 Okay. Can everybody hear me? Can anybody hear me? Anybody? Okay. Great. Marcus hears me. Tony hears me. All right. Looks like we're going then. Okay. Great. Well, thanks everybody for coming to this next presentation, which is the Viewers and Open Simulator Panel. So with me today, I'm very pleased that I'm going to have to thank them for taking the time to be on this panel. So, in front, I'm sitting in a hot seat here because I'm the one with the actual presentation slides, but then I will be moderating the panel. So, everybody's decided to sit on. Okay. Most people decide to sit on one side. So, furthest to your left is, and do forgive me if I get any of this wrong, is Jessica Lyon of the Firestorm Viewer, who is the I believe the project manager, or the overall manager of the viewer, and sitting next to her is Cinder Biskitz, also of the Firestorm Viewer, who manages a lot of the Open Simulator aspects of the support they have for Open Sim in their viewer versions. Next to her is Latif Khalifa, who as well as being very heavily involved, I believe in singularity, is also of course one of the core developers of the LibOmv library, which both opens to another projects, kind of use a lot for the protocol, and of Radigas, the, well, I guess formerly TextViewer, but also recently of a lot of graphical components. And next to him, who for some reason, okay, bizarrely, I don't have a name tag for you, but I'm guessing that is Liru, who is also of the singularity viewer, who does a lot of work on that, a particular viewer. Sorry, I just lost one of my pages here for, actually, if you give me a second, I've got so many tabs opening some of these systems, as I'm sure people are familiar with that syndrome. But yeah, sorry. Yeah, Liru fears and fires, I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing that, also known as Inusato Kanya, who's been working for singularity, sorry, on the singularity viewer for two years, but he's been using virtual worlds for quite a bit longer, and doing a lot of work on localization, support, and monitoring issues. And finally, if I actually rotate my camera the right way, sitting over there is Nicky Perian, who of course is one of the core developers on both the Kokura viewer, and before that, as many of you are familiar with, I'm sure the Imprudence viewer. And he's retired from the US Army and ABB, and the Kokura viewer is one of his hobbies, and I must admit, it's a lot of work, and it's always very impressively comes up on that viewer. So basically, the format of this panel is that, I'm gonna run through, first of all, a few questions that are full-top, which I think are gonna be interesting in terms of, to some extent, all in towards OpenSim, of course, but also about what kind of the people on this panel see as the future, and then I'm gonna open it up to general Q&A from the floor. So the way it's gonna work is that, probably the best thing, you can ask questions if you like during the talk, and people on stage are very welcome to respond, but we can also wait until the end, and I'll ask questions at the end, and then we'll deal with them there. So right, okay, let me refocus on my slide for a second. So what I'm gonna do actually is go to each of you in turn, and everybody can answer, if somebody just wants to let, somebody else on the same viewer project answer, then that's absolutely fine as well. Yes, I should have put that slide up, actually, showing who people were, sorry. Right, so I'm just gonna wait for this slide to appear. Okay, so the first thing really actually is introduction. So if I start from, well, apart from what people actually wanna say a little bit about their viewer, and kinda like the open sim aspects of it. So if I start right on the left side from the audience point of view, which is Jessica, if you could say a few words about that, please, that'd be great. Yeah, sure, so basically, Phoenix is being used quite a bit in open sim early on, and when we started up Firestorm, we were, I was contacted by quite a few people in fact, and a lot of educationals that were moving over to open sim, saying that Firestorm works really good in open sim, but it's got this bug or that bug and the other bug. And as well at the same time, there was some questionability as to the future of Second Life, and as most people know, our primary focus has always been with Second Life. But we're all about options. And so I wanted to bring a focus on Firestorm into open sim to give Second Life users the option for switching or moving to or just transferring back and forth from open sim to Second Life. And so we brought on Armin, many of you know Armin, initially as our open sim developer, but his life got very busy. And so then we brought in Cinder here, who is practically a hero, I think for us in open sim compatibility. And so we've brought a focus into open sim as well now so that we can, it's about options, right? It's about giving people a choice to use open sim or use the viewer wherever they want, whatever grid they want. And I don't know what else I could say about that. Okay, great. Cinder, is there anything you'd like to add to that? I don't know. Okay, no problem. Latif? Sorry, is it Latif? Am I saying that right? Yes, it's fine. So Singularity Viewer is a viewer based on a lindelab code and it's using the familiar good old V1 interface, but most of the guts have been since replaced with a more recent code. So we have stuff like Moop and Mesh and all the latest goods that come from that way. Singularity has a small development team like most open source projects. And it has only one version. There is no specific version for open sim since lindelab wouldn't license Havok and other things to us anyway. With regards to open sim, we have a long and good history of cooperation with open sim grids and the open sim protocol itself, the, not the protocol, the people who develop open sim. And that support includes the standard grid manager with grid info protocol for easy addition of the sims. And we have some things that are being developed like our octopus system which allows the simulators to add custom menu items and custom dialogues to the viewer. So you can have a user interface modified by the simulator itself. We also have a support for, for example, a map in hypergrid mode. And the adding in cooperation with open sim development team things like export permission and other things that are, that are going to be part of the future protocol extensions. So that would be a short intro into singularity and open sim. Great, thank you. Lira, do you have anything to add? Is there anything you'd like to add? I'm not really sure. Latif really covered it all. I, yeah, I guess I don't have anything to add. Okay, great. And finally, Nicky, if you'd like to give a little introduction to Kukua. Okay, well Kukua came about about 18 months ago when through a lack of interest I just tried to fill a vacuum and start developing it. At that time, we tried to stay close to the second line viewer and add open sim capabilities as they came about. And I expected that it would not be able to stay close to second line for very long, but that's proven not true. We are still within weeks of an upgrade on the second line viewer have that into Kukua. But we do spend a good bit of time on testing within the open sim community. And to their credit, the open sim users are much more technically oriented and are into diagnosing problems. And that may just be from survival. I'm not sure. Okay, great. I think that actually leads on to, I think it does anyway. So it leads on to, well really we've already addressed this. So at least the first part or however, I don't know. Actually, no, this is the first question. So I'm getting a bit at odds and ends there. So actually, if I just go back the other way, so Nikki, I mean, how much do you think your viewer is used of open simulator? And I think you've already kind of said this. I mean, how did the users differ if at all compared with, and I don't mean this in any kind of discriminatory way. I'm just kind of interested in whether there is a different flavor of community, whether it's more, as you say, more technically oriented, for instance, is there anything you'd like to say about that? Okay, we recently pulled in the automatic update version from my second life. And so they're on a different website or downloading than what the other, all the general population uses. So right now, based on the downloads, those that are in the automatic update system versus those that just respond to a blog entry, I'd say about two thirds of our users are open sim. Okay, that's quite a high proportion. I guess, because you've already, you've always, I mean, for quite a long time, you've had quite a concentration on open sim. I think quite a lot of support there. So that's an interesting proportion. So I don't know, Leroy or Latif, would you kind of care to talk about that? Well, the users, oh, I'm sorry. You mean about the usage of singularity on open sim grids? Yes. Yeah, well, I think, you know, starting a few years ago, improvements seem to be the most used viewer there. And they are trying to pick up the sort of torch that you left because a lot of people like this interface, but improvements hasn't been maintained in the meanwhile. You know, people want stuff like mesh and media on a print and stuff. So we are trying to fit in that role where you can get all the latest features, but with the familiar interface and stable and so on. So that would be, and I think we are having a lot of success in that area. We are also heavily concentrating lately on the content possibility, which I think is very important for open sim users. So you can export and import your creations from all grids, you know, respecting proper permissions. And we have been recently adding stuff like Colada export, which has been taken really positively by the open sim community. Okay, great. And Liru, and if there is anything you want to add, please do, well, please do jump in, but I'm sure you're already in the text as well, which is great. So I don't know, Nicky, did you want to say something more on that? No, I just misunderstood the intro. Okay, sorry. So, Cinder and Jessica, I mean, would you say, I mean, how much do you think open sim is used with your view, I guess for you, and I'm just kind of guessing here, that it's probably a fairly low proportion since you do have a lot of kind of second life users, but maybe I'm wrong. And would you think that the community is different, since they're more of an emphasis on, because I know there's a lot of education interests, for instance, in more defined viewers and having kind of simplified stuff, or is it kind of the same? Well, we've had, I've found that a lot of, first of all, we don't keep metrics on how many users we have in open sim. We don't have any way of collecting that other than our downloads, as those of you that know us know, we have two separate downloads because of the Havoc licensing issue through LinenLab, but we also understand that there are a lot of SL users who use our open sim download in Second Life as well. So even that's not a good measurement. As far as how many users go, we don't really use that. We use that more as a measurement of how well we're doing, how well we are addressing the issues that our users have. And so it's difficult to say. I tend to think that the more people we have, perhaps we're doing a better job than we were, say, last month or last year, that kind of a thing. I know that we have, I know there are a few grids that use Firestorm exclusively. I know that there are a lot of educationals who use Firestorm. And that tells me we're doing a good job and we're fulfilling their needs. And there's a big future we're still working, we're still pushing forward. There's a lot of compatibility issues still to come. I've seen a lot of questions coming in local chat. And I think all of our viewers here on the panel can answer the same thing as yes, most likely yes, and yes, we're working on that. And yes, we plan on fixing that. It's just a matter of time. As far as open sim users compared to Second Life users, I think, I think open sim users are more of a cutting edge kind of group of people who are willing to explore greater possibilities. And also who don't like to be tied down by, say, rules set out by big company like Lin-a-Lab, for example. One of the nice things about Open Simulator is that it is open source server side. And there are a lot of orgs, I mean, just watching the keynote from this morning, there's a lot of companies who are taking great advantage, doing amazing things with the platform. And so I think that the users differ quite a bit. People in Second Life, I think, generally are there for the economy, they're for shopping, they're for socializing. And I think on average, people who are open sim specific are more exploratory and more wanting to explore the technology. Yes, I think it's one of these things where, because it is kind of, and there is disagreement on this, I still regard Open Simulator as alpha. I mean, it's not as complex as the view, it's only a third of the code lines, but it's still a pretty complex piece of software in its own right. And it's kind of, it's one of these development things where it's filling in the blanks for a lot of, I mean, anyway, I said this earlier, and I do regard it's filling in a lot of the Linden lab kind of blanks. And when you do that, you get a certain kind of result where you do get a lot of incomplete features and stuff, which you'd expect to work with a dozen and that kind of thing. But on the whole, it's actually quite interesting how many people are actually say, when you're talking rubbish, Justin, it actually works quite well, which when you can see all the problems, you don't tend to think. I don't know, so sorry, I don't know. I kept it in there, I don't know if I had anything to add, Cinda, about that. No, not really. Okay, so I'm gonna move on. And if anybody on the panel does wanna say something extra, please do interrupt me. So question two here is a question I guess I was kind of interested in generally because I was kind of interested in what the kind of blockers are, but starting from, really from Jessica again from that side, or actually, no, I should kind of alter this, shouldn't I? I shouldn't start the same person every time. I should actually start, this time I'm gonna start with Eulity, frankly. So what do you think would make it easier for your viewer to work with OpenSim and alternate grids? What could be done better, either by the project? And of course, you know, I mean, you know how it is, it's another open source project, it's kind of an archaic, it's not, there's no central control, but you know, people do step up and try and address things which are deficient. Or do you think there's kind of things that even grids could be doing which would help the viewers? But as you know, we have a very good cooperation with the grids. For example, Singularity is a base for the Avination viewer, which is also rooted in Singularity code. What can OpenSim project do? I think we do need to have some sort of coordination between not only OpenSim developers and the viewer developers, but between viewer developers among different projects. And that in order to implement these protocol extensions. And I've been listening to your talk yesterday where you have said that the viewer project is really huge. And even though many people say we should have an OpenSim viewer and we should break up with Lynden lab once and for all, I don't think those people really realize how big the viewer project is and what would we take? So we should continue to use Lynden resources in that way, the stuff that they open source, but it should not limit us to adding extra features and extensions to the protocol. And this is where I think we should have some soft of RSC repository for the protocol extensions. So for example, things that we are adding like support for a map in Hypergrid or the export permission or the octopus. I think we should have a tiny corner on the wiki perhaps OpenSim wiki where we can document the stuff that we have implemented and where proposals could be make. I hate committees and really formalize groups, which is why I think the wiki would be the perfect format to implement, to document what we have implemented. So people that are interested, okay, we want to put support in Firestone so the map works in Hypergrid. We could point them to the page, okay, this is the fields that are done and this is the patch where we have implemented in Singularity and you are welcome to take it into Cocoa or Firestone or any other viewer. Okay, yeah, great. No, I don't like groups either. I think I made the point yesterday that sometimes people seem to sit, I don't know, they're sitting down and trying to come up with a protocol before you actually have implemented anything. It's just kind of a little crazy to me, especially in a space like this. But at the same time, you do need some kind of coordination. I don't know how that comes about because to be honest, I don't think we don't really even have that great coordination. I mean, from my point of view, and I think other people might disagree, but I'm not sure we have fantastic coordination even within OpenSim, right? We have this thing where, and I think I might get a lot of disagreement here, but we have this thing where somebody comes along with an interesting idea and they just implement it, right? There's not really a culture of saying on the mailing list first, well, I'd like to do this. It's more kind of well, there it is, there's the code and what now kind of thing. I think for stuff like the export permission, the Melanie implemented it in OpenSim and Liru has implemented it with help from Melanie on Singularity and and it will be really stupid to have other viewer teams re-implement the same thing and look through the code for how it's implemented stuff. It would be really nice to have one portal on the wiki where we could just document here are the things that are extensions of the protocol. This is what they do and this is how they were implemented. Yeah, and that of course would rely on server, on us documenting this as well. So I think it'll have to go around, but I'm just, so I'd just like to go to then, go to then on the other side on Nikki quickly and say, well, so what do you think about this question? Do I mean, do you have anything to say about what Latif said about this? Yes, I'd like to say some standardization on the export and how it should be handled. There seems to be two parties is that the large commercial bridge want to restrict exports and the smaller just getting started grids would like to get content any way they could. So that's a natural conflict. As far as what OpenSim could do, I think it should try to do some standardization to the second life viewer. For instance, script standardization or something as a resident program and sitting on it and being able to sit in the same manner as you would on either grid. I think those things would, if you could get the standardization up and the people would come more readily to OpenSim grids. Yeah, no, it is an issue. And I think partly it's because we do end up using code which has been front side. We use early code and early code kind of works, but then the kind of the strange little bugs which are in it almost get codified. I mean, I'm sure you're used to seeing this another kind of context, the kind of the way, the odd ways that things work end up being more difficult to change. Which is why I'm kind of keen not to try and say OpenSim is too mature because it really isn't to me anyway. And I really, I shouldn't start sitting here and just say what all my views kind of is. I'm asking you the questions, but you know, I think it's a difficult thing because we are dealing with a lot of buggy software and there's like, well, you wanna correct this, but that's gonna break people's existing scripts. And sometimes I think you do have to go ahead and do this, which is why I'm not keen on saying that OpenSim is really that mature and that's one of my reasons. Anyway, I'd just like to ask Jessica the same and Jessica and Cinda the same thing then. I mean, what response would you give to that all to the question? I'd have to mirror what Nikki and Latif have both said. Cooperation through communication, documentation, collaboration, these are all keys to being able to work. The trouble is OpenSimulator people have to understand that at least the three of us at the three viewers here up on stage right now are trying to stay compatible with two different platforms which are in some ways going in different directions on us. And that makes it difficult for us to maintain one or the other or both. And it would be great, like Nikki said, it would be fantastic if we could get some standardization so that that task, it's one less thing we have to worry about. And that way we can put our focus on new features that OpenSim may be coming out with as well as keeping up with, for example, LinenLab and Second Life. And so I couldn't agree more with Latif in regard to documentation of Wiki would be quite useful. And coming up with some kind of standard universality that we can all sort of operate from. And this way we also remain compatible with each other as well. Yes. Yeah, I think, you know, having the Second Life feel does effectively kind of act a little bit like that. And certainly I don't think I'm wrong in saying that the OpenSim project does strive to be more compatible with Second Life. That is the aim. It's not, the aim is certainly not to be incompatible. Of course that causes, you start to get into difficulties when you're trying to do something different. And that kind of conflicts of what the Second Life squeeze into the Second Life protocol. But I mean, definitely our aim is to be compatible because I think we really do recognize the value of that. So I'm just gonna move on then to our final question. The final question I have prepared here, which is really a very general question. And you can ask this really in any way you see fit but it's basically how do you see things evolving with respect to your viewer and virtual world systems? And by that I mean, do you think these things are gonna, because I will talk about survivability. I'm kind of the warrior of the thing if you like. I'm always trying to look what is the future and what can we realistically do? And how do you see these things? Do you see a continued evolution in virtual world systems along these lines? Or do you think, you know, this is gonna be a lot like a lot of other systems. Something better is gonna come along which maybe learns the lessons from what we have here. And actually kind of there'll be a renewal. Do you think these kind of things can be very long lived? So if I posed out first to Nikki, what do you think about that? Well, I think of course the technology moves so fast there's gonna be something that's gonna be better in six months or two years from now. But we have to be prepared to change with that technology. The viewers seem to be adding more and more stuff especially from the second life with materials and things like that. And that keeps going and going and going. I wouldn't have imagined they would have had four major feature ads within a year's time. That seems a pretty, pretty quick place to me. Right. Okay, and Jessica and Cynda, what would you kind of, what would you like to say on that? It's very difficult to predict, isn't it? As Nikki said, everything, things change so quickly and breakthroughs seem to be coming out more and more frequently. And like Nikki said in regards to second life, they've just come out with several big enhancements to the system, to the platform, at least to their platform and in fact OpenSim is keeping out quite nicely. And there's a little birdie that tells me there's quite a bit more in the pipeline come in second life within this year even. And certainly within the next 12 months, we can expect to see some more big breakthroughs which I don't know what they are yet. I know there's still more appearance things coming down the pipeline. And so it's very difficult to tell really, you're watching the keynote this morning and some of the ways that the OpenSim platform is being utilized for education and even city planning. You know, that's brilliant. That's absolutely genius. And so how do you predict what's coming in the future? Really difficult to say because it's all in the mind of the creator who come up with the ideas. And I'm perpetually flattered, just flattened, leveled by some of the uses that have been coming out. It's, I think it's fantastic. Cinder, did you have anything to add? Because, I mean, being our main dev, she's the technical side for Firestorm, especially in OpenSim. Developers, there are a few words. Yeah, yeah, some of us talk too much probably is probably how it comes down to. So finally, Latif, I mean, what do you think might, I mean, as Jessica says, it is very hard to predict the future. Maybe this is kind of an unfair question. I guess I'm really, maybe I'm, we're almost asking for speculation, which is there's no shortage of speculation around. But what do you think might, the future might help these systems? Do you think they're going to be long-lived? Or do you think something better might come along? Or, you know, what other things are kind of more important than that? I know that you always say that you regard OpenSim to be alpha. And I think if you need any proof that it's not and that has come a long way, it's this very conference, I'm very impressed with what you are able to achieve on completely open source stack. As for the future, I know many people want to have, they think downloading viewer is the hardest thing in the world and installing it is hard and it should be done on the web. But I don't see in the immediate future a move in that direction. It's certainly in the next five years, I don't think you will be able to achieve anything that's achievable in standalone application like a viewer today, even though we have seen yesterday Pixie viewer and stuff, but I've been testing a lot of these new technologies on the web and attempt to make it easier for the end user, but I don't see that happening in the next five years. And predicting more than that is very difficult to say. As Jessica said, Lin and Lab has turned on Turbon, their viewer development, and we'll have a hard time keeping up with them with all the new features, both on the viewer side and on the simulator side, but we'll do our best. I think there's also a bit of a balance that at least with Lin and Lab has their balance and we'll leave them aside, but as far as open sim and viewer development on our end is, as Nikki said, the limitations of the user's computers. And as technology evolves, as the platform is advanced and features are added, things like materials, for example, have a heavier requirement on the viewer itself. And so I think open simulator and certainly Lin and Lab should, I don't know that they will, but they should weigh out and balance the advancement of that technology to not alienate and eliminate your users who are on smaller budgets. And down. I'm sorry to interrupt. Yeah, I think this is definitely one of the challenges because of course there's something like open sim, or at least certainly the way this project is structured, it's much more anarchic, there's no central planning. So if somebody were to introduce these kind of heavy things, it becomes, I don't know, to be honest, I would still say that with our kind of approach of conflict hell and not any hell to everything, that you would ultimately be able to turn things down to actually be simulated side at least, yeah, options. I mean, maybe that's not a perfect solution because then you get fragmentation of what you're doing and everything becomes enormously more complex. I don't know how far one can really go of that, but I think as you know, open source projects have ways of responding to this kind of things and things come out for it. It might be a kind of a messier thing, but I think interesting things can happen. So we still got to have a good 15 minutes here. So I'm actually going to open up and take questions from the floor here. So I'm probably going to do the cut off, well, actually. There have been quite a few questions going out local. Yeah, so actually, is there anything any of you would really like to kind of actually speak about anything you've seen or I can take something on myself? Okay, so I guess one of the, this is probably an unfair question is people always go on about me and we came up today and I didn't blame them, of course, with regards to the hyper grid. There's this, yeah, 4.96 thanks to all of us, this bug where if you teleport and arguably teleporting across a map in the hyper grid is kind of a funny kind of thing. But if you kind of teleport any further than 4,096 regions, you end up with a graphical mess on the other side. And it's very difficult to know this thing. I mean, it sounds like the kind of thing which is going to be some kind of post-college issue almost. There's some limitation there and then that feeds through to some bad information on the graphic side and screws it up. I mean, does anybody have kind of like an idea what's happening there or and these kind of things? Sorry. I didn't really have an understanding how serious people find this problem. And now that I know, I think we can both, Justin and me, we can both look into, on both ends, what's happening and investigate and hopefully fix it. Yeah. I'm not familiar with that issue either. Cinder, did you know about this? Okay. I think this goes back to the whole communication, cooperation, collaboration, documentation kind of thing. It would be really useful if we all had a shared medium that we can all use and communicate through in regards to issues like this. I mean, this sounds to me like it may be half and half server and viewer side. I could be wrong, usually am, but. Yeah, and it's one of these things where if it was really something one side of the other, you'd almost expect it to be fixed. It's the kind of thing that makes you think, well, protocol in some ways being involved because that's hard to fix. It's not a simple bug fix, as you know, when you get down to that level. And I'd just like to say actually that if anybody does want to coordinate things through the OpenSim Wiki, they are definitely more than welcome. And I know that might be a bit discriminatory against, because I know there are a few other open source kind of server branches and forks and other projects out there. And the OpenSim Wiki does tend to be very open in focus, but I don't think I don't see any reason why there can't be a general kind of discussion about protocols or documentation of kind of cross system issues on there. So I don't think that'd be a problem, although I think it might make other people uncomfortable. So maybe another venue is better, but certainly the OpenSim Wiki, I think would be more than happy for that, for instance, to be used for this kind of stuff. Right, so if you want to have another question, shout it out now, because I don't know how much further. Okay, so I'm gonna go for Neocortex actually, I'm gonna go for the 3D stuff, right? I mean, there is actually a view out there, I think Control-Alt Studio, and I haven't tried it yet, because I actually do have an Oculus Rift around, I just have so little time to actually do anything. But it's kind of a very interesting kind of immersive kind of environment, because I'm very interested in immersion and that kind of thing. So do you envisage a future where viewers well, any viewers will end up supporting more of these kind of 3D devices like the Oculus, and maybe like the Elite Motion, for instance. I don't know, yeah, please just. I think it'd be fair to say, we'll all have the same answer. I mean, we try to evolve with the technology as well, and if there's really good tech coming out, which the Oculus seems to be, I think certainly we're interested in adopting it at Control-Alt Studio, it'll be possibly easier for us since Control-Alt Studio is already based on the Firestorm code base. And I'm still trying to get ahold of that guy. But- He's in the audience. What's that? Oh, is he here? Yes, Jack, he's here. Oh, you're awesome. Wherever you are, if you're in the audience, I want to talk to you after. So yeah, I mean, as technology evolves, I think it's safe to say we're all going to evolve with it. It's just a matter of, in our case specifically, because our focus still is in Second Life, that's where we have the abundance of our users. And so we have to consider things like complexity of maintenance with the linen lab code as it comes in. We have to look at the demand. How much demand is there for Oculus right now? How many people have an Oculus device? And if we implement this into Firestorm, is it going to affect the stability for those people who don't use or have an Oculus, for example? So there's a lot of things that come into play. It's really just a matter of when, not a matter of if. Okay, anybody else want to make a response to that question? As Jessica says, it might be pretty, obviously one would kind of support technology as they come along, and if they're popular enough, but it is a question of actually having the code. Well, we've got Strachan, I've been working with Strachan on his Oculus stuff in his viewer. Well, okay, great. Yeah, it'd be great to talk to Strachan later on. Right, so, does anybody else have a question they'd like to? They'd like to ask the panel if they want to put it in the general chat. I know we're now talking about a floating tracker, which I was, I don't know, if there's people actually interested in looking at it, I think it's great. I'm just, I don't know, we had one before, and I'm always wary of having a tracker people can vote on, but no, he's actually gonna do anything about it. We seem to have a point this to me, but maybe that's just me. Yeah, any other questions? Or from the stream? Did anything come through from the stream? Yeah, one of the things for a 4096 bug is you'll first have to disable the thing I put on to actually stop people teleporting more than that, which some people think is a silly thing to do. Well, actually, maybe that's a bit strong, but I don't know, I don't like random, bizarre graphical glitches. Okay, so Marcus has a question. I guess to me the question is, do you, and I know some of you do, because I know a couple of you, I mean, Jessica, you and Cinda, I've come from the LF grid, for instance, I see that from the hybrid thing. So do you, and I think this is probably the answer, is probably yes. I mean, do you use go and open similar worlds a lot yourself or do you mainly, I guess, work on the code and have it actually going well, I don't know. In my case, I don't get, I get in open sim about as frequently as I get in second life. I just don't have the time as much. Second life is mostly now just a login for meetings, charity things and whatnot. Cinda works very closely with open sim now. Yeah, I spend more time in open sim than second life now, usually over on little field grid. Right, yes. Anybody else want to add anything? I did a good bit of testing in the open sim, but I would say probably half of my time, but most of the time it's just go in, see if it works, do a little bit of tests and go out or go in for a meeting. Yeah, yeah, I must admit it's the same thing for me. I'm practically always, if I go in world, I'm gonna meet a bug sooner or later and then I'm gonna have to try and do something about it. Right, so I think Mike has a question and I think this probably relates a bit to the code. I mean, because I've heard, and I haven't done a lot at all on the viewer code, I've only really looked to try and work out some bugs from the viewer side, but do you think there's a chance of a plugin system for viewers to support extensions? Or is that, I don't know, I'm putting my own spin on this, maybe I shouldn't, but is that kind of a big reworking of the code base? Because I hear it's not really kind of structured like that or to make that easy. Well, if we are talking about Glendon Lab code, which most viewers are based on, it's really monolithic and not modular at all. You have stuff like, when you first look into it, you scream in horror that the interface components, for example, do direct network access. So if you want to change the way an IM is sent, you actually go to the piece of code that handles the user interface for it. So refactoring that whole code to be pluggable, I don't think it's feasible and realistic with the resources we have and the number of developers we have. And we are trying to keep as much in step with Glendon Lab for the reasons I mentioned before, makes stuff easier to port. If your diff is not too big in developer terms. So it's not, the Glendon viewer is not really, I don't think we will see extensible plug-in system for that. Well, I have to agree with Latif. The plug-in system has a lot of merit and in fact, it was done long time ago with viewer 1.23 from Lord Greg Gregg. He'd set up a plug-in system. And I mean, it has a lot of merit but the trouble is again, 90% of our viewer is Glendon code. And the further that we venture away from that code, the more difficult it is for us to maintain and keep up with Second Life. Now that could be a different situation if for example, we just said, let's just take, this is our code base right now, let's just take this and forget about keeping up with Glendon Lab from this point forward. And in that way, then we could rearrange things and if we didn't have to stay compatible with Second Life, it would be easier to do a plug-in system but I think going forward, a plug-in system although it has merit is just very difficult to, would be difficult to do, difficult to maintain, difficult to even develop. You could have one plug-in that creates issues for with another plug-in. And the other thing is, I saw Sean asking a question and I'd like to address that. His question was whether OpenSim will always take a backseat to Second Life. And I speak for our project in this regard is that Second Life is where the majority of our users are and most people who come to OpenSim originate in Second Life, they hear about Second Life first because they have the depressed and the economy and they have just the abundance of users. And in considering that the majority of our viewer code comes from Glendon Lab initially anyways, at least in our case, until and unless Second Life explodes which could happen, we have to at least stay compatible with Second Life. We have to at least put our primary focus but that's not to say that we don't have a focus in OpenSim. Cinder is almost exclusively OpenSim development for our team. I would just like to add regarding the plug-ins. I think one way to solve that issue would be with something like the octopus system we have been working on where you allow the simulator to add additional functionality to the viewer. Functionality, the interface. Basically, you can add items to the menu which can open the dialogues, flutters and that can go a long way to adding a specific, for example, you want to make an in-world game and the game could be presented in such way that it adds interface elements to the viewer while you are in that region. So that would be one way of not solving the problem but at least some use cases where extensions would be useful could be solved in that way. Yes. Now, I think it's an interesting approach. I will be very quickly. I once worked on a kind of a system for a research lab which was about water wars in OpenSim which was kind of a game but I got around the kind of interface issue by effectively reusing the media browser to display web pages and putting it via a long polling and all that kind of thing. And that was interesting. It was kind of really clunky as you can imagine but it was the only really way to try and do it which used interface. And I think you're right. I think actually having some stuff come from the server to say what UI should be presented makes this stuff more web browser like which is always an interest of mine as you've kind of already heard. So I'd just like to say, I mean, sorry. So, Nicky, do you have anything to add Fran? I think unfortunately we're gonna have to wrap up now but if you'd like to. Yeah, please go ahead. Plugins in theory are really great. In practice they are difficult to work with and if you have a problem in a plugin it's a difficult troubleshoot. While it sounds really good in practice it's not very easy to put together. And I have some experience from that just from our GStringer plugin which you know we use it for streaming audio. That is a mess to get into and correct any problems. And when someone says that I got a problem with this my heart just sinks to get into it. So plug-ins are great in theory but for the viewer in practice I don't think they're very adaptable. Okay. Okay, well, I'm afraid that's all we have time for here. So I'd really like to thank all our panel members for coming along. Some of them probably are not great times in the morning and on the weekends kind of give the presentation here and for a very interesting panel. So please give them an a round of applause. Thank you for having us. It's been a pleasure. I'm really impressed by the way with this conference. You guys have done an amazing job. Yeah, it has been very interesting because you know we have no idea if we're able to pull this kind of thing off. And it's not been perfect by any means but I think just getting into here in these numbers and this kind of thing is actually very good because I'm not a big fan of traveling. It's actually being able to do a virtual conference. It's pretty good because you know, you can get a lot more people who are interested and anyway, I saw it, I won't start rambling on that. Okay. Yeah, no, well, so thanks very much and definitely look forward to what will be a very interesting future. Yeah, so this is the end I think of the breakout sessions today. There are a few lunchtime events. So for instance, at lunchtime, there's both the social event on Avination which is on expo zone six. And there's an interesting thing from a company and I will admit, I do know these people personally. I've actually visited them, a company called Simudine who have actually developed a used view of code to develop a view for the Windows Pro and using stuff like a gyroscope to actually be able to move the view window around and kind of interesting stuff about that. So, and that's happening on, I believe, on expo zone three. So once again, thanks for being in the audience for attending and asking some great questions and now, well, also there's the conference meal break which might be more important in some respects for an hour, but I'm sure if any of the viewers do wanna hang around and there's, you know, people talk to each other anywhere. I don't know what I'm saying this for but if they wanna hang around, I'm sure there's a lot of people interested in asking more questions in order rest of it. So thanks very much, everybody. Yeah, thank you for listening, trust him. Thanks for everything.