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."

22 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. OK....so? by Scalli0n · · Score: 5, Funny

    A mock jury decided a mock decision.

    How about we mock the geeks that are still crying over this?

    --
    Sig & Below
    Yuck Fou
    1. Re:OK....so? by Frymaster · · Score: 4, Informative
      How about we mock the geeks that are still crying over this?

      feel free. but the exercise actually has touched on an important issue: the "value" of "virtual" items.

      let's look at two theories of value, shall we?

      1. labour theory of value: both adam smith and karl marx agree on how to assess value (whoda thunk?) value is represented by labour. (marx's theory is here, adam smith here) the bottom line is that the value of an object is the labour that goes into making it. raw materials are "just there" and only have value because of the labour expended to extract and refine them. add up the work hours to make something and you have its value.

        now, with virtual items this is tricky. baboo the barbarian "worked" for several hundred hours to win the +12 shears of torpiary. so, to baboo, thos shears have a "value" of 100 hours. however, some programmer wrote up those shears in 2 minutes and created a dozen of them with a keystroke. so, to the authors of the game, the shears are worth 2.01 minutes of labour.

        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.

      2. the scarcity theory of value: this is the supply and demand stuff everyone seems enamoured with these days. you know it. now, we'll ignore things like elasticity and fungibility to keep it simple.

        to baboo, there are only 12 shears in "existance". since they are highly sought after (demand) and there are very few (supply) the value of the shears is high. however, the authors of the game can create, destroy, modify and, most importantly, duplicate these shears with near-zero effort. the supply can be upped instantly. the shears can be modified to become useless, thus reducing the demand. the authors can make as many shears for themselves as they wish...

        so, once again, the value depends on who you are. totally unlike real shears. the scarcity theory breaks down with virtual things.

      so. do virtual items have value? no matter how you calculate value, the answer depends on who you are. this is a major readjustment of the whole concept of value and will need to be addressed by governments and the law as the distribution and use of virtual items (not just in the gaming world, but everywhere) becomes more prevalent.

      we don't need a digital millenium copyright act, we need a digital millenium value theory. of course, coming up with that will require some knowledge of economic theory and some hard thinking - so don't expect one from your politicians anytime soon.

  2. Damn by Timesprout · · Score: 3, Funny

    I read that as Casanova's Notes and I thought /. was finally going to tell me how to be a babe magnet.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:Damn by Snoopy77 · · Score: 3, Funny

      1. Stop reading /.
      2. ???
      3. Babe magnet

      --
      "She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
  3. Sorry... no real loss. by tinrobot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. This is an easy one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just award them some virtual money.

  5. Does this mean virtual deaths are real too? by happyhippy · · Score: 5, Funny

    So Im looking at a couple of thousand life sentences for playing Counterstrike?

  6. Only if the operator is nice by achurch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    I suspect that's the crux of the problem--whether or not the sysadmin would actually return the items/counters or just say "tough luck". As an off-and-on FFXI player, I've had to deal with Square taking the latter position (albeit on bugs rather than cracks) far too often. If it took you X number of days to acquire an item or the like, and through no fault of your own that item suddenly disappeared, then yes, the real time you spent acquiring that item is a real loss.

    1. Re:Only if the operator is nice by achurch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Get a grip - its only a f**king game!

      So is everything else. To each their own enjoyment.

  7. Div's Happy Hour by akedia · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just want to take a moment to talk to all the retards.

    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.

    What a bunch of fucking brain surgeons.

    (Credit goes to Penny Arcade. Seems apropros here. Seriously guys, get a life. It's disturbing.)

    1. Re:Div's Happy Hour by Idarubicin · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I just want to take a moment to talk to all the retards.

      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
  8. Loss is subjective by Steeltoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Loss is subjective by achurch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You could say exactly the same thing about the real world, you know. Get your car stolen? That's real loss. Hard drive goes up in smoke (this happened to me two days ago)? That's real loss. In the End, no, nothing matters, but until then--which is subjectively quite a long time!--being pissed is, IMNSHO, a perfectly normal and reasonable reaction.

  9. whats the point? by August_zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?
    1. Re:whats the point? by GMontag451 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, it would be akin to paying someone $50 for a stack of Magic cards. If you had 10 mint Beta Black Lotuses (approx total value: $7000) and someone stole them, would you say "Oh well, it was just a game."? I sure hope not. Now say you have 20 foil Birds of Paradise in Magic:Online (total approx value: $1000) and someone hacks WotC's server and steals them all. Would you say it was just a game then? The line gets blurry, especially when you consider that you have to pay for packs of online cards just like you pay for packs for real cardboard.

  10. "Real" damages? Are you kidding? by tgrigsby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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... ***
  11. Both sides' virginity was upheld by Sagarian · · Score: 5, Funny

    unanimously

    by an undoubtely [poorly] HUNG jury.

  12. Virtual money by kiddygrinder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  13. Analogy? by fven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  14. Not that suprising to me by Castaa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You have to look at the buyers of EQ accounts to get the reasons behind the price differences.

    A buyer of a high level EQ account is most likely to be a person that wants a position of power and respect in the game. They want the to be the 'best'. Or near the top anyway.

    So much so, that they are willing to pay hundreds of real US dollars for it. This type of player is most likely a male player in real life. Power and sense of being respected (looked up to) is more important to male online gamers. A high percentage of male players (over 80%) play male avatars online. So there is going to be a higher demand for high level male avatars for EQ.

    In general, women play EQ for more of a sense of community and social interaction. These goals do not require a female player to purchase a high level EQ account. Also, there are only about 15-20% real life female players in EQ. So even if they were looking to buy an account there would be far fewer female buyers compared to male.

    Another interesting demographic is that only 1-2% of female EQ players play as males.

    Good source of info on this subject can be found here: http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/

    --
    Chew: You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes.
    Roy: Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes.
  15. It's all the same. by Mr.+Self+estruct · · Score: 4, Funny

    You guys.. it doesn't matter... even the FEMALE characters in EverQuest are guys....

  16. "Real" money are also just virtual by Inoen · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Has anyone thought abut the fact that "real" money have no value either? They are just symbols of the labour that went into obtaining them.
    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.