There isn’t any capacity to “do what you want” when there is no way for people to pay for it. It means that only the rich can have their purple private Idahos, or the friends of the rich. People who need to monetarize what they are doing to have a presence on line cannot achieve this because there is no intellectual or real property rights. Communism doesn’t work, people should realize this by now, it always leads to crime and destruction.

I don’t think you can afford to be a Pollyana with these Lindens, not at all. Their track record has proven that they only understand force when it comes to the community’s interests. That is, they’re prepared to be the most generous and beneficient of all the game gods, and, as I said, create the best democracy (which is always the worst system…except for all the others).

But the minute you REALLY want to make a claim for what is said to be yours and you don’t want to play along with the fanboyz, then you are discouraged, if not penalized.

I don’t know what the right answers are, hell, with the technical guts of it, I don’t even claim to understand what the _options_ are, but I hope by discussing it and participating, by doing my part to share that info with others, that it will spark good thoughts and conversation that will pay off, if not in Second Life, then in future iterations of virtual worlds.

I imagine something akin to the “laboratories of democracy” concept, many worlds with many systems and customs and protocols, that meet the needs of those who are using it. If I’m in a rush about anything, it’s getting the technology into the hands of as many people as possible with as much openness and flexibility as possible.

I DON’T want the experience of virtual worlds to be in the hands of the few, I want it in the hands of the many. You want a private Idaho, go for it, or you want a shared region of themed sims, or a sim where there is no currency or no gravity or a purple sky, go for it. I’m really at a loss as to what your objection is.

Also, you should know, I’m a Pollyana. I assume the best about everyone until proven otherwise. It’s what allows me to remain an idealist, and better foes than you have tried unsuccessfully to beat that out of me, so let’s not waste time on how naive I might be.

I hope more people will start jumping up and down and screaming wildly about this, it’s really a travesty. And the worst thing is that WE will be portrayed as Luddites and backward, and they will be portrayed as progressive, when they are the ones destroying a world, not us.

The idea that “nothing is set in stone” when a) you’ve already said that because the economy and the IP is too complex that it should just be ignored and you should press on with its destruction and b) because it takes awhile to do ths technology creates a total false impression. Because the entire construct of the thing is already hard-wired. It is hard-wired from the moment they first invite the maker and seller of Copybot to the table, and the reverse engineer of the server code to the table, when the TOS still says reverse-engineering is an offense.

Then you realize that the approach is one of destruction, theft, and crime, in the guise of revolutionary expediency.

It just seemed that there were two separate but related threads – the system architecture and how assets and associated permissions are handled. I hope the system architecture will be designed with the most flexibility to implement asset permissions/licensing schemes that protect content creators while still giving consumers portability across regions.

It doesn’t appear that anything is set in stone yet and it will take time to develop in any case, so we can hash these things out.

See, this is just completely extremist. You’re saying that just because something is complicated and has many interests involved, it has to be stepped on, sacrificed, and even brutally removed precisely because it “gets in the way” or something that is supposed to be “more important”.

What is the point of scaling architecture for a world in which no one can rationally participate because their creations, their land, their work are all callously destroyed by the makers in the name of the greater glory of the platform? It’s insane.

Only script-kiddies, griefers, anarchists, mad artists, etc will want to play in such a place. And that’s fine. Except…who will pay for it? Do you imagine you can keep shilling people to pay for this?

Those who paid tier — and paid the bottom line for this software company for four years — then don’t get to have any say about the devaluation of their land and intellectual property because uh, revolutionary expediency trumps the need to take on board any of their interests.

Ok, tough guy, when you’ve made your brave new world, and it has no people in it, you’ll know why. The revolutionary always eats its children.