I think ESR has got it wrong, the AimBot is by far a much worse problem than a player being able to see around corners - a good player essentially can tell where people are anyway based on sound cues or knowing how far behind him someone was. It might give a slight advantage, but not the godlike ability to clean out a room that an AimBot gives.
Agreed! In fact, the ability to support 3D-sound footsteps REQUIRE you to have (at least approximate) positional information on people who may be around corners or otherwise out of side. This isn't really an issue with Quake, since it doesn't use footsteps, but Quake2, Quake3, UT, etc...
Your aimbot solution is interesting but it'll still require some "fuzzy" logic as users will often shoot randomly to throw off enemies, or just because (due to their timing or hearing of footsteps) expect an enemy to be coming. They might accidentally hit one of these "phantoms". Causing undue splash damage (if they are close) and/or marking these non-cheaters as cheaters.
But, "Openness" only becomes a factor with a vast miniority of total Linux or BSD users.
Linux is more popular than *BSD for the same reason Windows is more popular than Linux...Marketing. There's no Linux, Inc. but the grassroots marketing for Linux, and the fact that so many companies are offering easyish to use installation CDs you can buy at CompUSA is far superior to the marketing and end-user distribution available for any of the BSD variants.
How can so many slashdotters miss the point so completely? Comparing Quake to E-Commerce is just silly to begin with. Quake wasn't written to be a secure platform for anything, its a freaking game for christssake.
Cheating in Quake will always be possible. I'm pretty sick of reading posts on these two threads where someone who doesn't even recognize the problem is trying to offer solutions. BY FAR the most troublesome cheat you can do with any Quake, open source or not, is use an Aimbot. You CANT STOP aimbots with any fancy autorization system. YOU CAN'T. NOT EVER. You can only obsecure protocols. Even if you coded algorithms on the server that detected "bot-like movement", a coder could just make his bot algorithm differ from what the server considers BOT-LIKE. This would be even easier if the server source was open source as well! Hell, you could even write a proxy bot that doesn't move the crosshair aim for you, it just shoots when it can draw a ray between your gun origin and an enemy. In this way, all the bot does is pull the trigger when you sweeep your railgun across an enemy. Try detecting that on the server. Its impossible. All you can do is use some half-baked fuzzy logic that says "Well Player-X is too good, he must be a BOT!". Which is not security at all.
Even without source to the client open source of other system components can cause problems...NVidia/3dfx have open source OpenGL drivers under Linux? Cool.. why not write a program which sits between the mouse driver and the opengl driver, takes information from both and use that to cheat? Harder than hacking open source client, but still entirely possible.
This whole issue doesn't speak badly of Open Source, nor does it (as many people here think) speak badly of how Quake was implemented. Its just the way things are. If someone wants to try to create a "secure client/server" chess system that someone sitting next to Big Blue running his chess program can't cheat at, please get back to us when you figure out how. The serious Quake cheats are in the same category as this, and just can't be solved without using some security through obsecurity.
Couldn't he sue these carpetbaggers to get them to drop the name?
I realize that might set what some see as a dangerous precendent for other Linux-related software, but I think in this case everyone would understand. This company is so obviously just trying to make a fast buck.. And if nobody stops them, they probably will (a fast $100 million bucks, probably)!
Yes..but given Perl's license, anyone is free to make a forked version of Perl for their own ends....This is all Stallman wants for Java.
This doesn't require OTHER people to use the forked Perl version -- most will stick with the 'official' Wall version..But at least Perl leaves the option open (and notice how nothing bad has come of it?) whereas Java doesn't.
I realize this is in jest, but all of the trademark issues (which the people on JavaLobby are saying is the critical failure of RMS' argument) are total crap. Linux can't use the name UNIX, and yet people know its a UNIX-alike and its growing much faster than any of the systems licensed to use the UNIX trademark.
Sun should be worried about this. If a better Open Source version of Java comes along with a catchy name and evolves faster than Java itself, they may have marginalized themselves out of the Java market by being so close-minded. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't always agree with RMS, but when it comes to computer LANGUAGES, I think there must be an open atmosphere where anyone is free to develop their own implementation.
there are other reasons this happens, the only time I ever see these is when eBay ends an auction prematurely because the item in question is illegal (a la Warez, pirated CD-R music, etc).
Selling this tape would technically be in the same exact category as Warez, pirated CDRs, etc. You could make a case that Lucas won't really make any money from it, so it's ok to redistribute... While logical, there's no legal basis for that. eBay would be open to legal charges from Lucas if they allowed these sales to go on, especially as they have shown in the past their ability to act as sale content editor.
If everyone 'wrote their own' it would invalidate the purpose. It would be far easier to just fill out dead-tree tax forms than to program (your) state and federal tax rules into a program.
The purpose of these programs is that one group does the work of creating a framework and programming in rules (which are hopefully dynamic so they can be changed every year, along with tax law, without changing major parts of the framework code). Everyone else then benefits from the work of that one group.
Now...Perhaps you meant that this guy should spearhead the development of tax software for us all to use. In this case, you're showing a bit of a programmer's-bias assuming everyone can whip up code. Linux user != programmer, the quicker that notion is dispelled, the quicker Linux can really take on Microsoft.
One last point...The best hope for tax (or other financial software) on Linux may be if Quicken and others produce versions of their commercial software. I support Open Source, but its probably far too early to expect the general population to trust OSS on something where they can legally be held liable for the results the software produces. (The IRS man won't care that your GPL'd software made a calculation error, he just wants his damn money and he wants it now.) The general population, for right or wrong, probably will feel much safer with a known-entity commercial vendor.
This robot is somewhat interesting, but LEGOs MindStorms are much cooler and more fun. Especially when you utilize the cool hacks such as legOs...Plus, Mindstorms are much cheaper than this robot....Mindstorms aren't likely to be able to vacuum your floor, but who cares? Vacuuming is just about the least of my cleanup issues... If this thing could wash dishes or do the laundry, I'd be more interested!
Personally, I'm more interested in the AIBO approach of creating a robot with some sort of personality. 'Cye' is interesting, but he doesn't seem all that useful (he can vacuum your floors half-assedly?) and the way you have to train the robot seems a little lame.. Why doesn't he map his own paths based on previous collisions? I've even seen a LEGO MindStorm-based robot that would build a map on a remote PC based upon collisions..Dragging the robot around to train him seems a little annoying, no?
Yes!! You can have the ease of use while keeping the power -- BeOS (and AmigaOS before it) does a good job at this. There will inevitably be people opposed to graphical installers on Linux. These are largely the same people that write code in 'vi', don't bother to install X, and don't own a mouse.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that POV ('if it works for me, I'll stick with it'), but clearly these people are the minority of computer users. GUIs, including during the install process, are a must for any serious OS in 1999. Lets just hope the major distros allow for non-GUI install too, just to keep everyone happy.
I don't see this as a drawback. If you want things to be stable, pick another distro. Thats the beauty of Linux (and *BSD) distros -- you want security? You want stability? You want all the latest bells and whistles? Pick the distro that's closest to what you want.
Mandrake is one of those that is gunning quite a bit for the Windows desktop users...These users are used to things being a bit unstable to allow for neat eye-candy. Clearly, this is not the best choice for everyone, but its nice to have the option.
Well, there's a pretty standard baseline VGA standard you can rely on to be supported even with the newest video cards. As long as the X server used for the graphical installer sticks to this, everything should be just as smooth as using text-mode.
It would be nice, however, if more distros supported GUI install AND text install for 'expert' users.
If you want a GPL 3D Engine... Write one. There are actually already GPLed 3D engines more advanced than Quake1, such as Crystal Space. You just never hear about them...Which is currently the biggest problem with OSS...Its all too easy for good projects to get lost in all the noise.
Turnabout is fair play. Many PHBs have read the extremely optimistic OO/design pattern/reuse books that have proliferated over the past 5 years, and are applying those ideas to EVERY project. Sometimes they just aren't the right tools for the job.
This seems like another entry into the backlash trend I'm beginning to notice vs strictly reusable/OO/framework-based programming.
To some degree, this is a welcome backlash. Many OO/reuse-nuts tend to advocate its principles for all projects across the board when many projects aren't helped, and some are in fact hindered by these techniques.
Some people may be interrupted during TV watching by friends on the phone or at the door. They may want to pause the show in progress not to "study" it, but simply to put it on hold so they can return to it slightly later. Since you are a friendless loser, this probably doesn't apply to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed! In fact, the ability to support 3D-sound footsteps REQUIRE you to have (at least approximate) positional information on people who may be around corners or otherwise out of side. This isn't really an issue with Quake, since it doesn't use footsteps, but Quake2, Quake3, UT, etc...
Your aimbot solution is interesting but it'll still require some "fuzzy" logic as users will often shoot randomly to throw off enemies, or just because (due to their timing or hearing of footsteps) expect an enemy to be coming. They might accidentally hit one of these "phantoms". Causing undue splash damage (if they are close) and/or marking these non-cheaters as cheaters.
Linux is more popular than *BSD for the same reason Windows is more popular than Linux...Marketing. There's no Linux, Inc. but the grassroots marketing for Linux, and the fact that so many companies are offering easyish to use installation CDs you can buy at CompUSA is far superior to the marketing and end-user distribution available for any of the BSD variants.
Cheating in Quake will always be possible. I'm pretty sick of reading posts on these two threads where someone who doesn't even recognize the problem is trying to offer solutions. BY FAR the most troublesome cheat you can do with any Quake, open source or not, is use an Aimbot. You CANT STOP aimbots with any fancy autorization system. YOU CAN'T. NOT EVER. You can only obsecure protocols. Even if you coded algorithms on the server that detected "bot-like movement", a coder could just make his bot algorithm differ from what the server considers BOT-LIKE. This would be even easier if the server source was open source as well! Hell, you could even write a proxy bot that doesn't move the crosshair aim for you, it just shoots when it can draw a ray between your gun origin and an enemy. In this way, all the bot does is pull the trigger when you sweeep your railgun across an enemy. Try detecting that on the server. Its impossible. All you can do is use some half-baked fuzzy logic that says "Well Player-X is too good, he must be a BOT!". Which is not security at all.
Even without source to the client open source of other system components can cause problems...NVidia/3dfx have open source OpenGL drivers under Linux? Cool .. why not write a program which sits between the mouse driver and the opengl driver, takes information from both and use that to cheat? Harder than hacking open source client, but still entirely possible.
This whole issue doesn't speak badly of Open Source, nor does it (as many people here think) speak badly of how Quake was implemented. Its just the way things are. If someone wants to try to create a "secure client/server" chess system that someone sitting next to Big Blue running his chess program can't cheat at, please get back to us when you figure out how. The serious Quake cheats are in the same category as this, and just can't be solved without using some security through obsecurity.
I dont speak for EVERYONE, but I generally only lambaste SOFTWARE patents here. Hardware process patents are a Good Thing.
Couldn't he sue these carpetbaggers to get them to drop the name?
I realize that might set what some see as a dangerous precendent for other Linux-related software, but I think in this case everyone would understand. This company is so obviously just trying to make a fast buck.. And if nobody stops them, they probably will (a fast $100 million bucks, probably)!
Step 1) Take one of the current GPL Java implementations (Kaffe, Japhar, etc).
Step 2) Rename the implementation to "JLinux++"
Step 3) Advertise it as a Linux-friendly J*v*-alike.
Step 4) IPO (Linux baby! Yeah!)
Step 5) Take the $5 billion in capital from step 4 and buy Sun.
Step 6) Put the Java trademark on your implementation and forget Sun ever existed.
Kaffe
Japhar
Kaffe is GPLed, Japhar is LGPLed. There may be more, but these are the two big names.
This doesn't require OTHER people to use the forked Perl version -- most will stick with the 'official' Wall version..But at least Perl leaves the option open (and notice how nothing bad has come of it?) whereas Java doesn't.
Sun should be worried about this. If a better Open Source version of Java comes along with a catchy name and evolves faster than Java itself, they may have marginalized themselves out of the Java market by being so close-minded. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't always agree with RMS, but when it comes to computer LANGUAGES, I think there must be an open atmosphere where anyone is free to develop their own implementation.
Selling this tape would technically be in the same exact category as Warez, pirated CDRs, etc. You could make a case that Lucas won't really make any money from it, so it's ok to redistribute... While logical, there's no legal basis for that. eBay would be open to legal charges from Lucas if they allowed these sales to go on, especially as they have shown in the past their ability to act as sale content editor.
Just think how his FAMILY TOOK THE NEWS!!! So SAD!!!
The purpose of these programs is that one group does the work of creating a framework and programming in rules (which are hopefully dynamic so they can be changed every year, along with tax law, without changing major parts of the framework code). Everyone else then benefits from the work of that one group.
Now...Perhaps you meant that this guy should spearhead the development of tax software for us all to use. In this case, you're showing a bit of a programmer's-bias assuming everyone can whip up code. Linux user != programmer, the quicker that notion is dispelled, the quicker Linux can really take on Microsoft.
One last point...The best hope for tax (or other financial software) on Linux may be if Quicken and others produce versions of their commercial software. I support Open Source, but its probably far too early to expect the general population to trust OSS on something where they can legally be held liable for the results the software produces. (The IRS man won't care that your GPL'd software made a calculation error, he just wants his damn money and he wants it now.) The general population, for right or wrong, probably will feel much safer with a known-entity commercial vendor.
Nah, we're catching up! At least it was first posted *this year*!!!
This robot is somewhat interesting, but LEGOs MindStorms are much cooler and more fun. Especially when you utilize the cool hacks such as legOs...Plus, Mindstorms are much cheaper than this robot....Mindstorms aren't likely to be able to vacuum your floor, but who cares? Vacuuming is just about the least of my cleanup issues... If this thing could wash dishes or do the laundry, I'd be more interested!
I don't think there's anything wrong with that POV ('if it works for me, I'll stick with it'), but clearly these people are the minority of computer users. GUIs, including during the install process, are a must for any serious OS in 1999. Lets just hope the major distros allow for non-GUI install too, just to keep everyone happy.
Mandrake is one of those that is gunning quite a bit for the Windows desktop users...These users are used to things being a bit unstable to allow for neat eye-candy. Clearly, this is not the best choice for everyone, but its nice to have the option.
It would be nice, however, if more distros supported GUI install AND text install for 'expert' users.
If you want a GPL 3D Engine... Write one. There are actually already GPLed 3D engines more advanced than Quake1, such as Crystal Space. You just never hear about them...Which is currently the biggest problem with OSS...Its all too easy for good projects to get lost in all the noise.
Turnabout is fair play. Many PHBs have read the extremely optimistic OO/design pattern/reuse books that have proliferated over the past 5 years, and are applying those ideas to EVERY project. Sometimes they just aren't the right tools for the job.
To some degree, this is a welcome backlash. Many OO/reuse-nuts tend to advocate its principles for all projects across the board when many projects aren't helped, and some are in fact hindered by these techniques.
Some people may be interrupted during TV watching by friends on the phone or at the door. They may want to pause the show in progress not to "study" it, but simply to put it on hold so they can return to it slightly later. Since you are a friendless loser, this probably doesn't apply to you.
Huh?