1  |   Order by index

Nov 15, 1998, 5:14pm

Should we give away our bot-programs? Or should we offer to run them
on someone else's behalf (getting their citizen# and
privilege-password)? There are serious technical problems for either
approach. (No, this is not a discussion of "how to make money from VR
programming", which rightly belongs in the wishful thinking newsgroup.)
If I were a non-programmer citizen, I'd hesitate to run a bot-program on
my computer, if it came from some virtual person, free or not. And
expecting ordinary citizens to scan open-source code looking for
viruses, when even programmers can't figure out other programmers' code,
is hopeless.
So should we offer to run our bot-programs on our own machines? All
builder-bot services, including the DJ Bot of Sample 2, can only be
given away if the recipient lends us a citizen# and a
privilege-password. The problem with the privilege-password is that it
is too broad. Until the citizen revokes it, a privilege-password can be
used to build or demolish objects owned by the citizen in any location
in any World. If all I want is to have the programmer run a builderbot
to build me a lawn and garden at x,z on AW, I don't want to put all my
other objects on AW and other worlds at jeopardy. It's like having to
give passwords to all my bank accounts in cities all over the world just
to withdraw money from one account in Chicago.
There should be SDK methods in support of secure transactions. The
problem here is trying to use a universal password for a particular
account. Is there some way that a privilege password can say which Zone
on which World it applies to? Or is there some other way to get round
this problem?

Nov 15, 1998, 8:06pm

SeedBot asks for a citizen number and privilege password to use to build the
seed object with. That's probably the best way to do it - make it
customizable based on input, INI file settings, etc.

[View Quote]

Nov 15, 1998, 9:24pm

There is a little problem to give away the bot-programs:
<an excerpt from the licence agreement for the SDK>
BETA LIMITATIONS. The Active Worlds SDK is currently Beta Software and is provided as is for the purposes of
evaluation and testing only. By downloading the beta version of the SDK, you agree to not distribute the
SDK, nor any applications based on the SDK, to any person for any reason.
:(((

[View Quote] > Should we give away our bot-programs? Or should we offer to run them
> on someone else's behalf (getting their citizen# and
> privilege-password)? There are serious technical problems for either
> approach. (No, this is not a discussion of "how to make money from VR
> programming", which rightly belongs in the wishful thinking newsgroup.)
> If I were a non-programmer citizen, I'd hesitate to run a bot-program on
> my computer, if it came from some virtual person, free or not. And
> expecting ordinary citizens to scan open-source code looking for
> viruses, when even programmers can't figure out other programmers' code,
> is hopeless.
> So should we offer to run our bot-programs on our own machines? All
> builder-bot services, including the DJ Bot of Sample 2, can only be
> given away if the recipient lends us a citizen# and a
> privilege-password. The problem with the privilege-password is that it
> is too broad. Until the citizen revokes it, a privilege-password can be
> used to build or demolish objects owned by the citizen in any location
> in any World. If all I want is to have the programmer run a builderbot
> to build me a lawn and garden at x,z on AW, I don't want to put all my
> other objects on AW and other worlds at jeopardy. It's like having to
> give passwords to all my bank accounts in cities all over the world just
> to withdraw money from one account in Chicago.
> There should be SDK methods in support of secure transactions. The
> problem here is trying to use a universal password for a particular
> account. Is there some way that a privilege password can say which Zone
> on which World it applies to? Or is there some other way to get round
> this problem?

Nov 15, 1998, 10:40pm

Do you mean that (when it becomes legal to do so--see next comment) you will
give the citizen the program and the citizen will run the SeedBot program? or
that you will get a citizen# and privilege password from the citizen and you
will run the SeedBot on your machine (apparently this is already legal)?

[View Quote] > SeedBot asks for a citizen number and privilege password to use to build the
> seed object with. That's probably the best way to do it - make it
> customizable based on input, INI file settings, etc.
>
[View Quote]

Nov 15, 1998, 11:35pm

I didn't make it, but it's available for free download and the program
(which I downloaded) asks you for citizen number, privilege passwords,
coordinates, description, and object name and builds it.

[View Quote]

Nov 16, 1998, 2:10pm

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML>
I think your concern about people running others bot programs is unfounded.
AW has had a number of robot type programs in the past which a large number
of people have used with little fear of viruses. I agree the the possibility
exists but if I can get the source then I, as a programmer, would feel
much more comfortable.
<P>I don't like the idea of giving away the priv password for the reasons
that you mentioned.
<P>So, for me, the open source, free bot with lots of disclaimers is where
it should stay for awhile.
<P>Edward Sumerfield.
[View Quote]

Nov 20, 1998, 8:27pm

Is it okay for programmers to exchange program code designed for the SDK?

[View Quote] > There is a little problem to give away the bot-programs:
> <an excerpt from the licence agreement for the SDK>
> BETA LIMITATIONS. The Active Worlds SDK is currently Beta Software and is provided as is for the purposes of
> evaluation and testing only. By downloading the beta version of the SDK, you agree to not distribute the
> SDK, nor any applications based on the SDK, to any person for any reason.
> :(((
>
[View Quote]

Nov 20, 1998, 9:27pm

read the fine print - "to ANY person for ANY reason" :((

[View Quote] > Is it okay for programmers to exchange program code designed for the SDK?
>
[View Quote]

Nov 20, 1998, 10:49pm

I did--an *.exe is an application, mere code is not (an application is code in a form that users can execute on their
computers). I just want to make sure that SDK programmers really could exchange code, as happens here on the newsgroup
all the time, or post their source where other programmers could see it. We can also run our own SDK applications. But
we can't distribute them: that's all that is currently forbidden.

[View Quote] > read the fine print - "to ANY person for ANY reason" :((
>
[View Quote]

Nov 20, 1998, 11:34pm

First, we need an official statement from COF stating whether this paragraph is understood and/or enforced. It should be
removed from the license if it is not appropriate.

Second, I don't think we have to worry. COF release a beta product that we are testing for them. They are not about to
start suing people for breach of contract.

Edward Sumerfield.

[View Quote] > I did--an *.exe is an application, mere code is not (an application is code in a form that users can execute on their
> computers). I just want to make sure that SDK programmers really could exchange code, as happens here on the newsgroup
> all the time, or post their source where other programmers could see it. We can also run our own SDK applications. But
> we can't distribute them: that's all that is currently forbidden.
>
[View Quote]

Nov 21, 1998, 3:24am

I wouldn't worry about this clause too much. It is there to protect COF in
case someone tries to ship a supposedly finished product based on our beta
software. Presumably that clause will be removed once the SDK is released.

In the meantime, don't worry about exchanging source code or .exe's with
each other as you work on the SDK. As long as everyone understands that
this is beta software and it might be disabled, or fail, blah blah blah, at
any time, there shouldn't be any problem.

The one thing you should not do, however, is make an SDK-based application
and then give it to other people for their general use if they do not
understand that this is still beta software and so by using they are also
becoming unwilling beta testers.

-Roland


[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index