lilbSecondLife is open source, and unless you close the source (and obfsucate it and use a language that's NOT C#), everybody who wants to cheat and upload for free would simply modify the upload routine and rip out the payment code anyway. If you closed certain modules to prevent that, you're going against the very idea of open source. It is not our job to make policy, and we are also not in the business of enforcing LL's policies.
Also, just from a pure technical perspective, payments and uploads really have nothing to do with each other. It would be bad design to build payments in to the texture upload function. However, if payments and uploads happen together frequently (as they would with texture uploads), then it would be smart to either introduce a second, overloaded function or a new function that allows the user to specify the payment amount as a parameter. The function would return an error condition if there wasn't enough money in the person's account.
IMO, paying for uploads should have been a server-side function all along, and I don't doubt that LL *will* implement that server side as soon as they figure out that people are adding assets to the server without paying to do it. (To do otherwise is simply bad design from a security standpoint.) I assume that you're already talking to a Linden once in a while: I'd suggest e-mailing that contact and commenting on this. I have a feeling that we'd see a change in the .12 release.
I have no doubt that as people start leveraging libSL in their programs that LL will have their hands full trying to keep up with the things people have figured out how to do. Free uploads are just the tip of the iceberg. Now that LL's official position is "we encourage beneficial reverse-engineering", Let LL worry about the bugs and security holes in their protocol and fix it. It's not our job. :-)
On 7/9/06, Adam Frisby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since inventory upload (aka automated asset creation) has been made
possible via the CRC discovery, I think it might be the time to raise
some important questions.
1. Upload fees are handled clientside, while I dont think this is the
best approach for LL to take - it is something we need to deal with. Do
we implement this? (Personally, I think there's a responsibility to
implement them.)
2. Automated uploads is now possible for more than just textures -
eventually someone's going to think it might be a great idea to share
files by uploading them as base64 encoded notecards - again I suggest we
implement a charge, L$2-10/asset fair?
3. Given the above, has anyone started implementing the code for
handling asset creation?
-Adam
_______________________________________________
libsecondlife-dev mailing list
libsecondlife-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/libsecondlife-dev
--
Tom Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
KI6ABZ
_______________________________________________ libsecondlife-dev mailing list libsecondlife-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/libsecondlife-dev
