WHAT’S A BOT? A BENEFIT OR A MENACE?

Is that a good, appropriate question to ask, nowadays or a worn out record. Let’s find out.

A bot is an avatar which is controlled by a machine, rather than by a human, simple really. So why worry about that? If a human can do a thing is Second Life, what does

it matter that the process can be automated?

On the positive side, it means that all regular or widespread communications can be done at a single stroke of a key and left to be run by a bot. So what’s the fuss?

It is the purpose to which a bot is put that is contentious. The notorious copybot is a case in point. It is possible to steal a design, change permissions, sell the design/product in huge quantities without the original creator benefiting from his or her work. Worse than that, a copybot automates this process. It can be placed in or around a designer’s premises without being identified and steal, steal, steal.

All activities in Second Life are based on the open source Linden Scripting Language (LSL) (open source means that it is available for anyone to use in any way that they can devise) this brings many benefits to Second Life residents’ lives. We can build houses, vehicles, clothes, we can write scripts to power our cars, planes and boats, to greet people, send them messages, invite them to parties etc.

Open Source means an open world.

However, it also makes virtual criminal activity possible, too. Like a knife, its use depends on the motives of the user. A knife can save a life (in surgery) or take a life (in a robbery). A bot can enhance our second lives by opening up communication channels, for instance, or it can bring misery, if used to steal our hard-earned designs of anything that can be built in Second Life.

There had been calls to revoke the open-source rights to residents. When the furore had cooled down, it was realised that this was just a knee-jerk reaction. Pandora’s box is open and it’s too late to close it.

Do we want to put our freedom back in the box? Just look at the figures when you log on to Second Life: 50,000 or more people logged-on at any one time. So many of those people are creating, contributing to their home-from-home.

Beautiful houses, “wild” animals, pets, cars, planes, even our own virtual bodies have been made possible by this open source policy. Linden Lab started everything but it’s the residents who have continued it to heights we see today.

And that’s the problem. With freedom comes the abuse of freedom. So, why should we NOT revoke open source lsl. Because we will also revoke our creativity.

We must protect our freedom over and above our commercial and financial gains, because those gains would not exist without “freedom” or ”open source”. Freedom is not the culprit here, it is the abuse of that freedom and those residents who abuse it to their own, selfish, ends that are the culprits.

With freedom comes responsibility, so let’s take that responsibility as a community and hunt down those who abuse our rights and remove THEM.

Kim Trefusis

moreless

The end of audio streams in SL? Part II

On June 27th we reported that there is a possibility that we will not be able to enjoy free audio streams in SL and that a lot of them might be forced to quit their activities (read full article here).

The American Copyright Royalty Board, aka SoundExchange published their plans to impose huge costs to audiostreams on the internet (streaming radio stations) and according to SaveNetRadio, an organization that fights these absurd plans, this would mean the end of the majority of radio stations. In June a lot of internet radio stations (including some well-known) went silent for a day, to protest. And huge numbers of fans, listeners, radio station employees and whatnot sent protest letters and emails to the American Congress to rule against the plans.

Today, before Congress actually made a ruling about this, SoundExchange changed their plans. No longer will radio stations be prone to an unlimited amount of royalties they have to pay. This is maximized at US$ 50,000 (a staggering L$ 1.3 million).

However, stations who want to apply this maximum amount will have to use the very controversial DRM copy/ripping protection to their streams. DRM has the goal to prevent people from recording from broadcasts, and is already under attack for the unreasonable limitations which it brings to consumers. Not only does it make legal recording for own personal use impossible, it also is a system that is very buggy on Linux and Apple computers.

Yesterday it was the date that the new rules would apply and law suits are bound to happen about this subject. In the meantime it is hard for the smaller radio stations to comply to the new rules, especially since the SoundExchange organization has not withdrawn their intention to charge stations backwards to January 1st of last year (2006).

In short, the American Congress has had to endure a lot of pressure from hundreds of thousands of people and in their turn has put pressure on SoundExchange to change the plans. They have done so, but not in a way that it will prevent radio stations from becoming too expensive to keep broadcasting.

Will we have to play our own illegally downloaded MP3's soon? Or will there be pirate/rogue radio stations with their own underground scene? Or will we actually have to use Voice to beat the deafening silence in SL? We will continue to watch the developments in this matter closely.

moreless