[sldev] Re: Privacy Pocket (Second Life)

[Tateru Nino]

Jason Giglio wrote:
> Sylvio Deutsch wrote:
>> But what really makes me mad is the origin of the issue... why not
>> trust people word? If someone says he is over 18, he should be. If
>> not, where 
>
> These privacy proposals are orthogonal to age verification.
>
> As I pointed out, it's more than just sex.  People need privacy for
> many reasons.
>
> This should not even be tied to the "adult" flag directly, and should
> be an extension of the normal "limit access" ACLs, allowing non-"adult
> content" privacy.
>
> If I'm working with a client on a private NDA project, he shouldn't
> have to be age verified just to see the progress!
>
> Adult flag could use the same code to hide the parcel from
> non-verified residents, but the option to turn on privacy without
> adult flag is important too I think.
Try having a private meeting to discuss confidential customer
information, budget allocations, or suchlike without having a bunch of
people swing by to see what your little green dots might be up to.

-- 
Tateru Nino
http://dwellonit.blogspot.com/