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 is currently not possible on OpenSim. llhttprequest for example doesn't even send all the headers that it's supposed to. Yet it's claimed to be fully implemented.
Stop trying to spin it, I have used OpenSim and I have determined it is worthless for my uses entirely.
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 server of your own.
You can "rent" a full featured simulator however from Linden lab.
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.
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 networked to the Internet back in the early 90s, allowing inter-business communications on business BBS systems.
I can definitely see the Internet being/useful/ back then.
Honestly, with LVM on Linux, I don't really see the benefits of ZFS over it (note: you can get ZFS over fuse on Linux if you really wanted).
The only thing I ever hear about what's good about Solaris is the fact it has ZFS and dtrace. Both of which I'm not interested in. Seriously, just go look on sun.com for information about what's good about Solaris. They come up with the regular buzz words such as 'scalable' etc. But the only meat I ever find is 'ZFS' and 'dtrace'.
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.
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 what's to stop one idea from being copied and done by a billion other people?
The same kinds of comments were made about the web in the early days.
As I recall, in the early days we had BBS systems and many companies were making use of these for short, long distance communication, working remotely, e-mail. Sure, it wasn't as common as things are today, but you could see the benefit with BBS systems which evolved to moving the infrastructure they provided onto the Internet. Where everything could intercommunicate more.
Now, I look at Second life... Sorry, I don't see anything similar going on here at all.
Despite all my knowledge and experience on Second life, I cannot see how it is useful for companies.
If Second life was widely adopted - I can only think of using it as a graphical chat room, for support, isn't that sad?
Even then, I couldn't recommend it for stuff like teaching because there are far better technologies out there for remote teaching, which let you use things such as whiteboards etc.
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, you would earn virtual currency - they saw this as the perfect way to detect people being creative.
What happened was that people set up something called 'camping chairs'. People would sit on these chairs for hours on end and do nothing and earn a percentage of the money the owner of the land was making. This was a way to get free money and didn't reward creativity at all. The funny thing was that the creative people had little money in the game, despite all these marvelous inventions and selling them. While the people who just sat around and literally doing nothing, had plenty.
Eventually Lindenlab removed this system - good riddance.
Then these people just focused on excessive gambling things in Second life, eventually this got 'outlawed' too.
Now people are just using dancing animations and very light roleplay as 'dancers' in clubs on Second life to make virtual currency and they end up making more than many decent content creators.
Second life unfortunately isn't really a place where most novel business ideas and creativity will make you money. But sex, much like in the real world, sells well.
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.
That, and IPv4 is just more convenient because you can actually remember the addresses without writing them down. I can say "Hey, ping 10.10.1.12" and people will do it. Try that with an ipv6...
Imagine your exec takes his laptop home, plugs it into his home internet connection, and all his corporate applications Just Work without setting up a VPN or anything. Doesn't have to call the helpdesk. Doesn't fiddle with it and break something. All protected by IPSec over IPv6.
In practice: Doesn't work at all because his home network like every other consumer home network doesn't provide IPv6 address allocation and there is nothing the IT staff can do about it.
Beyond extra work, new networking hardware... Security is a major one. I personally don't feel very comfortable using IPv6 with the amount of exploits and issues getting continuously patched on the Linux kernel with it.
Lack of IPv4 embedding in IPv6 has to rank as one of the dumbest decisions of all time. It reminds me of that "anti-spam proposal evaluation worksheet" that floats around in the comments here from time to time.
On every Internet IPv6 network I've used, I've been able to connect to IPv4 addresses. The networks had a IPv6 to IPv4 gateway, the gateway was essentially a NAT.
To answer your original question, there's little or nothing that needs to be done to set this up. Either your ethernet switch knows how to handle multicast, and therefore sends it only to subscribing ports, or it doesn't, and it broadcasts the data to all active ports, just like a hub. I imagine you were using some low-end home switch/router for your tests, which simply isn't smart enough to handle multicast properly. You can be sure, however, your ISP isn't using such low-end kit.
Well, I'm still glad my ISP isn't using multicast. Because my hardware was provided by my ISP and obviously if they started multicasting to me because one computer on my netowrk wanted to see the stream, my entire network would be flooded.
"a lot" ? examples? everything I use on a daily basis in the server space is v6 compatible and has been for a few years now.
I'm just talking general software. But in my experience: Google desktop, Google earth, pretty much every instant messenger but some xmpp clients, media players etc.
There is a lot more software that won't work when you have only a IPv6 IP address on your network card (yes, I had a proper IPv6 to v4 gateway setup).
IPv6 has its own challenges... the biggest problem with IPv6, though, is the chicken and the egg. Until more hosts support IPv6, there's not much point to using it.
A lot of IP based software is incapable of using IPv6, I know this from experience when using exclusively a IPv6 address.
I was shocked, on the other hand, to find that there were no Windows XP drivers and that inserting the Windows XP CD and booting from it caused a BSOD before the installing starts. I have an HP Pavilion DV5-1002NR.
Do not purchase this laptop if you want to use Windows XP on it.
On the upside, Kubuntu runs perfectly out of the box on a HP Pavilion DV5-1002NR.
Nevertheless, even locally, broadcast is more efficient than unicast if more than one client wants to listen.
That depends, flooding every computer on the network with information is not desirable. It takes away bandwith from every computer on the network at the expense of this 'efficiency'. Personally I would be very unhappy with my ISP if I was receiving unicast content I didn't want.
Curious about this, because I'm still getting my test network set up. How complex is the network? My understanding is that packets are broadcast to every host on the subnet and they can choose to listen or not.
The network wasn't that complex, only one router and testing with VNC and some packet inspection utilities. My understanding after numerous trials was that it was essentially the same as doing a broadcast, all the devices were receiving the packets, they never 'asked' for it. With this mind, I don't really see how a computer can 'opt-in' for receiving, they're sent the packets either way. The only choice you have really is if you want to decode the data you're getting sent or ignore it.
I never went out of my way to read the RFCs on the matter, simply because this was just me fooling around with the idea out of curiosity, didn't have any practical use for it.
I'm probably doing this wrong to begin with and if that's the case, I wouldn't mind being told exactly what is needed to do this properly.
This was directly from a couple big consumer web sites. I haven't seen published numbers for this, but I'm sure there must be other web sites that track it.
The reason why I asked for sources is because I've never seen the Apple platform that large on any large scale statistics tracking systems. Then again, I don't deal with strictly US content and I hear Apple is far more popular there.
Slashdot Mirror
Which, I have used and is entirely rubbish, it doesn't even reach the crap physics of regular Second life.
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 is currently not possible on OpenSim. llhttprequest for example doesn't even send all the headers that it's supposed to. Yet it's claimed to be fully implemented.
Stop trying to spin it, I have used OpenSim and I have determined it is worthless for my uses entirely.
You can "rent" a full featured simulator however from Linden lab.
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.
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 networked to the Internet back in the early 90s, allowing inter-business communications on business BBS systems.
I can definitely see the Internet being /useful/ back then.
Honestly, with LVM on Linux, I don't really see the benefits of ZFS over it (note: you can get ZFS over fuse on Linux if you really wanted).
The only thing I ever hear about what's good about Solaris is the fact it has ZFS and dtrace. Both of which I'm not interested in. Seriously, just go look on sun.com for information about what's good about Solaris. They come up with the regular buzz words such as 'scalable' etc. But the only meat I ever find is 'ZFS' and 'dtrace'.
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.
Well, game definitions are usually something among the lines of:
A pursuit or activity with rules performed either alone or with others, for the purpose of entertainment.
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 what's to stop one idea from being copied and done by a billion other people?
As I recall, in the early days we had BBS systems and many companies were making use of these for short, long distance communication, working remotely, e-mail. Sure, it wasn't as common as things are today, but you could see the benefit with BBS systems which evolved to moving the infrastructure they provided onto the Internet. Where everything could intercommunicate more.
Now, I look at Second life... Sorry, I don't see anything similar going on here at all.
Despite all my knowledge and experience on Second life, I cannot see how it is useful for companies.
If Second life was widely adopted - I can only think of using it as a graphical chat room, for support, isn't that sad?
Even then, I couldn't recommend it for stuff like teaching because there are far better technologies out there for remote teaching, which let you use things such as whiteboards etc.
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.
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, you would earn virtual currency - they saw this as the perfect way to detect people being creative.
What happened was that people set up something called 'camping chairs'. People would sit on these chairs for hours on end and do nothing and earn a percentage of the money the owner of the land was making. This was a way to get free money and didn't reward creativity at all. The funny thing was that the creative people had little money in the game, despite all these marvelous inventions and selling them. While the people who just sat around and literally doing nothing, had plenty.
Eventually Lindenlab removed this system - good riddance.
Then these people just focused on excessive gambling things in Second life, eventually this got 'outlawed' too.
Now people are just using dancing animations and very light roleplay as 'dancers' in clubs on Second life to make virtual currency and they end up making more than many decent content creators.
Second life unfortunately isn't really a place where most novel business ideas and creativity will make you money. But sex, much like in the real world, sells well.
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.
Second life is not a game. It's a virtual world. It's not a roleplaying game.
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.
Opensim is severely lacking in abilities compared to normal Second life to the point that it is absolutely useless.
Hey, ping 2002:A0A:10C::
In practice: Doesn't work at all because his home network like every other consumer home network doesn't provide IPv6 address allocation and there is nothing the IT staff can do about it.
Beyond extra work, new networking hardware... Security is a major one. I personally don't feel very comfortable using IPv6 with the amount of exploits and issues getting continuously patched on the Linux kernel with it.
IPv5 is the Internet Stream Protocol.
Such as?
On every Internet IPv6 network I've used, I've been able to connect to IPv4 addresses. The networks had a IPv6 to IPv4 gateway, the gateway was essentially a NAT.
Well, I'm still glad my ISP isn't using multicast. Because my hardware was provided by my ISP and obviously if they started multicasting to me because one computer on my netowrk wanted to see the stream, my entire network would be flooded.
I'm just talking general software. But in my experience: Google desktop, Google earth, pretty much every instant messenger but some xmpp clients, media players etc.
There is a lot more software that won't work when you have only a IPv6 IP address on your network card (yes, I had a proper IPv6 to v4 gateway setup).
A lot of IP based software is incapable of using IPv6, I know this from experience when using exclusively a IPv6 address.
On the upside, Kubuntu runs perfectly out of the box on a HP Pavilion DV5-1002NR.
That depends, flooding every computer on the network with information is not desirable. It takes away bandwith from every computer on the network at the expense of this 'efficiency'. Personally I would be very unhappy with my ISP if I was receiving unicast content I didn't want.
Sorry, VLC, not VNC.
Ah! That sounds more like the statistics I'm used to seeing :)
The network wasn't that complex, only one router and testing with VNC and some packet inspection utilities. My understanding after numerous trials was that it was essentially the same as doing a broadcast, all the devices were receiving the packets, they never 'asked' for it. With this mind, I don't really see how a computer can 'opt-in' for receiving, they're sent the packets either way. The only choice you have really is if you want to decode the data you're getting sent or ignore it.
I never went out of my way to read the RFCs on the matter, simply because this was just me fooling around with the idea out of curiosity, didn't have any practical use for it.
I'm probably doing this wrong to begin with and if that's the case, I wouldn't mind being told exactly what is needed to do this properly.
The reason why I asked for sources is because I've never seen the Apple platform that large on any large scale statistics tracking systems. Then again, I don't deal with strictly US content and I hear Apple is far more popular there.