closed for bots ? (Sdk)

aw now closed for bots ? // Sdk

1  |  

walter knupe

Nov 12, 1998, 3:55pm
Is it true, that the main world AW is now closed for bots as well ?

its bad that aw_enter does not return giving an error code, and
its even MORE bad that beta seems the only bot open place now....

bots are not that interesting if you run them in an empty world only...


Walter aka Faber

roland vilett

Nov 12, 1998, 6:25pm
Oops. Sorry about that. I upgraded AlphaWorld to a 2.1 server last night,
and I forgot that 2.1 worlds disallow all bots by default.

I've now set AlphaWorld to allow all bots. Consider this an "experimental"
condition. The usual bot rules apply, including: 1) no bots at or near the
GZ area, and 2) no large-scale automated building (small SDK auto-building
projects of 100 objects or less will be tolerated for the time being as long
as no noticeable problems arise on the server side).

SDK apps have great potential for good, but also, unfortunately, for harm.
We will see how it goes with AlphaWorld allowing all bots. If there are too
many problems and/or abuses we may close it to bots in the future.

-Roland

ps. the aw_enter() problem should be fixed in build 8 of the SDK, just
posted now.

[View Quote]

runay@cyberjunkie.com (runay)

Nov 12, 1998, 6:30pm
Same problem here. When I use HamBot in SDK mode it never gets past
the WaitFor, it just stops responding. In AW that is, in my own world
it works just fine. HamBot in non-SDK mode still works in both worlds.
Probably just a temporary SDK problem in AW.

Runay

On Thu, 12 Nov 1998 18:55:23 +0100, "Walter Knupe" <wak at faber.ping.de>
[View Quote] >Is it true, that the main world AW is now closed for bots as well ?
>
>its bad that aw_enter does not return giving an error code, and
>its even MORE bad that beta seems the only bot open place now....
>
>bots are not that interesting if you run them in an empty world only...
>
>
>Walter aka Faber
>
>
>

canopus

Nov 12, 1998, 11:14pm
So, under the new AW rules, if Tazunu Inoue's Castle, which contains about
5680 objects, were to be moved to a better site by a mover bot, it should
be broken down into 57 parts to be separately moved and reassembled? Or
would the mover bot satisfy the AW server if it called aw_wait(60000) after
every 99th object in the building?

[View Quote] > Is it true, that the main world AW is now closed for bots as well ?
>
> its bad that aw_enter does not return giving an error code, and
> its even MORE bad that beta seems the only bot open place now....
>
> bots are not that interesting if you run them in an empty world only...
>
> Walter aka Faber

roland vilett

Nov 12, 1998, 11:57pm
Actually, technically the ban only applies to the addition of new objects,
so your mover bot would be exempt.

Unfortunately, the way the ban is enforced is by tallying the daily number
of ADDs by citizen and then checking on anyone who registers above a certain
threshold, so if you did move 5680 objects from one place to somewhere else
it would show up as 5680 adds, assuming the move is implemented by deleting
all of the old objects in the old location and then adding them all again in
the new location. I guess you'd better drop me an email before doing it so
I know to watch out for it.

Sigh, I *really* need to get those building quotas implemented one of these
days...

-Roland

[View Quote]

canopus

Nov 13, 1998, 1:53pm
Maybe you could speed up the review by collapsing all objects added in the same
cell to one, and then evaluating only those cases with more than n cells on that
day. After all, the most common kind of obnoxious building is paving over a lot
of cells at once (and then leaving them undeveloped). Constructing a 150-object
park (in a few cells) for someone to put a home in shouldn't raise a flag.

[View Quote] > Actually, technically the ban only applies to the addition of new objects,
> so your mover bot would be exempt.
>
> Unfortunately, the way the ban is enforced is by tallying the daily number
> of ADDs by citizen and then checking on anyone who registers above a certain
> threshold, so if you did move 5680 objects from one place to somewhere else
> it would show up as 5680 adds, assuming the move is implemented by deleting
> all of the old objects in the old location and then adding them all again in
> the new location. I guess you'd better drop me an email before doing it so
> I know to watch out for it.
>
> Sigh, I *really* need to get those building quotas implemented one of these
> days...
>
> -Roland
>
[View Quote]

canopus

Nov 14, 1998, 9:31pm
The new AW rules try to prevent obnoxious builder bots and obnoxious avatar
bots. The rule that a bot can only build so many objects (or cells) in one
day is good for AW citizens as well as the AW server, because it
discourages obnoxious paving programs everywhere in AW. The rule that
avatar bots can't run in or near GZ is good mainly for the AW server,
because it doesn't discourage obnoxious avatar bots that come and occupy
ordinary citizens' property away from GZ. Everybody can mute avatars to
discourage them, but gangster bots, unlike their doltish owners, will have
the patience of an evil angel.

Being able to see the name of an obnoxious citizen or tourist helps to
inhibit them, but seeing the [bot's name] is currently useless, as it
totally hides the malicious or stupid owner. I suggest that the AWAPI
servers display the owner's name plus the program's stated bot-name, so
that the same tactic of exposure can be applied, for example, showing
[Brat's GangsterBot] instead of just [GangsterBot].

[View Quote] > Is it true, that the main world AW is now closed for bots as well ?
>
> its bad that aw_enter does not return giving an error code, and
> its even MORE bad that beta seems the only bot open place now....
>
> bots are not that interesting if you run them in an empty world only...
>
> Walter aka Faber

canopus

Nov 17, 1998, 3:00pm
Does the usual bot rule forbidding bots at or near the GZ area exclude doing an
aw_query of property at or near the GZ area (assuming the bot is invisible or is
outside the GZ area)?

[View Quote] > Oops. Sorry about that. I upgraded AlphaWorld to a 2.1 server last night,
> and I forgot that 2.1 worlds disallow all bots by default.
>
> I've now set AlphaWorld to allow all bots. Consider this an "experimental"
> condition. The usual bot rules apply, including: 1) no bots at or near the
> GZ area, and 2) no large-scale automated building (small SDK auto-building
> projects of 100 objects or less will be tolerated for the time being as long
> as no noticeable problems arise on the server side).
>
> SDK apps have great potential for good, but also, unfortunately, for harm.
> We will see how it goes with AlphaWorld allowing all bots. If there are too
> many problems and/or abuses we may close it to bots in the future.
>
> -Roland
>
> ps. the aw_enter() problem should be fixed in build 8 of the SDK, just
> posted now.
>
[View Quote]

roland vilett

Nov 17, 1998, 6:08pm
No, the no-GZ rule only applies to visible bots.

-Roland

[View Quote]

x@x.com (xelag)

Nov 17, 1998, 7:39pm
As I understand it, an invisible bot is one that entered a world with
aw_enter() but has not called aw_state_change(). If so, how can it be
located in gz or anywhere else. Maybe Roland or someone else could
expand on the subject of invisible bots, or post a url where I could
get more details bout what they can/not do: i.e. can they speak?
Thanks.


On Tue, 17 Nov 1998 12:08:20 -0800, "Roland Vilett" <roland at lmi.net>
[View Quote] >No, the no-GZ rule only applies to visible bots.
>
>-Roland
>
[View Quote]

canopus

Nov 17, 1998, 8:22pm
Sample 2 is an example of an invisible bot that is located somewhere (it doesn't
need to have an avatar to change the midi on the midispk object, but Sample 2
only applies to midispk at 1N 1W--there are altogether 5 lines of code which
won't work except at or near the GZ area of Beta, and must be replaced if the
bot is to work elsewhere, even on Beta).

[View Quote] > As I understand it, an invisible bot is one that entered a world with
> aw_enter() but has not called aw_state_change(). If so, how can it be
> located in gz or anywhere else. Maybe Roland or someone else could
> expand on the subject of invisible bots, or post a url where I could
> get more details bout what they can/not do: i.e. can they speak?
> Thanks.
>
> On Tue, 17 Nov 1998 12:08:20 -0800, "Roland Vilett" <roland at lmi.net>
[View Quote]

walter knupe

Nov 18, 1998, 6:31pm
You are correct, an invisible bot does not have a current position,
therefore its located nowhere. for that matter, nobody can see or hear it,
and it does not see or hear anybody.

which means its only useful to query property, to add / change / delete
objects or to change world parameters, because those actions are not related
to a current bot position.

and it looks like the only thing you are not allowed to do is confuse and
annoy users with your bot hanging around on GZ. so if it has no current
position or one outside of GZ, you can do everything, even querying property
on GZ.

Walter

XelaG schrieb in Nachricht <3651ea84.36446757 at news.activeworlds.com>...
>As I understand it, an invisible bot is one that entered a world with
>aw_enter() but has not called aw_state_change(). If so, how can it be
>located in gz or anywhere else. Maybe Roland or someone else could
>expand on the subject of invisible bots, or post a url where I could
>get more details bout what they can/not do: i.e. can they speak?
>Thanks.
>
>
>On Tue, 17 Nov 1998 12:08:20 -0800, "Roland Vilett" <roland at lmi.net>
[View Quote]

1  |  
Awportals.com is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2021. All Rights Reserved.
Awportals.com   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn