Oz Linden Interview Summary

When the Lab finally got around to adding region Windlight, they had to change how data for a region was stored. Then prove in the viewer ways to manipulate the stored data.

48:00 – Parcel Windlight is another shared experience feature. It is already out there. It violates the policy, but the Lab is not going to force the issue. They want to work with the FS/PH team to implement the feature. Creating a way to store the data, Windlight settings, for the parcel and to allow parcel owners to change the data requires changes to the viewer and server. Only the Lab can make changes to the server. Those changes have to work with the viewer and the data stream between the viewer and the servers.

48:40 – Jessica brings up that the rule is so broad one could interpret RLV as being a violation of 2.k. I personally don’t think so. To me your use of RLV is not changing my experience of SL, unless I choose to allow it to. That ‘allow’ is a key point in understanding 2.k.

48:50 – Jessica bring up a point understanding that Oz understand the policy and the intent. But, what happens of Oz leaves the Lab?

Oz says, “With all due respect, I don’t think there is any way to answer that question.”

Oz goes on to explain the orientation of the Lab as running the Second Life business. One has to listen to this section because I’ll never convey the idea. I think even Oz fails to convey the reasoning and the paradigms for those that do not understand business, private, ownership, and free market ideas. These ideas and philosophies are not taught in modern schools. One now has to read the Federalist Papers to get them. Suffice to say the investors, managers using salries to pay mortgages and send kids to school, users trying to make a living from SL, and user using the for recreation have a common interest.

52:00 – Jessica points out the TPV Dev’s have made a considerable contribution to the success of SL. Oz agrees. Many 3rd Party features are coming to the LL viewer.

53:00 – Jessica bring up the concern about the Mesh Deformer paid for by the community and developed by Qarl. If the Lab decides they don’t want it, there is lost money (US$5k), Qarls time, and etc.

Oz says again, the Lab is committed to working with Qarl and getting the Mesh Defomer integrated into the core viewer for SL. He explains some of the challenges of getting code to an acceptable level and quality so it can be integrated into the LL viewer.

He mentions that the Avatar Physics we have now, bouncing boobies, was written by a Linden in his off time. It was not an assigned project.

56:30 – Jessica brings up feature surprises. If you don’t keep up on these things, the FUI (Flexible User Interface) we are using now was developed in ‘secret’ and sprung on the TPV community. It was released without prior notification. Viewer 2 was developed in secret and sprung on the entire SL community. Esbee Linden spoke at an SLCC meeting (2010 I think) saying that that had been a mistake. They had learned from it and it would not happen again.

We have seen the Viewer Evolution group disappear, where users got to talk with LL viewer dev’s, the FUI developed in secret, the Simplified Inventory pop up from no where… TPV Dev’s think it is obvious the Lab is going to work in secret.

The TPV Dev’s take heat when they are slow getting a feature from LL out into their viewers. They are accused of dragging their feet and spoiling those features. The TPV Dev’s can’t quickly adopt code when a mountain of new code is dropped on them. So, if the Lab wants the TPV Dev’s to get features out quickly and to work with them, why does the Lab want to work in secret?

57:55 – Oz says, the Lab is going to do some development behind closed doors and some development in an open environment.

The Simplified Inventory is a good example. The feature was written for the Basic Mode viewer. It did not make it in. Not too long ago they released it as a separate feature in a Project Viewer to see how people liked it. (see: Second Life’s Simplified Inventory Project) They learned a lot from the release. It has not been incorporated into the main viewer.

The Received Inventory feature was recently tested in a project viewer. They got a bunch of feedback. Now the teams are back to work incorporating the feedback into the features. Oz doesn’t say what we will or won’t get. I do expect Received Inventory to make it to the core viewer. Simplified Inventory, I have no clue about it.

Part of Oz’s job is keeping the TPV’s at near feature parity. So, he gets new features to the TPV Dev’s as soon as he can. WITH the caveat that normal software development goes through a series of ideas, plans, new ideas new problems, revised plans and repeat the process as often as necessary. The Lab wants the freedom to change their mind, to do OOPS, to find a better way or even give up a feature and move to a better implementation that looks completely different.

They will work in secret until they feel they can release the feature without wasting TPV Dev’s time. That means until they are nearly certain how it will work server and viewer side.

6 thoughts on “Oz Linden Interview Summary

  1. Pingback: New TPV policy changes - Page 100 - SLUniverse Forums

  2. Pingback: WHAT IS THIS CRAP? » And imagine how far we could fall

  3. Excellent Nalate’s, thanks for posting this “reader’s digest edition” it’s nice to finally read the end result of this review.

    One point which kind of stuck out though, Parcel WindLight… Seriously ? google “LightShare OpenSim” then google “LightShare Aurora-Sim” and you’ll make some interesting discoveries which have nothing to do with PH/FS or LL but rather Parcel/Region LightShare has been in OpenSim / Aurora-Sim for almost 3 years, supported by Imprudence Astra, Singularity and a couple of others…. by the way, it works wonderfully. Why not be up front about it and take from what is already designed, tested, implemented, debugged & known good ??? OpenSim being the best free idea sandbox & test resource that LL has. (oh I forgot, all the folks that were there @ LL when IBM argued that point are all laid off, so the corporate memory is NULL_SPACE.)

    I guess the next new innovation that LL & PH/FS dream up will be “Flexi-Regions” or “Flexi-Sims” which will look just like Mega-Regions or Variable Regions (as used in Aurora-Sim)…

    Sorry but it does leave a bit of an unpleasant after taste .

    • I’ve met you in OSGrid and appreciate the help you gave me. Thanks for being in both places and helping others.

      OpenSim does have a nicer version of WindLight in their Lightshare. I suppose while the OpenSim people could give the viewer side of Lightshare to LL and the Lab could use it, the Lab’s server is not open source. For the Lab to take the OpenSim Lightshare they would have to comply with the open source license. I seriously doubt that will happen.

      If you listen to Oz at 31:50, he is talking about how there is a mixed opinion about open source within the Lab. I find that completely understandable considering how some open source people have abused the Lab in the past.

      Flexi or Mega regions in SL seem unlikely to me. One of the Lab’s goals is to increase the population a region can carry. I suspect that is going to require some significant change and I believe those changes would have a major impact on how Mega regions would work. While I may be wrong, I see Mega regions being way down the road, if ever.

      I’m not sure which ‘it’ leaves the bad taste. For me, I see our biggest problem being how poorly a vocal part of the community is handling the changes at the Lab.

      • “it” = LightShare / WindLight is opensource as is OpenSim and yes while the platforms differ they are not that different. The viewer patches exist and are out there and also not a massive nasty. Parcel WindLight is something we all started asking for & discussing as soon as WindLight became available, LL did not bother to consider a full environment solution until well after OpenSim went ahead and implemented it because it not only made sense, it is used extensively.

        Re mega regions…. refer to https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-7583

        Completely agree that the culture that has evolved @ LL in regards to the open source community and that benefits no one which is a genuine shame that so many lose out as a result. Unfortunately that also has a direct impact on the overall community by effectively removing unity from community. Henri Beauchamps of CV had an excellent & clear look at the impact of TPV, very rational & sane without all the “sky is falling” chicken little routine.

        /me admits his guilt in helping people on various platforms and trying to get discussion going in ways to be of benefit to all.

        • Thanks for JIRA ID. I don’t understand the high JIRA number and the 2009 creation date…

          For a 2009 dated item to not yet be touched in some way by a Linden suggests there is some internal decision process at work.

          I think the change will be complex and lots of work. That usually mean it goes to the bottom of the priority list.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *