1  |   Order by index

Jan 10, 2001, 2:02am

What exactly is a "restricted command"? Is it like shift and fly, and how they can be shut off in a
world?

I can understand concerns, but someone wants to restrict light in a world. Now, if this is an
integer restriction, like "The light cannot be any brighter than X" then its fine but no lights
whatsoever? sheesh! I gotta delete lots of street lights I had plans for!
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net

"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve..."

Jan 10, 2001, 2:07am

It's for things like rotate and move that could be used to encroach in a public building world.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 10, 2001, 11:23am

Restricted commands are commands that can only be used if the world
owner sets it as available in the world features. The only restricted
command right now is "create url", as this would cause your web browser
to pop up to a web page as soon as the object comes into view. (not
always a good thing) But adding that integer restriction would
definitely be a good thing, in my view.

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Restricted Goober as decreed by COF
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 10, 2001, 11:32pm

Sure seems like light would have to be added to the list, though, doesn't
it, agent1?

[View Quote]

Jan 11, 2001, 11:41am

Well, I would probably add it to the list, yes. I've already engulfed a few areas in light, but I think you have to be able to see the light object for it to have any affect.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jan 11, 2001, 2:44pm

*ahem* Idea.
It's been agreed on that the light command needs to be restricted, thus
making it completely useless in all public building worlds. So, here's a
thought. Why not make yet another 'extended RWX command' such as #!
collision? Except, in this case, it would of course be #! light, or
something along those lines, with similar parameters as seen in the action
field version. A small collection of simple, premade light objects could be
added to the public world paths (they could be tiny invisible spheres, or
whatever... doesn't matter). omni5m.rwx, spot2.rwx, and so forth. This way,
lighting could still be used in public worlds such as AW, but not too an
excessive degree, as you could only use certain lighting options.

Hell, this'd save a lot on data limits even in non-public worlds, since
instead of adding the light command to the action field of every street
light object, you could just put it on the street light object.

[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2001, 12:20am

Drat. All the new commands -- looks like they will be restricted in AW. Prolly not in WAW but all
my good stuff is in AW.
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net

"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve..."

[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2001, 11:00am

Yes, at most the light will shine 120m (the max visibility), so I don't think there's a need to put a restriction on the light command.

[View Quote] > Well, I would probably add it to the list, yes. I've already engulfed a few areas in light, but I think you have to be able to see the light object for it to have any affect.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2001, 11:02am

Good stuff? AW has lots of shit in it. The REAL good stuff is on other worlds. Try visiting some and get cultured.

[View Quote] > Drat. All the new commands -- looks like they will be restricted in AW. Prolly not in WAW but all
> my good stuff is in AW.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2001, 8:19pm

i kinda agree with eep on that one.
there probly wont be tomany peeps totaly abuseing the comand i do see the
possability of abuse here though like some one holding down shift and insert
on a object useing the comand.
i think some one said something bout useing a priv pass of another cit to
delete tourist build abuseing a comand like that.
that way only the tourist vadelism object would be deleted leaving every one
else property alone basicly select cell by cell while hold shift hit delete
trash cleaned up..
[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2001, 12:30am

cultured?

Jan 13, 2001, 12:58am

I can see why the move command has to be restricted but umm, why rotate?
Doesn't it just rotate or does more than that?

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2001, 1:17am

If an object had it's axis translated far off of center then there's huge
potential for abuse. An object could be rotated right through your property
from far away without some kind of restriction. Now in the AW worlds that's
somewhat controlled by not having objects that are like that. Still, large
objects could also do the same thing.
Casay
[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2001, 6:49pm

By AWCI's books, worlds have different cultures. Hmmmmm..

--
- Tony56 (Tony M.) [chandler56 at mail.com]
"Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Pizza Pie!"
____________________________________________________________
[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2001, 7:10pm

[View Quote] You could do it on a smaller scale with normal objects. For example, you can
put a large wall just outside someone's property, and then turn it 90
degrees. Or you could block roads this way.

Rolu

> Casay
[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2001, 7:53pm

Oh, that's right, now I know why, but it would be better if they could make
it so it can't turn onto people's property and maybe same with the move?

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2001, 8:18pm

That would probably require a cell database rewrite since AW can't seem to handle "normally" rotated objects along the z-axis. However, since manually y-axis-rotated objects can give encroachment errors, there's no reason action-command-rotated objects can't as well. No "restrictions" necessary--just common sense programming Roland lacks all too well to me.

[View Quote] > Oh, that's right, now I know why, but it would be better if they could make
> it so it can't turn onto people's property and maybe same with the move?
>
[View Quote]

Jan 14, 2001, 11:31pm

Yeah but in AW all the really big objects are z (except for the balloon) or
are centered and will basically spin in place. I think that AW should find
some way to kinda (excuse any wrong words, not a programmer) pre-load the
rotate so that if the object encroaches then the command is blocked and the
object is reset to its previous state (like if you move it into someone
else's property, it snaps back).


--
/ |\ /| |\ /|
/ | \ / | | \ / |
\ | \/ | | \/ |
\_ | | | |
[View Quote]

Jan 14, 2001, 11:33pm

Not only AW has lots of shit in it, mars and meta are full of big areas of
claimed land, wildaw has claimed empty lots, and there are many worlds who
are owned by people who can't build at all (or at least not very well). And
AW does have a LOT of "good stuff" too, and many towns to visit so I guess
that makes up for not going to other worlds and having to d/l them only to
find out that they're bad.


--
/ |\ /| |\ /|
/ | \ / | | \ / |
\ | \/ | | \/ |
\_ | | | |
[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2001, 11:48am

But that would also have to be taken care of by the world server. Apparently it would cause too much stress on it to check for each object.


Here's an idea: in the registry, the distance of the farthest point from center on the object gets recorded. The world server could use a sphere made with that radius/whatever for encroachment detection.


-Agent1



[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index