Re: [mmox] User Accounts / "Object" Transfer.

[Morgaine <[e-mail]>]

Jon, after reading your other posts, I think that you may have been
referring to your "shared-spaces" idea when you questioned the value of
"teleport between grids", as I can't see any other architecture being
discussed.

However, if that's the case then I don't understand the point being made,
because shared-spaces seems to be a "teleport only" architecture.  The only
means by which a user can go from one shared space to another is by
teleport, since shared spaces do not have topological relationships to each
other, from your description.

If you ignore the local simulation for a moment, then what happens when one
of your users changes from one local shared space to one belonging to a
different provider is very similar in implementation to the usual separate
worlds case:  the agent appears in the space at the remote end.   Adding a
local simulation on top of that doesn't really change the matter.  That's
teleport between grids, plus a local accelerator.

And perceptually from the users' perspective, the model suggests that they
too see a teleport occurring every time that they change their shared space
to one operated by a different world provider.  This looks like perfectly
ordinary "teleport between grids" to them too.

Morgaine.




On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Morgaine <[e-mail]>wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 9:37 PM, Jon Watte <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> What end-user value does "teleport between grids" solve?
>>
>> In my opinion, that feature is very un-interesting, as it requires lots of
>> engineering, and gives very little value, compared to lower-hanging fruit
>> like physical spaces shared across interoperating servers.
>>
>> After perception of the world around you, travel is the next most
> important form of interaction with the world.  Teleport is simply
> instantaneous travel, and teleport between grids is simply instantaneous
> travel between worlds in different organizational domains.  How can it
> possibly be uninteresting and give little value to travel to distant places
> in virtual space?  ;-)
>
> I expect that you meant something *completely* different to the above.
> :-)   Are we hitting an ambiguity in terminology of some kind here?
>
> Morgaine.
>