Slashdot Mirror
Castronova's Notes on Hacker Court
scubacuda writes "Cal State Fullerton's Edward Castronova (who recently wrote an excellent analysis of gender inequality between male and female Everquest avatars) has just updated his notes on 'Hacker Court', a mock trial held at Vegas' Black Hat Conference on whether virtual items destroyed during the hack of an online video game constituted real loss. 'No verdict was reached, but the jury and audience agreed that the damages were real,' says Castronova."
I'm not an Everquest player, so I may be talking out my rear here, but the logic seems fairly simple.
Somebody with bad intentions hacks into the server and destroys your virtual items. Later, the hack is revealed. The sysadmin either goes to the backup or resets a few counters. Virtual items are returned to you. Problem is solved.
The only tangible loss I can see is the Sysadmin's time and effort.
So, a bunch of people who play EQ-type games get together and decide that getting their EQ-type characters messed up is "real damage."
What does the other 99% of the population think?
In the objective sense, everything happens as-it-is. If something disappears or gets created, it's just an event happening in a world, in this instance the artificial cyberworld of Everquest. In fact, if Verant wishes to, they can easily implement a system of degrading items or having NPC thieves pickpocket you. It's their game, their chose. They even claim no warranty for preserving anything you "gain" in the game in their license you agree to every login. They also have a history of banning people who auction out virtual stuff. It's not real. You pay for the experience of these events, wether you judge them good or bad, not any objects in their world.
It's your choice to play the game, and also how you're gonna handle a setback. Obviously, you have a goal of earning as much level, eq, money, power, respect, whatever, as you can. This goal is also subjective, and varies a from player to player. I won't go into details here about that, that could last for days..
One lesson, as in real life, is that things come and go. There's no real value to material stuff, because in the end THEY WILL ALL GO, including our own body. When you realize this, you can see everything as events with hidden lessons in them and let go of it. This doesn't mean you should never complain to get your character fixed or do anything dogmatic. Nobody can tell you what you MUST do, and rob you of your choice!
It means that in the end, you know you're perfectly safe because you're going to lose Everything anyways.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
I admit that I play some online games that I end up having to pay for. I play PSO with a few friends and my brother from time to time. I played AC2 for awhile, I am playing in the FFXI beta right now.
But I could never see the justification in buying items with real money. I mean its a freakin game, as soon as it becomes so important to me that I'll spend $100 for an imaginary sword I hope that somebody is kind enough to snuff me out. The "items" one finds in a game are, at most, numbers. I can no more own a magic broad sword +2 vs Nose goblins as i can own the number 7.
People cheating/hacking can disrupt my enjoyment of a game, but its a game. Im not going to press charges against them, im not going to go over to their house and tell their mom. If the host of said game can't keep the miscreants under control than I will quit and find some better use for my money, simple as that.
People are just way too attached to their own self worth. It wouldn't be hard to throw in some arguments about artifical spirituality and psuedo-relegious behaviors associated with online gaming but I am out of scotch
On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
Require payment of damages - in the game's own virtual currency, "gold pieces" or whatever.
Ok, so let me get this straight. You played a game in which someone cheated. And now someone has to pay you for it? No, you go play a different game. This is covered in kindergarten here in the U.S.; I'm not sure how this particular life lesson is passed on in other countries.
Look, everyone wants to get pissy when someone "wastes time". I spent X hours playing this, and you cheated me out of points/wins/lives/etc. Well, then you just go to the next game. Or you complain to the folks running the game and they sympathize and set you up with the stuff you say you lost. Or they don't because you'd be "wasting their time." And then you go play someone else's game and let them rot with their insecure gaming software. Vote with your participation and watch gaming software quality improve.
But to try to track down and sue someone because they cost you time playing games is severely unrealistic.
It occurs to me that people who see real damages in that situation need to tear themselves away from the computer and join the real world now and then.
As for me.... I'm going to go sue the crap out of that guy that tripped me during the weekend warrior basketball game. Who knew there was money in getting cheated?
*** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
All you are saying is that Marx and Smith are wrong. "Labour value theory fails us." - we already know that. Value has always been a relative thing, and has depended on culture, class, etc.. It is an entirely human ascription and as such, has no basis in objective reality.
Don't you buy Virtual money everytime you use a bank? Wouldn't you be a little pissed if someone deleted your bank account and said it wasn't real anyways? Obviously this is different, but only because it's not worth as much as 'real money'
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
You and some colleagues are working on a document. The largest part of this document is stored on your company's file server. Someone with malicious intent cracks the server and the last weeks work (assuming regular backups here!) is lost.
I think we all agree that this is a real loss. The loss can be quantified in the $time spent by you and your colleages x $wage working on the document plus any loss intrinsic to the data. If the data is stolen rarther than destroyed then damages associated with rival company having internal data etc need factoring in.
But at the end of the day, you do whatever you can (restore from backup, restart work from what you have, possibly seek redress for stolen data, secure systems better in future).
So if the analogy is valid (you and friends have spent hours working on a game), you accept a loss, do whatever you can and then get on with it.
A second way to look at the legal situation here is to use an anthropological viewpoint. What are the native laws in the society (in this case the online one), it may be quite acceptable to steal (thief as an occupation comes to mind, danm those succubi).
It is nearly always wrong to attempt to apply 'our' laws to another society - look historically at all the attempts to enforce new laws and ways of life on indigenous populations.
I guess in summary, look at online RPGs as their own little microcosmic world and accept their minimal effect on our real world.
So, you spend your real money in order to get pretend money in your online games.
Then, for the privilege of spending that pretend money - in a pretend world, on pretend things - you pay more real money, every month.
I spent some real money the other day on a pretend world. It was a world created by Arthur C. Clarke. I was entertained for a few hours, and now that pretend world full of pretend things sits on my shelf.
Yesterday I went to the local video store, where I spent some more real money on yet another pretend world. Today, I returned the video--if I want to visit that pretend world again, I'll have to cough up more real money.
What's the difference between people who spend X dollars per month on Everquest et al. and the people who sink X dollars per month into satellite television? It's all entertainment. People don't usually buy either product with 'useful' ends in mind--they pay the money to be amused and pass the time. It's their money; it's their time. Sure, they could be giving both to more 'worthy' causes, but so could we all.
~Idarubicin
"the bottom line is: the labour value of virtual items depend on who you are. this is totally unlike "hard" items (ie, real shears). labour value theory fails us."
,yet people attach a value to them (measured in other currency, time, or goods). Scarcity of in game items is seemingly not an issue for a game company, just like governments who can 'always print more money'. If the game company decides to 'print more items', their real-world value will drop accordingly. Like central banks, game companies have a responsibility if they want to control in-game inflation, and companies will and have fired employees caught creating valuable items for themselves or for others.
The notion that a virtual item has little or no value to the game company is not completely true. For one, game companies may sell in-game items to some extend. Witness Ultima Online, where the game company will buff your character for real-life dollars.
In-game items are almost like currency when it comes to value. Like currency, virtual items have little or no innate value
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Their value is in the trust we all have, that we can trade the money for tangible items of real worth.
Just as the game designers can decide to create more of the very rare 20-in-the-world-only item, the people working at the mint can create more coins, notes - money. This would have dire consequences for the national economy - just as it would have dire consequences for the sales of the game.
My point is that virtual money are just as real (or unreal) as real-world money. Both of them are just symbols of value. They are not value in themselves. And yes, both of them can be traded for items with a real value (real in Marx' and Smith's sense).
Now the real world money can be used in more places than virtual money; you can use any currency almost anywhere in the world, if you can find a bank. But you would need to go through the pains of trading on ebay in order to exchange your virtual money to real money or vice versa.
So maybe an analogous question to ask would be: if you have a copy of Microsoft Word on your hard disk, and someone wipes it, what is the value of the damage caused? I'd say the time taken to reinstall Word, not the cost of buying another original Word CD at full retail price. Similarly the damage caused by deleting a virtual item is just the time taken for the sysadmin to recreate that item.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Ok I'll grant you being without your +9 vs orges simitar is a loss but what is the value of that loss. Could you have legaly sold the simitar in the real world? In everquest no, so there is no resale loss to you. What is the cost of replacing the item? Nothing, the item is virtual and can be perfectly recreated an infinite number of times.
You could claim being without you +9 Vs orges simitar for a time reduced your enjoyability but the idiot who yells at the screen during a movie reduces yor enjoability as well and what damages can you claim from him.
In short I think the user has a very limited claim on the the craker/exploiter in the online mud world and would have to demonstrate a real loss.
I have no
The shears in and of themselves are worth nothing at all!
;(
The entire value comes from the service of playing the game. Getting items is a PART of the SERVICE of playing that game. By "spending 12 hours" to get the shears, you have spent 12 hours on the service in pursuit of enjoyment.
If the game company decided to nullify your service early, even if you have a level 60 everquest avatar, the only thing you SHOULD be able to get back is your unused subscription amount.
IE if you played 1 month of a payed for 6 month subscription, you should get the 5 months back that you arent allowed to play.
these online games are a SUBSCRIPTION BASED SERVICE. you agree to that when you sign up for them. I know you "feel bad" when you lose something online, i have lost some "important" items myself on these games due to poorly handled trades, but the thing is, when it comes down to it, you are playing a game, and the mechanics of the game are an interface to a service.
You did NOT put "work" into getting those items, no more than when you go to mcdonalds, buy a hamburger, did you put "work" into the seat because you decided to eat there.
You no more "own" the plate at a restaurant because they used it to serve food to you, than you own an item online.
now the question of "worth" is different, it may be "worth" money for you to give them an aspect of the service with which they do not want to invest time to be a part of (im talking about getting the shears from you with "real" money).
but dont feel bad that once you buy those shears, and someone then nerfs them, you havent "lost" any more money than you had lost before.
you simply now have an aspect of the service that is worthless to you.
Someone else isnt liable for your "loss" since you did not OWN what you traded for anyway.
You did not buy a "licence" to that object, so you have no loss in licencing fee.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion