Difference between revisions of "Talk:Money"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Maike Short (talk | contribs) |
(response) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
: What are you trying to do? Attachments like HUDs cannot be owned by anyone except the wearer. And HUDs can only be seen by the owner. So paying a HUD would be paying yourself. But I think that HUDs are part of the no-attachment rule. --[[User:Maike Short|Maike Short]] 19:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | : What are you trying to do? Attachments like HUDs cannot be owned by anyone except the wearer. And HUDs can only be seen by the owner. So paying a HUD would be paying yourself. But I think that HUDs are part of the no-attachment rule. --[[User:Maike Short|Maike Short]] 19:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
:: Presumably Gwyn is trying to develop a pay-as-you-go HUD, whereby the HUD requests PERMISSION_DEBIT on state_entry(), then tosses money paid into the HUD via the money() event to a hard-coded or dynamically populated key. | |||
:: Yes, you would be effectively paying yourself, but it does seem like a useful means of remotely authorising a payment to a 3rd party. | |||
:: The current UI doesn't seem to make it possible- I would advise poking around Imprudence or #opensl to see if this is prevented at the protocol level or not. If not, then you're just a patch away from having PAYG-HUD :-P | |||
:: [[User:SignpostMarv Martin|SignpostMarv Martin]] 20:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:22, 9 April 2009
Where does this money go? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timothy Dagger
"When money is paid to the object, the money is given to the objects owner." --TxMasterG Ping 17:07, 16 April 2007 (PDT)
Can you pay a HUD?
If so, how? :)
Gwyneth Llewelyn 02:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- What are you trying to do? Attachments like HUDs cannot be owned by anyone except the wearer. And HUDs can only be seen by the owner. So paying a HUD would be paying yourself. But I think that HUDs are part of the no-attachment rule. --Maike Short 19:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Presumably Gwyn is trying to develop a pay-as-you-go HUD, whereby the HUD requests PERMISSION_DEBIT on state_entry(), then tosses money paid into the HUD via the money() event to a hard-coded or dynamically populated key.
- Yes, you would be effectively paying yourself, but it does seem like a useful means of remotely authorising a payment to a 3rd party.
- The current UI doesn't seem to make it possible- I would advise poking around Imprudence or #opensl to see if this is prevented at the protocol level or not. If not, then you're just a patch away from having PAYG-HUD :-P
- SignpostMarv Martin 20:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)