Eep, Bots should not be intigrated into the browser as plugins. (Wishlist)

Eep, Bots should not be intigrated into the browser as plugins. // Wishlist

1  |  

data21

Aug 6, 2001, 6:00am
Bots are best as separate programs. If they where integrated into the
browser then we would have to stay logged in to AW all the time just for
some of up to keep out 24/7 bots running. having the bot in a separate
program like they are now means we don't have to be in AW just to keep the
bots running, saves on PC resources, and on people thinking you rude not
answering telegrams or letting them join you not knowing your sleeping and
just keeping your 24/7 bot running.

tony m

Aug 6, 2001, 6:15am
this doesnt even belong here! DUH!

[View Quote] >Bots are best as separate programs. If they where integrated into the
>browser then we would have to stay logged in to AW all the time just for
>some of up to keep out 24/7 bots running. having the bot in a separate
>program like they are now means we don't have to be in AW just to keep the
>bots running, saves on PC resources, and on people thinking you rude not
>answering telegrams or letting them join you not knowing your sleeping and
>just keeping your 24/7 bot running.
>
>

data21

Aug 6, 2001, 6:17am
I know, I only posted it here because he posted here. Since few check the 2
to 3 day old posts re's
I just make it a new topic.


[View Quote]

eep

Aug 6, 2001, 6:44am
I mean the world server, not the browser (which could just have the GUI to CONTROL/CONFIGURE--or as a separate program--the plugins). Regardless, that separate GUI program would NOT have to be run all the time, unlike bots do now, since the "bots" (plugins) would be a part of the world server and run alongside it seamlessly like Web browser plugins do.

Next time please reply to the original post.

[View Quote] > Bots are best as separate programs. If they where integrated into the
> browser then we would have to stay logged in to AW all the time just for
> some of up to keep out 24/7 bots running. having the bot in a separate
> program like they are now means we don't have to be in AW just to keep the
> bots running, saves on PC resources, and on people thinking you rude not
> answering telegrams or letting them join you not knowing your sleeping and
> just keeping your 24/7 bot running.

data21

Aug 6, 2001, 7:01am
hmm this would run useing the worlds rights list for bots.
Wouldn't that lagg the world surver down?
Besides the surver running the world or worlds and holding all that come in
and out of them, it would also be running bots for each of the many users.
Still think its best for the user to host the bot and not the surver.

hmmm
users + building
or
users + building + 3 bots per user each bot doing its own thing.

You get a few of them more complex game bots in there that will drag the
surver down alot.



[View Quote]

john viper

Aug 6, 2001, 8:02am
"eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in news:3B6E572F.74A331DF at tnlc.com:

> I mean the world server, not the browser (which could just have the GUI
> to CONTROL/CONFIGURE--or as a separate program--the plugins).
> Regardless, that separate GUI program would NOT have to be run all the
> time, unlike bots do now, since the "bots" (plugins) would be a part of
> the world server and run alongside it seamlessly like Web browser
> plugins do.

What if you have not a world server?

_____________________________________________
Jeff Tickle (John Viper, #296714)
jviper at jtsoft.net
http://www.jtsoft.net

data21

Aug 6, 2001, 8:27am
I beleave hes talking about making bots built into the world surver. That
will look to the world rights to see who can use a bot in this world.
And have the AW browser use this world and bot surver combo. Making the AW
browser have a new pull down menu for bots. You pick the bot you want the
surver to load up, you config it, and it stays on even if you log off, the
bot stays on till you log in and turn it off.
Anyway, it would still cause a lot of lagg to the world surver



[View Quote]

brandon

Aug 6, 2001, 11:57am
so basicly those who dont host there own worlds cant run a bot.....or have
to pay the person who hosts their world extra for hosting bots

[View Quote]

brandon

Aug 6, 2001, 11:58am
and another thing this isnt a wishlist topic

[View Quote]

data21

Aug 6, 2001, 1:36pm
Yes it is, I am hopeing/wishing that AW dose not use this idea of Eep's LOL


[View Quote]

eep

Aug 6, 2001, 6:16pm
Play 3D games much? Some even have "bots" that run alongside the game server. Go play Quake and/or Unreal. Hell, go play ANY 3D game and you'll see there is a LOT more interaction and effects going on than in AW that DON'T require external programs running. Now quit being a pest and go LEARN about things before replying to posts about things you do NOT know ANYTHING about.

[View Quote] > hmm this would run useing the worlds rights list for bots.
> Wouldn't that lagg the world surver down?
> Besides the surver running the world or worlds and holding all that come in
> and out of them, it would also be running bots for each of the many users.
> Still think its best for the user to host the bot and not the surver.
>
> hmmm
> users + building
> or
> users + building + 3 bots per user each bot doing its own thing.
>
> You get a few of them more complex game bots in there that will drag the
> surver down alot.
>
[View Quote]

eep

Aug 6, 2001, 6:22pm
No. Good god you people can't think (and I tire of having to do all the thinking around here--especially for Roland the Wonder Twinkie). Attempt to extrapolate. Obviously you wouldn't need a world server to run a bot since the GUI (integrated and/or external app) could control them. Most of what bots do are part of worlds anyway and not as "companions" or whatever (obect building/manipulation/seeding, etc, etc). THOSE kinds of bots could stay external (or run alongside the uniserver). What I'm referring to are the bots that change world features (day-night light cycle, weather, monitor and react to named objects, etc, etc). These are things bots do that should be integrated into the world feature list.

[View Quote] > so basicly those who dont host there own worlds cant run a bot.....or have
> to pay the person who hosts their world extra for hosting bots
>
[View Quote]

data21

Aug 6, 2001, 6:55pm
Well why didn't you say it like that the first time, your 1st post about it
and the others you posted never told this part of your idea, this version of
it I like alot. I would be happy to have a built in bot that changes world
features :-)
And yes I do play 3D games. :-)


[View Quote]

wing

Aug 6, 2001, 7:45pm
Have standard issue as-they-are-now bots for normal users, and scripted server-side.
[View Quote]

eep

Aug 6, 2001, 8:47pm
That's where the extrapolation part comes in. If you didn't already know bots MOSTLY just control world features and other in-world effects than that's not MY problem, but yours--one of a lack of understanding of what bots actually do. <shrug> Learn more about something before replying to a post about it.

And don't change the subject field unless you leave the old one in. Extrapolate how that would look...

[View Quote] > Well why didn't you say it like that the first time, your 1st post about it
> and the others you posted never told this part of your idea, this version of
> it I like alot. I would be happy to have a built in bot that changes world
> features :-)
> And yes I do play 3D games. :-)
>
[View Quote]

data21

Aug 7, 2001, 3:44am
Shouldn't judge people without knowing what they can do.
It is you who didn't post your idea clear enough, till now your posts to
this topic had tons of gaps in it.
its ok to post a book type post, i will all of it.
I been using bots for 3 years going on 4, I know what a bot is and what
they are capable of doing.
[I used bots as world greeters], [world featurs changers], [univercel
actions for objects. Ex. you activate the action all see the effect]. [world
backing up], [prop loading/saving/building], [midi playing], [chating
through them], [moveing land from univerce to univerce and world to world],
[changing obejcts.]
they can probly to alot more then this to. yea theres alot more, but im not
wasting time listing all things a bot can to, id be here for years doing
that.


[View Quote]

deconstructor

Aug 7, 2001, 1:54pm
I personally feel Eep has a fairly good idea. I feel that this plugin
system should not only revolve around bots, but controlling everything, like
the world server. Perhaps there could be some universal SDK application, in
which you could just snap your various plug-ins in for what you need to do.
There would be your various standard plugins, for things such as world
server, perhaps some sort of propdump manager for a mapping program, or even
an AW browser plugin. And then, using the SDK, you could code (or download
other) plugins, which could be used for things such as bots and basic world
maintenence.

Why bother doing a plugin system at all? Not only do you have everything
working together instead of tons of seperate applications, but you can also
get the lovely use of object-oriented programming. Perhaps you could have
plugins on top of plugins, for example, a world maitenence plugin on top of
the world server plugin. The world maitenence plugin doesn't need to know
the inner workings of the server plugin, it just knows how to call it's
various functions that it needs to utilize.

1  |  
Awportals.com is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2022. All Rights Reserved.
Awportals.com   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn