Feature Requests

I propose adding an object-wide flag that can be set even for no-mod items (similar to the "for sale" bit and other status flags), which prevents textures from rendering as full bright. (This feature is misused so often that it would be nice to be able to disable it at the land level, too.) Frankly, this is a plague on SL. Any time you have an area with multiple creators, somebody has to play the "full bright police" and nag everyone else to remove all the full bright items from their builds. Even worse, no-mod items are sold on the marketplace with full-bright textures. Why would any possibly want a glow-in-the-dark painting? Who knows! But people still sell no-mod artwork with full-bright textures, and when the item is photographed at precisely the right angle and time of day, there's no way to tell. I get it: there are a few cases where you really do want full bright textures, like a light bulb, computer screen, or something else that produces its own light. But these are so rare that the majority of full-bright textures are just visual litter. They aren't wanted by the people seeing them, and in the no-mod case, they usually aren't wanted by people placing the objects either!

I’m writing to suggest an improvement to the security prompt that appears when an object requests access to take funds from a user’s Linden Dollar account. Currently, the message only displays the object’s name, which can be vague and may not provide enough information for users to make an informed decision. Given the potential risk, I believe this prompt could benefit from additional details to help users determine whether they should grant access. Adding the creator's name next to the object’s name in the prompt would help users verify if they trust the source of the request. This additional information could prevent users from unintentionally granting access to suspicious or unauthorized objects. To further enhance security, a "Verified" checkmark could be implemented for trusted or high-reputation creators. This verification badge would help users recognize legitimate objects from creators who meet specific safety criteria set by Linden Lab or have a record of safe transactions. The combination of the creator’s name and a verified badge would provide users with a clear and trustworthy indicator, while the absence of a badge would encourage users to exercise caution.

Premium badges show on profiles and some don't want people knowing they pay for that. Not everyone wants people to know they are praying for an account. Some in SL don't want people to know they have a home. Some don't want other rl members to see they actually paid for a virtual account. There are many reasons. It should be a choice of whether you want to show that. I know I will not pay for that to be displayed.

Reclass all safehubs that are adult to moderate or general. After limiting the classes of avatars able to visit adult rated regions, the ability for anyone to get dumped into one by the system shouldn't exist.

Today when you accept or deny an Experience it's an all-or-nothing thing. I think an Experience should only ask for the permissions it requires, and when requesting permission from the Resident it should be possible to specify required perms, and optional perms: denying a required perm should have the same effect as if you denied the entire Experience, while the scripts should be aware of which optional Experience permissions has been granted and which ones has not been and work accordingly. Similarly, a phone app intended for taking photos and allowing you to tag friends in the photos will require the camera permission, but accessing contacts can be made optional, while the app should not have access to for example take screenshots of other apps running on the phone, sending SMS or making calls. A bunch of shops now use Experiences to let you teleport to various places in the store, and I guess for other features as well. While I might not mind being teleported, I might not want to hand the keys away for controlling my viewer in other ways.

In preferences we have the ability to unchecked a box to prevent accidentally TPing to an Adult region. The current options are G, GM, and GMA, but there is no option for either M or MA without G. It would be nice to have the option to block G regions if one is only in SL for adult activities and dresses that way. A warning pop-up letting a person know that the region they will be landing in is not in their safe region rating and asking if they want to TP anyway or cancel the TP would also work. Give us the option to prevent an accidental TP if we have inappropriate clothing on for the land rating. Gotta keep Grandma happy!

There is a vast amount of content available where the object itself is modifiable, but the scripts or other content it contains are no mod. It is possible to rename such objects or change their description by rezzing them in world, renaming and then taking back into inventory. It is not possible however to rename the same objects directly in inventory, or when attached. This limitation makes the process of renaming modify objects unnecessarily difficult.

Do we really need to ask for permission to teleport when the script is being worn from inventory by the resident? I have customers complaining that it is annoying having to answer this popup permission request, but the only way to bypass this behavior is to have a dedicated script hold that permission that is never reset; which would wastes region resources. According to the wiki Temp attachments are not permitted to teleport people which was the only real avenue for abuse back in the day, so I don't see a need to be granting this permission explicitly anymore. I think it is time for it to become like the other permissions that are auto-granted when an object is attached from a resident's inventory.

Aviation in Second Life can be a deeply frustrating experience. While ban lines aren't a problem except at low altitude, as during takeoff or landing, security orbs can affect you at all altitudes. If you trigger an orb with a short fuse or a longer timeout on a large parcel that takes longer than its timeout to cross, you're removed from your vehicle and sent elsewhere - but your vehicle isn't, so it merrily flies along until it goes offworld or finds a no-object-entry parcel or crashes. There's no way to know this will be a problem before you get to the parcel. I would like to see a change, either in scripting of llEjectFromLand() and llTeleportAgentHome() or else in mainland policy, to restrict a security orb's ability to separate you from your vehicle or to limit the altitudes over which it is effective to some vertical distance from the orb. I have no desire to invade anyone's privacy; I just want to go flying without getting ejected from my airplane without any way to avoid it.

If the online status is set to "hidden", it should not be able for scripts (i.e. "Online monitors") to reveal the avatar. An exception could be made if the scripted item and the avatar are in the same parcel (for shopping reasons etc.).