Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Games

An Intro To OpenSim, the Apache of Virtual Worlds 87

Posted by timothy
from the simulation-not-yet-a-topic dept.
ajohnj1 writes with an excerpt from Ostatic: "You've probably read a bit about OpenSim, the BSD-licensed virtual world server, and recent news that IBM and Linden Lab are working to make Second Life and Open Sim interoperable. Besides that project, what's Open Sim about, who's working on it, what are they doing with it, and how do you get involved as a developer and participant? Here's a starter's guide."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

An Intro To OpenSim, the Apache of Virtual Worlds

Comments Filter:
  • by suso (153703) * on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @09:14AM (#24657369) Homepage Journal

    I predict it will only take a day for someone to start working on a project to rewrite this in some more open source friendly language. Just because it says OpenSimulator doesn't mean it really is.

    I've been waiting for this whole ordeal to happen. I consider this technology to be the next medium that everyone will use and it will supplant HTTP. It needed two requirements for it to take off though. First, an open protocol needed to be developed and second it needed to be possible to interconnect different servers together to make once cohesive environment. Well, we have the first part now, is this the second part?

    Time to go write a new spreadsheet. [suso.org]

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by neokushan (932374)

      Wouldn't it be wiser to spend that effort working on a project that makes C# more open source friendly [mono-project.com], rather than simply rewriting any/all projects that use it?

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by ultranova (717540)

        Wouldn't it be wiser to spend that effort working on a project that makes C# more open source friendly, rather than simply rewriting any/all projects that use it?

        Better yet, don't use C#, use Java.

      • by Mr. Slippery (47854) <`ten.suomafni' `ta' `smt'> on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @09:44AM (#24657673) Homepage

        Wouldn't it be wiser to spend that effort working on a project that makes C# more open source friendly

        Not possible. So long as Microsoft retains the ability to attack Mono through patent suits, C# cannot be "open source friendly".

        C# is a poison pill that Microsoft would love to see the F/OSS community swallow.

        • I thought Microsoft released a patent promise not to sue on any protocols they've released and/or opened up. Suing over the items they're opening up would basically violate the EU agreement. Microsoft wouldn't get anything out of the suit, and they'd end up paying massive (half a billion dollars last time) fines.

          Microsoft isn't going to sue on these specific patents.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by DragonWriter (970822)

        Wouldn't it be wiser to spend that effort working on a project that makes C# more open source friendly [mono-project.com], rather than simply rewriting any/all projects that use it?

        There's not a whole lot of open source projects in C# (or for the .NET platform more generally) that don't have comparable open source projects that aren't targetted to .NET, but to more open source platforms (either because they are more platform agnostic or because they target a specific platform whose principal implementation

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tepples (727027)

      I consider this technology to be the next medium that everyone will use and it will supplant HTTP.

      They said that about VRML replacing HTML, but readers didn't prefer a 3D room over a 2D page.

      • by suso (153703) *

        I consider this technology to be the next medium that everyone will use and it will supplant HTTP.

        They said that about VRML replacing HTML, but readers didn't prefer a 3D room over a 2D page.

        I think that this was because they were trying to run before they even learned to crawl. I mean they tried to get VRML going back in the mid 90s when most people still didn't know what the Internet was. They needed something simpler to introduce people too. Maybe now VRML would do better if it had some momentum behind it, but it doesn't, and now this is here so tough luck.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by vrmlguy (120854)

          They said that about VRML replacing HTML, but readers didn't prefer a 3D room over a 2D page.

          I think that this was because they were trying to run before they even learned to crawl. I mean they tried to get VRML going back in the mid 90s when most people still didn't know what the Internet was. They needed something simpler to introduce people too. Maybe now VRML would do better if it had some momentum behind it, but it doesn't, and now this is here so tough luck.

          Speaking as someone who was there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vrmlguy [wikipedia.org]), VRML was indirectly crashed by Microsoft. MS was pushing something, maybe Direct3D, as *the* 3-D technology for the next millennium. In response, SGI started opening up every piece of IP they had, apparently on the theory that a small part of a open-sourced world was better than no part of an MS-controlled one. VRML was written and implemented in no time at all, and yeah, there's a few bugs that got included. As it turned out

      • by Animats (122034) on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @10:34AM (#24658393) Homepage

        The VRML people made a terrible mistake. They 1) went XML, and 2) got taken over by advertising people. The VRML effort was shut down in favor of something called "X3D", which is, exactly, VRML syntax with XML delimiters. "Now you can have spinning 3D logos with 60 characters of X3D!". This positioned X3D as an ad-delivery system, for which it's terrible.

        If you bring up an old VRML viewer on a modern machine with a good broadband connection, it works great. It's still not very useful, but it does work. Most computers of 1997 didn't have enough graphics power to run VRML properly, so it was hopeless back then. (I had a machine that did, because I was using a high-end animation system. But it cost $6000 and sat in a 19 inch rack.)

        You can be too early. I was interviewed by "There" [there.com] when they were starting up. They were determined to make a 3D shared virtual world that would work over a dial-up modem. [there.com] I told them this was going to produce a terrible user experience, drive them nuts trying to cram that data through a tiny pipe, and that by the time they got the thing going, enough users would have broadband to make a broadband-only product feasible. They stayed with dial-up, launched There just as broadband was starting to get serious market share, never really made it, and downsized when the funding ran out. There is now owned by something called "Makena Technologies", still running, and still designed for dial-up modems.

    • by Chyeld (713439) <chyeld@NOsPAm.gmail.com> on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @10:16AM (#24658117)

      I've been waiting for this whole ordeal to happen. I consider this technology to be the next medium that everyone will use and it will supplant HTTP. It needed two requirements for it to take off though. First, an open protocol needed to be developed and second it needed to be possible to interconnect different servers together to make once cohesive environment. Well, we have the first part now, is this the second part?

      With respect, there have been numerous attempts to replace text based protocols with visual worlds since before the web. I remember drooling over ads in my dad's old Atari ST magazines where BBSes were advertising virtual worlds where everything was represented as a building in a isometric 3d city and people ran along the streets talking to each other.

      These have never taken off as the main stream interface because even if you were able to achieve a completely believeable virtual world, it still wouldn't present the same information bandwidth as simply pulling up pages and reading them. And porn jokes aside, the real drive of the internet is presenting information, not pretty visuals.

      These will always be the niche, rather than the mainstream, way of interacting because no one wants to 'run' for 30 mintutes to do something that could be accomplished in 30 seconds outside of the world.

      That being said, I wouldn't mind seeing what could be created once the reigns were passed from corporations looking for money to Joe Six-Pack. Will it be a revolution or another eternal September?

      Given Second Life is already exhibiting a second coming of 'GeoCities' crappy design, I'm not certain I'll be welcoming our new OpenSim overlords.

      • Interoperability is the interesting part for me. Graphics can be upgraded, but if there is a simple standard available for me to connect my online persona with many different online worlds, that begins to change things.

        Host your own servers, do your own stuff, invite who you want, go to other places on a whim (just type the address), visit other people, etc. I remember how bad websites were in the early 90's. Tacky animated gifs, horrible images... this is the second life of today. With time, stand
  • in seeing this come to the inevitable Open Source Server code from Linden. Though I mentioned "inevitable", it was hoped this would happen when they released the viewer source.

    My opinion is Open Source and complete interoperability between the SL Grid and OpenSim Grids will never happen. Just look at the number of viewers that were coded to grab peoples credentials, then multiply that by a malicious server admin.

    Taking into account the amount of real world revenue the game generates, I don't foresee this
    • Re:I'm interested (Score:4, Insightful)

      by elrous0 (869638) * on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @09:48AM (#24657717)
      Linden has been TALKING about open sourcing for years. So far, they've delivered very little.
    • How is this different then an Apache server serving a page to a Firefox browser with a link that takes the viewer to an IIS web page?

      The only catch is that people in the virtual world may want their virtual stuff to go along with them, and that part will be more difficult. Set that aside, and I don't think it's inconceivable to have pretty good interoperability.
  • Who cares? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AlXtreme (223728) on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @09:48AM (#24657727) Homepage Journal

    After all the hype of Second Life, and the realization that only a bunch of furries and other weirdos [theregister.co.uk] (NSFW) are into it, why prolong the suffering of SL with initiatives like these?

    The problem with all 'virtual worlds' is simply that they are boring. There is nothing more for the average user to do than walk around and be a good little virtual consumer of virtual products. This in contrast with the massively popular MMORPGs that, while they are criticized for the grind-fest, at least give their users a good time in the process (how else could one explain the millions of paying WoW/Eve/whatnot users, compared to the thousands not paying a dime in SL?).

    So (and this is not a troll), who cares about SL or any similar 'virtual world'? What am I missing about virtual worlds that seems so attractive to hype, corporations and in this case even open source developers, but clearly not to ordinary users?

    • Re:Who cares? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ash-Fox (726320) on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @09:58AM (#24657875)

      The problem with all 'virtual worlds' is simply that they are boring. There is nothing more for the average user to do than walk around and be a good little virtual consumer of virtual products.

      Those are stupid users and I would be happy if they would go away on Second life. Much like the annoying club people.

      They don't do anything creative on Second life, they just take up space, they're not interesting conversation and are so computer illiterate, everything is a issue for them. They come up with random explanations for problems they're having which has nothing to do with it.

      On Second life, I spend a lot of time scripting, building things. From things from in-world air defense systems to play against other builders as a game to building things that are deemed practically impossible or really difficult due to the technical limitations in world.

      (how else could one explain the millions of paying WoW/Eve/whatnot users, compared to the thousands not paying a dime in SL?).

      Second life is not a game. It's a virtual world. It's not a roleplaying game.

      So (and this is not a troll), who cares about SL or any similar 'virtual world'? What am I missing about virtual worlds that seems so attractive to hype, corporations and in this case even open source developers, but clearly not to ordinary users?

      Nothing, it isn't exploitable by corporations, ordinary users are too stupid to make any use of it - although there are some that go there and just waste resources and in the case of open source developers - I don't see how a DRM system that Second life uses interests Opensource developers when they can't prevent people from close sourcing their builds or scripts.

      • by AlXtreme (223728)

        On Second life, I spend a lot of time scripting, building things. From things from in-world air defense systems to play against other builders as a game to building things that are deemed practically impossible or really difficult due to the technical limitations in world.

        So, what you are saying is that people actually turn SL into a game?

        I guess that the boundaries between role playing games and virtual worlds aren't that clear as you make them out to be, although the former tend to be more limiting when i

        • by Ash-Fox (726320)

          So, what you are saying is that people actually turn SL into a game?

          Some do. It really doesn't let you do much more. Some people creating virtual accessories and clothing that they sell for a 'business' though.

          It would be interesting to find out how many people (like you) are actively creating within SL

          Not that many unfortunately.

          Some interesting tid bits about Second life:

          Linden lab tried to reward creativity a while back using something called 'Dwell'. If people stayed on your plot of land for a while, yo

          • by AlXtreme (223728)

            Interesting how Lindenlabs are trying to foster creativity (as they do seem to think it's important, otherwise they wouldn't have tried this). It's actually a pity SL hasn't gotten very far (I certainly had higher hopes for it), but it's still an interesting experiment to see what works.

            Anyway, thanks for your tidbits!

        • by ozphx (1061292)

          What he's saying is that SL is so full of furries and other tards you need a full time programmer to write "in world air defense" to defend your island against dive bombing cocks...

          • by Ash-Fox (726320)

            What he's saying is that SL is so full of furries and other tards you need a full time programmer to write "in world air defense" to defend your island against dive bombing cocks...

            Actually one of the anti-air defense missiles is a giant dong I made out of bordom. It's pretty hilarious watching those bombard a fighter craft.

            • Actually one of the anti-air defense missiles is a giant dong I made out of bordom. It's pretty hilarious watching those bombard a fighter craft.

              *Sigh* ... And this is where you just lost your argument, and confirmed the parents view (bias as it may be) on all the people in SL. I think if you had omitted this little anecdote, the merit of your argument might have still carried weight.
              I have nothing against SL even if it's not for me. It's an avenue of entertainment like any other vice; we all have them.

              • by Ash-Fox (726320)

                *Sigh* ... And this is where you just lost your argument, and confirmed the parents view (bias as it may be) on all the people in SL. I think if you had omitted this little anecdote, the merit of your argument might have still carried weight.

                I never denied that. I have been agreeing with each of that person's points, except for the 'boring' argument. But it is exactly true that "There is nothing more for the average user to do than walk around and be a good little virtual consumer of virtual products." and

      • Nothing, it isn't exploitable by corporations [...]

        That's yet to be determined. There have been a number of corporations that have done some really dumb things in SL... like expecting people to pay for a box textured to look like an MP3 player or PC... and turned around and thrown their hands up. That just means that they haven't figured it out yet.

        The same kinds of comments were made about the web in the early days. It's useless. People don't get it. Corporations can't succeed. It's only for porn. You know

        • by Ash-Fox (726320)

          That's yet to be determined. There have been a number of corporations that have done some really dumb things in SL... like expecting people to pay for a box textured to look like an MP3 player or PC... and turned around and thrown their hands up. That just means that they haven't figured it out yet.

          Seriously, what are they going to do on Second life?

          I know Second life's capabilities and it doesn't allow for much.

          Most people don't want to spend money on Second life either.

          Then there is the brilliant issue of

          • by argent (18001)

            Seriously, what are they going to do on Second life?

            Second Life now? Second life in five or ten years? Some descendent of OpenSim in five or ten years? You're looking at the equivalent of the Internet in the late '80s and early '90s, when the only browser available required a NeXT workstation, and asking why there isn't a Google yet.

            • by Ash-Fox (726320)

              Second Life now? Second life in five or ten years? Some descendent of OpenSim in five or ten years? You're looking at the equivalent of the Internet in the late '80s and early '90s, when the only browser available required a NeXT workstation, and asking why there isn't a Google yet.

              Gopher was quite fine back then for retrieving information, even had a decent search capability and perfectly logical category system. E-mail was popular with those who had a address.

              On top of that, BBS systems were getting netwo

              • by argent (18001)

                Yes, you had gopher, and FTP, and Finger. You had BBS systems. You had Compuserve and other online services that were totally dominating in the search for a business model: I was paying $60 a month for a news clipping service called NewsNet in 1984, and Compuserve came up with something similar and I dropped it.

                The only non-centralized system that had any business interest was email.

                Email was a huge mess: there were at least 30 competing email systems... it was the only network protocol that business really

                • by Ash-Fox (726320)

                  I don't see what you're arguing. There is a difference between a mess and being completely useless.

                  • by argent (18001)

                    There's Second Life and OpenSim and Lively and There and IMVU and ActiveWorlds and HiPiHi and Habbo Hotel and ...

                    It's a mess.

                    You're saying, it sounds like, that the ad-hoc system that (I suppose) only geeks can understand is useless for business because it's too complex and people don't spend money in it. Like Internet Mail was, because unlike MCI Mail and Compuserve Mail, it was too complex and there was no way to charge people for it.

                    Which is why my email address is still "c=us/o=compuserve/ou=cis/id=7021

                    • by Ash-Fox (726320)

                      You're saying, it sounds like, that the ad-hoc system that (I suppose) only geeks can understand is useless for business because it's too complex and people don't spend money in it.

                      No, I'm saying it's useless because the current platform cannot do anything worthwhile in scripting, building or otherwise. Second life is not ad-hoc, it is entirely centralized by Linden lab. The Opensim non-sense can't even connect to the Second life grid.

                      it was too complex and there was no way to charge people for it.

                      Second li

                    • by Ash-Fox (726320)

                      There's Second Life and OpenSim and Lively and There and IMVU and ActiveWorlds and HiPiHi and Habbo Hotel and ...

                      Jesus christ, you're comparing stuff like Second life and Habbo Hotel and claiming they're the same thing. They have completely different goals and are utterly unrelated.

                    • by argent (18001)

                      Jesus christ, you're comparing stuff like Second life and Habbo Hotel and claiming they're the same thing.

                      It's not like "MCI Mail" and "SMTP" are the same thing either.

              • Here's a message I posted in 1991 bemoaning the lack of business interest in the Internet, in particular Compuserve's lack of telnet access:

                In article <1991May21.165458.7441@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@... (Gary Heston) writes:
                > Compuserve likes to bill for the use of their systems; billing people
                > who telnet in would be very difficult.

                Why?

                I'm sure it'd look like this:

                % telnet compuserve.com
                Trying...
                Connected to compuserve.com.

      • by skeeto (1138903) on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @10:56AM (#24658747)

        Second life is not a game. It's a virtual world.

        Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard this before. "It's not a doll, it's an action figure!" :-P

        • by Ash-Fox (726320)

          Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard this before. "It's not a doll, it's an action figure!" :-P

          Well, game definitions are usually something among the lines of:

          • A contest with rules to determine a winner; "you need four people to play this game"
          • A single play of a sport or other contest; "the game lasted two hours"
          • A pursuit or activity with rules performed either alone or with others, for the purpose of entertainment.

            • note: Second life's purpose is not to entertain if you read the mission statement etc.
    • I do (Score:2, Interesting)

      by darkvizier (703808)

      Second Life is a poor implementation of an awesome idea. The problem is that there's no purpose to it yet... it's ahead of its time. They've built a platform with no content, and they're relying on their users to fill the gap.

      I don't care much for the game itself, but I do care about the concept of virtual worlds. I believe it's necessary for human culture to always have new frontiers - wild west zones where men with ambition can make their own fate.

      Humanity has two possible frontiers left - space, and v

      • Second Life is a poor implementation of an awesome idea.

        Think about what you just said. Then consider all the other Second Life spin off virtual worlds that have failed. Linden Labs was able to pull off what many others have failed to do. And they did a pretty good job of it. Sure, the client might be inherently buggy, and support might not be the best. But the world they've allowed to be created, and the community that surrounds it is incredible.

        They've built a platform with no content, and they're relying on their users to fill the gap.

        When SL started, the original content was created by Linden Labs. You act as though they simply opened the grid as a

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      What did people do with early websites in the beggining.

      At first, they were just boring static pages that were either a horrible marketing attempt. How far has the internet come now that there are things like collaborative Encyclopedia building (Wiki), Google docs, YouTube, Ebay etc.

      It is impossible to tell what this medium will make possible in 5 years.

      Also, I wouldn't exactly call IBM [ibm.com] a furry or weirdo. Nor would I say that Cisco [cisco.com] is either. There are also a growing number of universities colleges u
      • by AlXtreme (223728)

        What did people do with early websites in the beggining.

        At first, they were just boring static pages that were either a horrible marketing attempt. How far has the internet come now that there are things like collaborative Encyclopedia building (Wiki), Google docs, YouTube, Ebay etc.

        Wrong. The first websites were very effective at the dissemination of information (for instance at CERN), there was nothing else that came close. Marketing only jumped on the bandwagon at the end of the 90's, which lead to the i

        • I can't help but remain skeptical. Maybe it's due to having read too many articles on El Reg, but maybe, just maybe, all those articles about Second Life are just attempts from Linden Labs to keep the hype running? I don't know a single person who has stayed in SL beyond simply trying it out.

          Tell me, are your friends like yourself. Are they "traditional hardcore geeks"? SL isn't for you. Remember when the Internet was all shell accounts, gopher, Archie, Veronica, command-line ftp, mutt, pine, and elm? R

          • by AlXtreme (223728)

            Tell me, are your friends like yourself. Are they "traditional hardcore geeks"? SL isn't for you.

            Alas, of all my friends I'm the weird little geek. The take-up of social networks is enormous, but SL? Most haven't even heard of it. If SL isn't for geeks, and isn't interesting enough to non-geeks, a question begs: for who is SL?

            Second Life is the http to There/IMVU/Actiworlds/VRML's gopher/veronica/archie. SL is the NCSA Mosaic of virtual worlds, primitive and cludgy in certain ways, but still there's nothing

  • Opensim is severely lacking in abilities compared to normal Second life to the point that it is absolutely useless.

    • Where does Google's Lively fit into this?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Such as? I've set up some Opensim servers, and it has quite a few. Not to mention, if something doesn't exist, it can be created (since it is open source).
      • by Ash-Fox (726320)

        Such as? I've set up some Opensim servers, and it has quite a few. Not to mention, if something doesn't exist, it can be created (since it is open source).

        Proper physics, working attachments, proper scripting, centralized inventory servers so you can take your attachments and so on with you.

        In other words: The things that make Second life worth using.

        • Opensim allows use of either a basic physics engine or OpenDynamicsEngine which has COD 4 on its list (see here) [wikipedia.org]

          It supports LSL, OSL, and c# for scripting with a few limitations (see here) [opensimulator.org]

          For centralized inventory servers, that depends on the grid owner's implementation since Opensim supports several database types.

          I'm not saying that opensim is anywhere close to Second Life's level as a finished product, but I would hardly call it useless, especially since it is impossible to run a Second Life serve
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Ash-Fox (726320)

            Opensim allows use of either a basic physics engine or OpenDynamicsEngine which has COD 4 on its list

            Which, I have used and is entirely rubbish, it doesn't even reach the crap physics of regular Second life.

            It supports LSL, OSL, and c# for scripting with a few limitations

            It isn't just a few limitations. All my previously written scripts do not work what-so-ever on Opensim because so many functions are not implemented correctly or not implemented at all. Anything I was interested in, in regular Second life i

  • by foniksonik (573572) on Tuesday August 19, 2008 @10:38AM (#24658453) Homepage Journal

    When Apple reinvents iLife to be a VR world where you can edit photos in a dark room, put up a virtual gallery of them, walk them down to get books made, etc. etc. Garage Band will actually be a garage studio where you can lay down tracks with your friends... pull off concerts for millions, etc etc. iMovie will be a virtual film studio with greenscreen and effects lab in real time....

    Until then nobody will care ;-p

    • Virtual reality is useful for allowing you to do things that would be too difficult/expensive/dangerous to do in the real world or more traditional interfaces, such as training on operating very valuable equipment or visualizing complex data. Slapping an "Oooh look, 3D!" interface onto an existing (and arguably well designed) workflow will only make a task harder and less fun to do, not easier and more fun. I realize you're just trolling, but the "3D Interace is teh aw3s0m3!" is infuriatingly common...

      • Oh i agree with you completely, which is why i was just trolling... there's nothing useful to add to this conversation until someone comes up with a legitimate input device for interacting in 3D.... using a 2D input device makes 3D visuals nothing but candy.

        The only use for 3D now is entertainment value. I'm currently working on a 3D interface for a flash application to control an Inflight entertainment system... nothing but candy. A 2D interface would be easier to use, etc. etc. but hey... it's just entert

  • I find it strange so many people slate Second Life when there's so much potential for metaverse systems. What I'd love to see is 'gaming zones', so you'd be able enter a certain area of Second Life (or whatever), agree to a dialog box or some such and the rules and physics for any 3D game, first (Quake!) or third person (WoW-like?), would take effect with some kind of organisational system for points, tournies, time restriction, etc. Even just a basic samurai sword fight! I'll also expect to use a "Use your

    • by adriccom (44869)
      Pssst. The already have some of that, although it's not quite Snow Crash yet. In world, check out Samurai Island, or DarkLife for examples of what you are asking for. There are also a few big RP/combat Sims, just look around.
  • Ugh, I understand the interoperability bootstrap concerns that lead to them being compatible with Linden's stuff, but Linden's stuff is just crap. It's poorly designed because it wasn't even designed, it was just accreted. The CTO they booted last (?) year even admitted he spent all of one night designing Linden Script (which was asinine decision #2 after asinine decision #1 to create Yet Another Scripting Language). The entire structure is just fragile as hell (and shows it) as they push one bleeding wound

    • by adriccom (44869)

      Wow. Have you ever heard of Samba? It's kind of useful, most would agree ..

      At least according to the OpenSim docs, they have reversed the functionality of LL's sim servers into a completely new implementation. I'd also like to note that despite the flaws, and perhaps despite themselves, LL has managed to keep SL up and growing and is the only "virtual world" to actually succeed in this after, what, a dozen companies have tried?

      Not that I'm holding up the LL Grid as a wonder of engineering or anything, but a

      • by Sarusa (104047)

        I don't think you comprehend at all how much being tied into a badly designed API constrains and weakens an implementation through all the bad explicit and implicit assumptions it makes, though I fully expect that OpenSim's implementation will be better.

        It is, as I said, a highly polished version of a turd. But a turd that lets you unleash fleets of flying penises at will (which is what the other virtual worlds have failed to let you do), so perhaps that'll be good enough for OpenSim as it has been for Lind

What the scientists have in their briefcases is terrifying. -- Nikita Khruschev

Working...