On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:39 +0000, Lear Cale wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Argent Stonecutter > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I agree, but I believe there's a solution to this. LL could provide a > mechanism for developers to register, so that a test client can > automatically get a temporary registration. Trust the people, not the > software. Someone who tests using multiple avatars would need to > register each of those avatars.
That seems pretty awkward. Think of how many registered versions would have to be tracked and how you might need to handle revocation lists. Code signing would seem to be a solution except that it's not binaries being sent around it's data. I can see how you could do it with encryption of the data but that seems to be one of the triggers that caused the concern in the first place. Personally I'd like more information from LL on the *intent* of the proposed change. Is it to protect content creators, control the user experience (the horse is out and the gate already open on that one), etc.. Once the intent is understood it's possible folks on the list could proactively propose solutions to the "problem." Mike _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
