MOO-cows Mailing List Archive


Re: Pueblo and Java.

I guess as long as theres MOOs out there, theres going to be AOL/IRCers 
out there that for some reason feel that its thier responsiblity to be 
personally responsible for all the acts in progress to censor the internet.
The only thing that can really be done about it is, like you said, 
regulate who (or what ;) has the permissions to send multimedia stuff.  
But as you also said that defeats the whole purpose of MOO.  Actually 
IMHO the whole concept of 'multiMOOdia' defeats the concept of MOO.  I 
mean, think about it, what IS moo? MOO was designed as a low bandwidth 
collaboration thingamajigger, back when graphical stuff was hard to come 
by.  Its kind of like books, some of the greatest literature out there 
was written without any pictures, now what have we got?  The novelization 
of 'congo' (not..mind you the actual book the movie was based on..but the 
novelization..including pictures) many of the books on the top 
seller list have pictures in them?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against sprucing things up, adding graphics 
and sound, it just sound slike it :)
I think as long as we have the rights to free speach, and written word, 
and the rights to view and present smut to the public, theres gona be 
perverts out there excercising the right.  (not too different from that 
guy who sat behind you in Mr. Johnsons health class whos only purpose in 
life was to annoy the hell out of you.)
I think what MAY somewhat solve the problem is, instant @toading of 
anyone who goes against the guidelines.  Sure thers gonna be 
complaints..but after all whos MOO is it??  Surely not some 
AOL/IRC/MUDder who needs to go around slinging smut to show how 'cool' 
he/she/it is.  It's your moo, just put your foot down ;)

The opinions expressed here-in are not to be rebroadcasted without the 
expressed written consent ofthe NFL on NBC.

On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, Matt Dominianni wrote:

> Hmmm, this is an issue we've been discussing at one MOO, reffering to it 
> as Media Spam.
> Pueblo provides the ability for any user to send sounds or images to any 
> other user who is connected via Pueblo (if the player has the permissions 
> to create Verbs and properties).
> Much like on a text based MOO, where you can spam people with offensive 
> text, now people have the ability to do the same with images and sounds.
> I myself have never experienced anything offensive via Pueblo, but the 
> concern exists that some asshole will use it for this purpose. One 
> obvious solution to this issue is to not allow users access to the rights 
> they need to program verbs and properties, and limit them to build 
> objects with existing properties already created by the wiz staff... but 
> that kinda defeats the point of MOO doesn't it?
> Incidentaly, the same is possible at the Palace, I can send graphics and 
> sounds to anyone in the same room as me. Interestingly enough, the 
> majority of people on these multi-user servers seem to have scruples. But 
> who knows what the future holds.
> Argle |:D
> On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, jer wrote:
> > Im just a little confused as to your security breach dilema.  Are you 
> > saying that the URL would be specified by the user (that makes perfect 
> > sense to me, seems the only plausible way to do it) or be pages on some 
> > standard machine that houses moo html objects? Either way the user has to 
> > have SOME way of puting whatever he/she/er wants ON the page.  As long as 
> > you're allowing the user to put whatever they want on the page, you're 
> > going to have this problem, whether you encode the URL or not.  The only 
> > way to really get around the problem is to implement a web page policy 
> > stating something like this:
> > 1) NO links to nude Babes on Ice
> > 2) if you DO have a link to nude babes on ice, make sure theres a vivid 
> > textual description fo those in the blind community.
> > 
> > slartibartfast
> > 
> > On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, John Leone wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi guys,
> > > 
> > > I'm a little backlogged on mail, so didn't jump in when everyone was 
> > > talkign.  After reading some of the conversation on Pueblo I downloaded 
> > > it.  It crashed as soon as I booted and couldn't make it work, running 
> > > Win'95.  So, I can't really follow the thread.
> > > 
> > > In any event, I've seen on other moo's a telnet client built into the web 
> > > page.  Figured this was done with java, so bought a book on java.  I've 
> > > looked at the telnet code for it, and that can be hacked into a moo 
> > > client pretty easily.(grin, 3 months later, it looked easy.)  What I'd 
> > > like to do is a double window web page.  with the top half showing the 
> > > url of a graphic, and the bottome window being a moo client.  I think it 
> > > can be done without much moo hacking, just a property, called, I don't 
> > > know, web on player, and a mod of look self that it sends an encoded url 
> > > to the java program.
> > > 
> > > In any event those are my thoughts in this very preliminary stage.  The 
> > > method is a security breach though, if someone knew the code, they could 
> > > just send the player the url of nude babes on ice or something(chuckle)
> > > 
> > > In any event, I would like to join this other list if it is formed, 
> > > because I want to keep up with the Jones.  But, I want somethign 
> > > flexible, because we have a large blind community, so I want them to get 
> > > text descriptions of any graphic.
> > > 
> > > Happy Surfing,
> > >                John Leone  john@GrassRootsMOO 8888
> > > 
> > 
> > 

Follow-Ups: References:

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index