So android play - It's also the permission manager for android apps right? It needs to have location permission before it can pass your location safely to third party apps you've installed and authorised. And this is a bad thing why? Because google gets your location? Until someone can demonstrate to me that google is using this location information to my detriment, why should I care? I certainly don't want to hand top level location trust to unknown third party vendors on a case by case basis - that sounds like a problem to me.
I guess it's time to switch to apple!/s
The dolphins listened to an entire "sentence" before replying, according to the article, which points out that dolphin brains are larger and more complex than the brains of humans.
This is the best summary. My ex-girlfriend never listened to an "entire" sentence before replying. I need to start dating dolphins.
Actually, most companies buying this kind of work are paying thousands. Some are paying tens of thousands. But for those you need to prepend a few months of meetings to the 30m of dev time to justify it:)
Clearly, about 180 years ago, some smartarse troll built a steam engine capable of broadcasting a signal at HD164595 and we're just now getting the echo.
I thought in a tesla you are officially supposed to have your hands on the steering wheel still? Can't do that while looking through the glovebox and cleaning the dashboard.... That's why he's not suing Tesla, because he has no case. I mean seriously, when I buy new tech that costs $100 I follow the instructions, and if I don't and it behaves in an unexpected way, I'm not surprised. When spending more by a factor of hundreds, on emerging tech, I think I'd be a little more careful, perhaps heed the warnings and guidelines, etc...
The official claim is that they intentionally took the site down as they found a security issue while trying to mitigate the DDoS. Not exactly inspiring confidence.
Just after 7.30pm, the following confluence of events occurred:
A fourth denial of service attempt
A large increase in traffic to the website with thousands of Australians logging on to complete their Census
A hardware failure when a router became overloaded
Occurrence of a false positive, which is essentially a false alarm in some of the system monitoring information.
i.e. no security issue. Their systems got overloaded, melted down, and flagged an alert for a possible issue that didn't exist, so they shut it down.
Nothing, aside for that it's a distributed attempt to get service, not denial attempt, so probably even more effective at clogging the system. They spent about AU$400,000 on load testing (Should've been more than enough).
Evidently they didn't do the load testing properly. If they can't get that right how can anybody expect them to secure personal data properly.
Yet they're forcing mandatory retention of personal data.
They don't want to admit this was wasted money, and their IT guy said "With this many people trying to fill it out at once it's just like a DDOS attack!" so they've just gone with it.
By claiming it's a DDOS it just proves even more that they can't secure anything. How can they be trusted to keep sensitive data if they can't get something so basic functioning properly?
My first part was a little bit tongue in cheek. half a million to a company that specialises in such should have been enough but clearly wasn't.
However you seem to be harping on the security of the data - There was no "security breach" - No one got access to their systems. They simply got overloaded (blew up a router, etc) and shut it down because it simply wasn't robust enough. But zero security issues. Keeping a server up and running and able to support a predictive load is one thing, security of data is another thing entirely. Those responsible for the server being able to handle the traffic have nothing whatsoever to do with those ensuring the security of the data.
Then again, don't trust anyone to keep any data secure and you'll be better off. Government requires we submit this data - and it can - so either fill it out and suck it up, pay the fine, or leave the country, but never assume perfect security.
What's the difference between a DDoS attack and 4 million people all trying to submit their census all at the same time?
Nothing, aside for that it's a distributed attempt to get service, not denial attempt, so probably even more effective at clogging the system. They spent about AU$400,000 on load testing (Should've been more than enough). They don't want to admit this was wasted money, and their IT guy said "With this many people trying to fill it out at once it's just like a DDOS attack!" so they've just gone with it.
Maybe he wouldn't have minded being outed as much if he hadn't be in Saudi Arabia at the time it was revealed.
Then he should focus on bringing Saudi Arabia down... oh, they're richer than he is. Next best tantrum target? Oh, that newspaper who reported a fact. He sure stomped that journalist down.
BS gawker ruined average peoples lives and got what they deserved. They are the ultimate example of an ugly bully who got cocky and took on the wrong guy. A jury of our peers made this decision and they did the right thing.
Gawker did nothing deserving of this. They did not "ruin average peoples lives". Sure, that sex tape was not something I needed or even wanted to see, (I actually still haven't seen it, don't need to, reading about it is enough for me)... but a news company gets hold of a sex tape of a celebrity, I expect they feel that they have information the public will view (and they were right). It's not like they planted hidden camera's in Hogan's bedroom. This is standard news cycle stuff. This is not the exclusive domain of Gawker. Punishment - well, figure out who posted the story, charge them, fine the company (a reasonable amount, not hundreds of millions) and carry on, like in every other similar situation... but no, Thiel has more money than god (does god have money?) and money is power, as demonstrated.
With how he has gone with Gawker, I'm curious who he'll go for next, and how that goes down. Might not be such an easily disparaged target next time.
I explained why the walled garden was actually an advantage over the alternative in this case.
No, you stated there is a walled garden, defined roughly what that meant (which I think is an argument as to why it is a disadvantage) then acted like it was the opposite.
I'm a little fuzzy on how allowing further tuning below the company level is a disadvantage, as opposed to the walled garden
The walled garden for the most part is a technical user pet peeve. For most a contained device that offers predictable performance, stability and continued OS support is far more important. That's been their bread and butter since the beginning.
You said something, in a reply to my post, but it was some rhetoric, and didn't clarify anything at all to me.
GP is right, All the vendors market to the guys wearing stars
GP can only be partially right.
Are you actually surprised that the Apple product out performed the Android device? I know I'm not. The devices simply aren't competing on the same level. IOS is for Apple's device only. It's fine tuned for its hardware and vice versa. Android is tailored for devices and fine tuned by the manufacturer. This is a clear disadvantage for the platform.
My 2 cents!
I'm a little fuzzy on how allowing further tuning below the company level is a disadvantage, as opposed to the walled garden....
You'd be dead right.... if it weren't "opt-in" - You agree to the ToS when you buy the game. No different to getting a drivers licence - When you get one you're suddenly liable for a lot more than you would otherwise have been. If you don't want to have to follow the road rules then - yup - you don't drive, noone is forcing you to. Noone is forcing you to buy a software product and agree to how you use it. It's common practice to require a signed agreement in order to receive (usually limited) access to something, be it a game, data used in running a business, or anything.
Every other business gets a legal recourse, but because this is 'just a game' they shouldn't have one?
p.s. (not advocating this at all, but I think it's better than the current system blizzard is using)
( snipped from: http://www.mapsofworld.com/spo... )
Punishment for Athletes in ancient Summer Games
In the ancient Summer Games, there were rules for every game contested for. Those who cheated or violated the rules were disqualified from the contest. Along with the contestant, the trainer and the sponsoring city-state were also fined.
Cheaters could be punished by whipping or levying heavy fines on them. The money from these fines was used to construct bronze statues of Zeus. These statues were placed along the tunnel that leads to the stadium. Each statue's inscription told the cautionary tale of the offense. The athletes walked past these statues as a reminder of the importance of obeying the rules.
Well, lets say you walk into a police station.
You decide that you want to go behind their desk, and hop on their computer, access their internal systems, find out where your ex is living, whatever.
Well, while the police station is there for you to visit and place complaints at, etc, and the computer systems hold the data that makes this possible, it's protected data, and you're not allowed to look at it like that or use it that way.
What bossland is accessing is protected code. They are reading it out of the memory, modifying it, and then using that to render an interface showing that hidden information.
An alternate example:
Think of blizzard as the olympic committee (they exist, right?). They have set up the olympic games (overwatch) and people can enter and compete by buying tickets. As I'm using the olympics as my example I trust you're generally familiar with the sort of rules and agreements a competitor must agree to.
Bossland would be the shady 'doctor' that hangs around at the contestant entrance selling performance enhancing drugs. (And unfortunately these drugs don't have any foolproof detection rate).
Three things can happen here.
1) run the shady doctor off - throw him in jail, ideally. (what would happen if this were real world)
2) cancel the games - if you can't have a level playing field, there's no point to the competition. (this seems to be what many here think would be the best solution - 'it's not illegal, you can't do anything about it')
I'm in favour of working through the legal system to try to reach (1) - This in reality means law reform, probably, or enhanced trade agreements (and we all know how those go) So I totally get that it's no easy path, but I far prefer it to option 2.
Why can't your other replies be this level-headed?
See, you admit Bossland hasn't broken any laws (at least in as far as the information available), which means -- GASP -- we actually agree on this point and there was no reason for us to argue in the first place.
Funny how that works, isn't it?
And yes, the outcome will be quite interesting, no matter which way it goes. My money's on Bossland's owners simply deciding to ignore it and never setting foot in the US for the rest of their lives. After all, it's a civil matter and civil extradition treaties aren't a thing (yet; thankfully).
I never claimed bossland has broken any laws.... where did I do that? Unless I was pointing out that they've broken US laws in which case I was also acknowledging that they don't operate out of the US.) The legal system is decades behind this sort of issue.
It's already pretty clear bossland is going to try to just ignore it, they've been doing that for years. But I don't care what bossland _do_ I care about what the courts do. What bossland 'does' has no relevance here.
And of course you are thankful that people in one country can't be punished for their offences to another country. You're a lawyer.
It's that kind of attitude that leads to all our international wars - When you can't prosecute someone for stealing your IP/whatever and costing you money, well, what's left to you? Funny how that works, isn't it?
If Blizzard fail to shut down bosslands activity this way, I'd expect them to sue the german government itself, and progress from there.
OK, are we still talking about black market drug companies or not? Changing your version of the definition does indeed rended my issue with black market drug companies moot. Congratulations.
Considering that I made the original mention of drug companies, after Calydor mentioned doping, and neither he nor I said anything about black market drug companies. Yes, I did mention black market drugs, but any prescription drug solt outside of a licensed pharmacy fits that definition. You're the one who changed the definition, I merely shifted it back.
Still unclear? are we talking about black market drug companies, or not?
I did check out the site, and also read about the suit, etc... the program access overwatches protected game code through methoes explicitly prohibited mbyt the licencing agreement to generate their overlay.
It doesn't "access the code", it accesses the areas of the system's RAM the game uses for data storage. Try again.
Yup, and what's in that protected memory they decrypt and modify? Oh, yeah, game code. It's a bit complicated, funnily enough, but that's what the courts are there to decide. You've made it clear you don't know what you're talking about already, however:)
You can keep on saying that bossland isn't doing anything wrong
I could, if that's what I were saying at all. What I'm saying, however, is that they're not doing anything illegal. I'm sure you can figure out the difference and how it is key to this discussion.
No, I've been saying all along that bossland is wrong, that the legal system isn't capable of handling international intellectual property rights, and that Bliz has just cause to take them to court and establish a precedent.
You seem to think that Blizzard has no merit, period, and should let bossland do as they please. It's laughable, but now I know you're apparently a lawyer, I see why you're on this path
(that's OK, I'm a programmer, I'm pretty sure you're not)
You fail pretty badly at logic for a supposed programmer. You seem to be pretty sure about a lot of things; this is just one more you're wrong about. In addition, I have a legal background, which also qualifies me to comment (with authority) on legal matters.
Now it comes clear, you have a lawyers mind.
As for my logic, I'm still waiting for you to illustrate a single flaw in it, however now I know you're a lawyer I understand that you merely obfuscate what you don't understand, and are trying to jam your personal ideas of what it should be onto it. I can't criticise you for it really, it's what works in the courtroom. It also explains why you're continuing to fight a losing argument even when you are wildly unqualified:)
The rest of the diatribe the two quotes above came from is irrelevant, as it's based on an entirely incorrect premise.
You keep making statements like this.... I know it's a good court tactic, but this is a forum and you're going to have to back up your statements with something. I know you won't, because you can't, but it'd be nice if you at least tried:)
Oh, The US legal system is horrible, most legal systems are, but they're the best we have, and one of the few avenues open to Blizzard.
But, Bossland has broken now laws and committed no civil infractions, so it will be a tough road for them.
It's going to be a tough road regardless. As for if Bossland has broken any laws, clearly they have, they just are outside of those laws jurisdiction (as those laws were created in and for a time where this kind of predatory business practices weren't even conceived)
Fortunately it doesn't matter that it's going to be tough (btw, you're a la
I went through and read the actual suit since as usual the summary is garbage. Blizzard is 90% blowing smoke here, but the claims that actually have some merit are:
1. Intentional interference with contractual relations: since cheating is against the EULA, they are facilitating other people violating EULAs.
2. Since the cheat makers themselves were violating the EULA by developing/testing cheats, they were thus infringing copyright.
The rest of the claims require some major mental gymnastics, like claiming that when the cheat modifies the workings of the game (unclear as to whether it actually does that, or just reads memory and creates on overlay), it constitutes a derivative work. But the claims that do have merit are actually a pretty crafty end run.
However, the implication of #2 is that if someone cheats at a game, they are on the hook for piracy. Pretty scary precedent especially in situations where it's not 100% clear what constitutes a cheat.
Oh, you're dead on the lawsuit details are smoky at best, but I see that as part of the legal system as a whole, and in particular an archaic legal system trying to solve problems in a world of international digital goods and services that are traded and sold between such legal systems, etc... There's more gymnastics required than I have the patience or inclination to unravel:P
And yeah, the judge on this is going to need to be very careful what precedent is set, however i think it's pretty clear that there's a problem here, and I would love to think that there's the possibility of a good precedent being set here, one that protects creators and their creations from this sort of abuse, in the international community. (But odds are it won't)
Yup, and they will continue to do so as they detect them, and they change their patterns, etc.... It's a neverending battle.
But that's not a 100% solution, and Bliz has put a lot of effort into this game and wants it to be the best it can be, so they're also pursuing other avenues, like trying to end the battle legally.
But the law hasn't caught up with the interconnected world, else bossland would never have dared to attempt profiting off them (and us, if you're a paying customer of overwatch or the other games they have done similar things to) this way in the first place. So it'll be interesting to see the outcome of the case.
There's a lot of interesting discussions about how global connectivity and digital goods and services will be continually at odds with a non-global authority to govern it.
Meanwhile, Blizz will continue to pursue whatever avenues are available to it both in the US and the EU (and wherever else they do business)
OK, I stand corrected on antibiotics vs anabiotics/whatever they're illegally producing but it doesn't change in any way my point - black market drugs are unregulated, and untested by the proper authorities, and as such unsafe, regardless of what they are, and they were developed at great cost by a different company who would like to recoup their cost legally by selling what they developed legally, etc... so sure, nitpick all you like.
My first point stands
Actually, the anabolic steroids are legally produced, they're either prescribed for off-label uses or obtained illegally, but neither of those are the fault of the companies legally producing them. Their illegal use (again, not the fault of the manufacturer) is against the rules of basically every professional athletic association in the world, but that's between the athletes and the associations, not the associations and the drug companies. If your point stands it's not supported by this argument.
OK, are we still talking about black market drug companies or not? Changing your version of the definition does indeed rended my issue with black market drug companies moot. Congratulations.
Bossland is using private methods of access explicitly against the ToS to give game players access to more than blizzard gave those players rights or access to, and are charging these players for this access. Blizzard's regular customers are being impacted and receiving a worse experience, bossland is making a profit off blizzard's intellectual property.
Did you even google "Watchover Tyrant" to see what it actually does or how it works? It's an overlay, it reads from the RAM used by the game on the user's local system and draws a graphical overlay on top of the game; it doesn't control the player or enhance the player's health, armor, or weapons in any way. It's literally just a graphical overlay. It doesn't use Blizzard's servers in any way, nor does it use "private methods of access", it simply reads (and doesn't write) game RAM. It's questionable whether this violates the ToS in any way, as Overwatch and WoW have the same ToS and similar add-ons for WoW exist with Blizzard's blessing. Where Blizzard draws the line is writing to game RAM, injecting mouse or keyboard commands into the game (though some macro add-ons exist, which do this with Blizzard's blessing) or communicating with the game servers directly. Even if it is, in fact, a ToS violation, that's not a legal or civil matter and Blizzard's recourse is to terminate the offending account(s). Again, if your point does, in fact, stand, it is not supported by this argument.
I did check out the site, and also read about the suit, etc... the program access overwatches protected game code through methoes explicitly prohibited mbyt the licencing agreement to generate their overlay. Blizzard draws the line where they please. Hell, they have the right to ban you if you don't use any cheating software at all, if you want to get technical. They can ban you for taking advantage of an unintended feature, i.e. abusing a bug. And they define what a bug is, as it's their code and only they know it's intent (though they're pretty crystal clear on their intent) Regardless my point stands.
They hacked into blizzard's code, and use a modified version of it to generate an overlay showing the intentionally hidden information. So yes, they've broken into overwatch. Their customers of course pay for their original copy of the game, and then pay bossland to hack it for them. Their resulting versions ruin the game for legal customers, which means that prospective legal customers will be less likely to purchase it. So yes, they have made money off blizzard's back that has resulted in blizzard losing money, the basic premise that restitution addresses.
They didn't touch Blizzard's code, they used a read-only debugger (of sorts) to determine where the game s
Next time you reply to someone, don't use a phrase like "troll blather". It makes you look like a frothy fanboy or a Blizzard intern.
I'm a fan, for sure.
But I'm a fan because of the quality of their product and the efforts they go to to maintain it's integrity, which are fairly good reasons I think.
And my arguments are mostly from the perspectives of both Gamer and Developer, though I've never worked for Blizzard (and probably never would).
And I actually had tried a few different phrases before I settled on "troll blather" as I seriously couldn't think of a more apt phrase.
I mean, clearly you know nothing about the game, as all your evidence is third hand, you're calling it a clone of quake 3 (I'm assuming you did play quake 3? Clearly you've not played both), And just about every sentence in your post was a hyperbolic inaccuracy.
If I hadn't already posted and had mod points I would have done the exact same thing with the dropdown, but without adding anything extra.
No, not a trick question, a real one, I'm no expert at any sort of law. I just know that if when I sell the right to use the compiled result of code I worked on, without modification, and make that part of the contract - this would clearly impact the price - if I was selling you my source code and rights to modify it, I'd be charging - well not me, we're talking about Overwatch here, I paid $60 for my compiled non-modifiable copy, but I think the source code and rights to modify it would be easily in the millions of dollars.
Blizzard have decided to keep their project closed source and locked up, and simply sell licenses to use it that way. And Copyright law is the law that covers the rights to this I thought? So when someone hacks in, modifies the source code, and profits off it, I can see Blizz thinking the law should help protect them. And when the whole entire driving intent it to access Blizzards game servers with these modified illegal clients, they're breaking yet more agreements and at that point they're damaging the entire overwatch playerbase. So you think there should be no legal recourse? Or is it a different legal area, like theft or digital trespassing or what? I mean I know most laws are old, and that the world today has a lot of issues the original law writers never considered, but that's not Bliz's fault is it?
Black market antibiotics are made without regulation, and are one of the largest contributors to antibiotic resistance.
Assuming they were making good clean helpful drugs, then they aren't like Bossland, who aren't helping.
I said anabolics, as in steroids, not antibiotics. And they're helping cheaters cheat, which is exactly what Bossland is doing.
OK, I stand corrected on antibiotics vs anabiotics/whatever they're illegally producing but it doesn't change in any way my point - black market drugs are unregulated, and untested by the proper authorities, and as such unsafe, regardless of what they are, and they were developed at great cost by a different company who would like to recoup their cost legally by selling what they developed legally, etc... so sure, nitpick all you like.
My first point stands
It's like blizzard built a carpark, charged everyone $5 to park there, then some unaffiliated company sets up out front, stops people driving in, and offers them "easy parking service" for $10, pockets the money, drives round back, in through a no-public-access service entrance, then starts parking the cars wherever they like, blocking other genuine customers parking.
In your example, you've got someone standing outside the parking garage and collecting money in the course of depriving Blizzard of sales while, at the same time, depriving Blizzard of resources they build and maintain (parking spaces). While Bossland does charge for their software, said software does not allow access to Blizzard's services without paying (Blizzard) for them, nor does it deprive "legitimate" (defined by me as someone who pays for access, thereby including users of Bossland's software; if you have another definition, let's hear it) users of access.
Bossland is using private methods of access explicitly against the ToS to give game players access to more than blizzard gave those players rights or access to, and are charging these players for this access. Blizzard's regular customers are being impacted and receiving a worse experience, bossland is making a profit off blizzard's intellectual property.
So my first point stands.
Damn straight blizzard will march out front, tell them to take off, and that if they stop breaking the lock on the private entrance and bringing cars in illegally, oh, and all that money you've been collecting, taking out of our pocket, we want restitution for that too.
They're breaking no locks, users of Bossland's software pay Blizzard for access and connect to Blizzard's servers using Blizzard's software, the same way everyone else does. They're not taking money out of Blizzard's pockets, as Blizzard is still getting paid. So there's no restitution to be had, no matter how bad Blizzard (and you) may want there to be.
They hacked into blizzard's code, and use a modified version of it to generate an overlay showing the intentionally hidden information. So yes, they've broken into overwatch. Their customers of course pay for their original copy of the game, and then pay bossland to hack it for them. Their resulting versions ruin the game for legal customers, which means that prospective legal customers will be less likely to purchase it. So yes, they have made money off blizzard's back that has resulted in blizzard losing money, the basic premise that restitution addresses.
Still failing to actually add anything pertinent to the discussion or make much sense here mate.... but lets keep going:
See what I did there?
I sure do, but I'm sure you'll see it differently.
OK, I guess you didn't so I'll explain: I laid your argument out and pointed out all the gaping holes in it, which is what you attempted to do, but failed at. Unfortunately, I used logic and reasoning, and you're too busy playing semantics and pedant
I think that went over your head... Try reading the post again - keyword "imagine"...
Personally I think he* is partially right, the DMCA and associated shit shouldn't be used for something like this. If a game developer have a persistent world where money transactions are involved (subscription fees should be enough) they should also be required to make cheats and security intrusions (almost**) impossible. Maybe not to the degree that they should be considered banks but something close to that would be logical. Many hacks in games are due to a fundamentally fucked up development environment, hacking instead of developing mostly due to pressures to deliver something rather than deliver something working.
(* sexist, most likely true)
(** given the current state of art for programming almost impossible is the best possible level of security)
OK, do me a favour, and remember that Blizzard is a for-profit company. Done that? Good. Now try to take the perspective of someone trying to ensure this company continues to profit. A little tougher? Got it yet? Good. OK, so now, you tell your devs you want "almost impossible" security, but to still make a profit. This is where you might imagine a kindly dev pointing out that there's this thing called "diminishing returns" that applies particularly well here, and they tell you that with the budget allowed, they've got as close to "almost impossible" as they can already. Getting "closer" will mean spending significantly more time (exponentially, actually) and turn those profits inside out. Now pretend you want to keep your job, and go hire a lawyer to stop these thieves like every other company in a similar situation does.
>"Oh, that's your son? Well doing what your son has been doing is actually against your ISP's TOS....they could cancel your service."
And that would be an actionable lie. So yeah, that's retarded.
Blizzard needs to allow private dedicated servers like games used to have. They don't like that, so they should have to deal with the resulting fallout.
Yeah, I'm also pissed that microsoft won't let me host my own copy of Win Server 2012 as I like. They claim it's their intellectual property or some such crap. So unfair I can't use all their hard work for myself however I like, and even profit off it myself. It's like some people think if I want to have my own game server I should have to build my own game server, or find one someone is happy and willing to sell me, and pay for that.
And don't forget, having my own dedicated modifiable server would allow me to help fragment the playerbase, and subvert the in game expectations of players, so that fair competition (the single core purpose of the software) is unachievable.
Slashdot Mirror
So android play - It's also the permission manager for android apps right? It needs to have location permission before it can pass your location safely to third party apps you've installed and authorised. And this is a bad thing why? Because google gets your location? Until someone can demonstrate to me that google is using this location information to my detriment, why should I care? I certainly don't want to hand top level location trust to unknown third party vendors on a case by case basis - that sounds like a problem to me. I guess it's time to switch to apple! /s
The dolphins listened to an entire "sentence" before replying, according to the article, which points out that dolphin brains are larger and more complex than the brains of humans.
This is the best summary. My ex-girlfriend never listened to an "entire" sentence before replying. I need to start dating dolphins.
Actually, most companies buying this kind of work are paying thousands. Some are paying tens of thousands. But for those you need to prepend a few months of meetings to the 30m of dev time to justify it :)
Clearly, about 180 years ago, some smartarse troll built a steam engine capable of broadcasting a signal at HD164595 and we're just now getting the echo.
Well played.
I thought in a tesla you are officially supposed to have your hands on the steering wheel still? Can't do that while looking through the glovebox and cleaning the dashboard.... That's why he's not suing Tesla, because he has no case. I mean seriously, when I buy new tech that costs $100 I follow the instructions, and if I don't and it behaves in an unexpected way, I'm not surprised. When spending more by a factor of hundreds, on emerging tech, I think I'd be a little more careful, perhaps heed the warnings and guidelines, etc...
The official claim is that they intentionally took the site down as they found a security issue while trying to mitigate the DDoS. Not exactly inspiring confidence.
Source? I saw they said: http://help.census.abs.gov.au/...
Just after 7.30pm, the following confluence of events occurred:
A fourth denial of service attempt
A large increase in traffic to the website with thousands of Australians logging on to complete their Census
A hardware failure when a router became overloaded
Occurrence of a false positive, which is essentially a false alarm in some of the system monitoring information.
i.e. no security issue. Their systems got overloaded, melted down, and flagged an alert for a possible issue that didn't exist, so they shut it down.
Nothing, aside for that it's a distributed attempt to get service, not denial attempt, so probably even more effective at clogging the system. They spent about AU$400,000 on load testing (Should've been more than enough).
Evidently they didn't do the load testing properly. If they can't get that right how can anybody expect them to secure personal data properly.
Yet they're forcing mandatory retention of personal data.
They don't want to admit this was wasted money, and their IT guy said "With this many people trying to fill it out at once it's just like a DDOS attack!" so they've just gone with it.
By claiming it's a DDOS it just proves even more that they can't secure anything. How can they be trusted to keep sensitive data if they can't get something so basic functioning properly?
My first part was a little bit tongue in cheek. half a million to a company that specialises in such should have been enough but clearly wasn't.
However you seem to be harping on the security of the data - There was no "security breach" - No one got access to their systems. They simply got overloaded (blew up a router, etc) and shut it down because it simply wasn't robust enough. But zero security issues. Keeping a server up and running and able to support a predictive load is one thing, security of data is another thing entirely. Those responsible for the server being able to handle the traffic have nothing whatsoever to do with those ensuring the security of the data.
Then again, don't trust anyone to keep any data secure and you'll be better off. Government requires we submit this data - and it can - so either fill it out and suck it up, pay the fine, or leave the country, but never assume perfect security.
What's the difference between a DDoS attack and 4 million people all trying to submit their census all at the same time?
Nothing, aside for that it's a distributed attempt to get service, not denial attempt, so probably even more effective at clogging the system. They spent about AU$400,000 on load testing (Should've been more than enough). They don't want to admit this was wasted money, and their IT guy said "With this many people trying to fill it out at once it's just like a DDOS attack!" so they've just gone with it.
Maybe he wouldn't have minded being outed as much if he hadn't be in Saudi Arabia at the time it was revealed.
Then he should focus on bringing Saudi Arabia down... oh, they're richer than he is. Next best tantrum target? Oh, that newspaper who reported a fact. He sure stomped that journalist down.
BS gawker ruined average peoples lives and got what they deserved. They are the ultimate example of an ugly bully who got cocky and took on the wrong guy. A jury of our peers made this decision and they did the right thing.
Gawker did nothing deserving of this. They did not "ruin average peoples lives". Sure, that sex tape was not something I needed or even wanted to see, (I actually still haven't seen it, don't need to, reading about it is enough for me) ... but a news company gets hold of a sex tape of a celebrity, I expect they feel that they have information the public will view (and they were right). It's not like they planted hidden camera's in Hogan's bedroom. This is standard news cycle stuff. This is not the exclusive domain of Gawker. Punishment - well, figure out who posted the story, charge them, fine the company (a reasonable amount, not hundreds of millions) and carry on, like in every other similar situation... but no, Thiel has more money than god (does god have money?) and money is power, as demonstrated.
With how he has gone with Gawker, I'm curious who he'll go for next, and how that goes down. Might not be such an easily disparaged target next time.
I explained why the walled garden was actually an advantage over the alternative in this case.
No, you stated there is a walled garden, defined roughly what that meant (which I think is an argument as to why it is a disadvantage) then acted like it was the opposite.
I'm a little fuzzy on how allowing further tuning below the company level is a disadvantage, as opposed to the walled garden
The walled garden for the most part is a technical user pet peeve. For most a contained device that offers predictable performance, stability and continued OS support is far more important. That's been their bread and butter since the beginning.
You said something, in a reply to my post, but it was some rhetoric, and didn't clarify anything at all to me.
GP is right, All the vendors market to the guys wearing stars
GP can only be partially right.
Are you actually surprised that the Apple product out performed the Android device? I know I'm not. The devices simply aren't competing on the same level. IOS is for Apple's device only. It's fine tuned for its hardware and vice versa. Android is tailored for devices and fine tuned by the manufacturer. This is a clear disadvantage for the platform.
My 2 cents!
I'm a little fuzzy on how allowing further tuning below the company level is a disadvantage, as opposed to the walled garden....
You'd be dead right.... if it weren't "opt-in" - You agree to the ToS when you buy the game. No different to getting a drivers licence - When you get one you're suddenly liable for a lot more than you would otherwise have been. If you don't want to have to follow the road rules then - yup - you don't drive, noone is forcing you to. Noone is forcing you to buy a software product and agree to how you use it.
It's common practice to require a signed agreement in order to receive (usually limited) access to something, be it a game, data used in running a business, or anything.
Every other business gets a legal recourse, but because this is 'just a game' they shouldn't have one?
p.s. (not advocating this at all, but I think it's better than the current system blizzard is using)
( snipped from: http://www.mapsofworld.com/spo... )
Punishment for Athletes in ancient Summer Games
In the ancient Summer Games, there were rules for every game contested for. Those who cheated or violated the rules were disqualified from the contest. Along with the contestant, the trainer and the sponsoring city-state were also fined.
Cheaters could be punished by whipping or levying heavy fines on them. The money from these fines was used to construct bronze statues of Zeus. These statues were placed along the tunnel that leads to the stadium. Each statue's inscription told the cautionary tale of the offense. The athletes walked past these statues as a reminder of the importance of obeying the rules.
Well, lets say you walk into a police station.
You decide that you want to go behind their desk, and hop on their computer, access their internal systems, find out where your ex is living, whatever.
Well, while the police station is there for you to visit and place complaints at, etc, and the computer systems hold the data that makes this possible, it's protected data, and you're not allowed to look at it like that or use it that way.
What bossland is accessing is protected code. They are reading it out of the memory, modifying it, and then using that to render an interface showing that hidden information.
An alternate example:
Think of blizzard as the olympic committee (they exist, right?). They have set up the olympic games (overwatch) and people can enter and compete by buying tickets. As I'm using the olympics as my example I trust you're generally familiar with the sort of rules and agreements a competitor must agree to.
Bossland would be the shady 'doctor' that hangs around at the contestant entrance selling performance enhancing drugs. (And unfortunately these drugs don't have any foolproof detection rate).
Three things can happen here.
1) run the shady doctor off - throw him in jail, ideally. (what would happen if this were real world)
2) cancel the games - if you can't have a level playing field, there's no point to the competition. (this seems to be what many here think would be the best solution - 'it's not illegal, you can't do anything about it')
I'm in favour of working through the legal system to try to reach (1) - This in reality means law reform, probably, or enhanced trade agreements (and we all know how those go) So I totally get that it's no easy path, but I far prefer it to option 2.
Why can't your other replies be this level-headed? See, you admit Bossland hasn't broken any laws (at least in as far as the information available), which means -- GASP -- we actually agree on this point and there was no reason for us to argue in the first place. Funny how that works, isn't it? And yes, the outcome will be quite interesting, no matter which way it goes. My money's on Bossland's owners simply deciding to ignore it and never setting foot in the US for the rest of their lives. After all, it's a civil matter and civil extradition treaties aren't a thing (yet; thankfully).
I never claimed bossland has broken any laws.... where did I do that? Unless I was pointing out that they've broken US laws in which case I was also acknowledging that they don't operate out of the US.) The legal system is decades behind this sort of issue.
It's already pretty clear bossland is going to try to just ignore it, they've been doing that for years. But I don't care what bossland _do_ I care about what the courts do. What bossland 'does' has no relevance here.
And of course you are thankful that people in one country can't be punished for their offences to another country. You're a lawyer.
It's that kind of attitude that leads to all our international wars - When you can't prosecute someone for stealing your IP/whatever and costing you money, well, what's left to you? Funny how that works, isn't it?
If Blizzard fail to shut down bosslands activity this way, I'd expect them to sue the german government itself, and progress from there.
OK, are we still talking about black market drug companies or not? Changing your version of the definition does indeed rended my issue with black market drug companies moot. Congratulations.
Considering that I made the original mention of drug companies, after Calydor mentioned doping, and neither he nor I said anything about black market drug companies. Yes, I did mention black market drugs, but any prescription drug solt outside of a licensed pharmacy fits that definition. You're the one who changed the definition, I merely shifted it back.
Still unclear? are we talking about black market drug companies, or not?
I did check out the site, and also read about the suit, etc... the program access overwatches protected game code through methoes explicitly prohibited mbyt the licencing agreement to generate their overlay.
It doesn't "access the code", it accesses the areas of the system's RAM the game uses for data storage. Try again.
Yup, and what's in that protected memory they decrypt and modify? Oh, yeah, game code. It's a bit complicated, funnily enough, but that's what the courts are there to decide. You've made it clear you don't know what you're talking about already, however :)
You can keep on saying that bossland isn't doing anything wrong
I could, if that's what I were saying at all. What I'm saying, however, is that they're not doing anything illegal. I'm sure you can figure out the difference and how it is key to this discussion.
No, I've been saying all along that bossland is wrong, that the legal system isn't capable of handling international intellectual property rights, and that Bliz has just cause to take them to court and establish a precedent.
You seem to think that Blizzard has no merit, period, and should let bossland do as they please. It's laughable, but now I know you're apparently a lawyer, I see why you're on this path
(that's OK, I'm a programmer, I'm pretty sure you're not)
You fail pretty badly at logic for a supposed programmer. You seem to be pretty sure about a lot of things; this is just one more you're wrong about. In addition, I have a legal background, which also qualifies me to comment (with authority) on legal matters.
Now it comes clear, you have a lawyers mind. :)
As for my logic, I'm still waiting for you to illustrate a single flaw in it, however now I know you're a lawyer I understand that you merely obfuscate what you don't understand, and are trying to jam your personal ideas of what it should be onto it. I can't criticise you for it really, it's what works in the courtroom.
It also explains why you're continuing to fight a losing argument even when you are wildly unqualified
The rest of the diatribe the two quotes above came from is irrelevant, as it's based on an entirely incorrect premise.
You keep making statements like this.... I know it's a good court tactic, but this is a forum and you're going to have to back up your statements with something. I know you won't, because you can't, but it'd be nice if you at least tried :)
Oh, The US legal system is horrible, most legal systems are, but they're the best we have, and one of the few avenues open to Blizzard.
But, Bossland has broken now laws and committed no civil infractions, so it will be a tough road for them.
It's going to be a tough road regardless. As for if Bossland has broken any laws, clearly they have, they just are outside of those laws jurisdiction (as those laws were created in and for a time where this kind of predatory business practices weren't even conceived)
Fortunately it doesn't matter that it's going to be tough (btw, you're a la
I went through and read the actual suit since as usual the summary is garbage. Blizzard is 90% blowing smoke here, but the claims that actually have some merit are:
1. Intentional interference with contractual relations: since cheating is against the EULA, they are facilitating other people violating EULAs. 2. Since the cheat makers themselves were violating the EULA by developing/testing cheats, they were thus infringing copyright.
The rest of the claims require some major mental gymnastics, like claiming that when the cheat modifies the workings of the game (unclear as to whether it actually does that, or just reads memory and creates on overlay), it constitutes a derivative work. But the claims that do have merit are actually a pretty crafty end run.
However, the implication of #2 is that if someone cheats at a game, they are on the hook for piracy. Pretty scary precedent especially in situations where it's not 100% clear what constitutes a cheat.
Oh, you're dead on the lawsuit details are smoky at best, but I see that as part of the legal system as a whole, and in particular an archaic legal system trying to solve problems in a world of international digital goods and services that are traded and sold between such legal systems, etc... There's more gymnastics required than I have the patience or inclination to unravel :P
And yeah, the judge on this is going to need to be very careful what precedent is set, however i think it's pretty clear that there's a problem here, and I would love to think that there's the possibility of a good precedent being set here, one that protects creators and their creations from this sort of abuse, in the international community. (But odds are it won't)
Yup, and they will continue to do so as they detect them, and they change their patterns, etc.... It's a neverending battle.
But that's not a 100% solution, and Bliz has put a lot of effort into this game and wants it to be the best it can be, so they're also pursuing other avenues, like trying to end the battle legally.
But the law hasn't caught up with the interconnected world, else bossland would never have dared to attempt profiting off them (and us, if you're a paying customer of overwatch or the other games they have done similar things to) this way in the first place. So it'll be interesting to see the outcome of the case.
There's a lot of interesting discussions about how global connectivity and digital goods and services will be continually at odds with a non-global authority to govern it.
Meanwhile, Blizz will continue to pursue whatever avenues are available to it both in the US and the EU (and wherever else they do business)
OK, I stand corrected on antibiotics vs anabiotics/whatever they're illegally producing but it doesn't change in any way my point - black market drugs are unregulated, and untested by the proper authorities, and as such unsafe, regardless of what they are, and they were developed at great cost by a different company who would like to recoup their cost legally by selling what they developed legally, etc... so sure, nitpick all you like. My first point stands
Actually, the anabolic steroids are legally produced, they're either prescribed for off-label uses or obtained illegally, but neither of those are the fault of the companies legally producing them. Their illegal use (again, not the fault of the manufacturer) is against the rules of basically every professional athletic association in the world, but that's between the athletes and the associations, not the associations and the drug companies. If your point stands it's not supported by this argument.
OK, are we still talking about black market drug companies or not? Changing your version of the definition does indeed rended my issue with black market drug companies moot. Congratulations.
Bossland is using private methods of access explicitly against the ToS to give game players access to more than blizzard gave those players rights or access to, and are charging these players for this access. Blizzard's regular customers are being impacted and receiving a worse experience, bossland is making a profit off blizzard's intellectual property.
Did you even google "Watchover Tyrant" to see what it actually does or how it works? It's an overlay, it reads from the RAM used by the game on the user's local system and draws a graphical overlay on top of the game; it doesn't control the player or enhance the player's health, armor, or weapons in any way. It's literally just a graphical overlay. It doesn't use Blizzard's servers in any way, nor does it use "private methods of access", it simply reads (and doesn't write) game RAM. It's questionable whether this violates the ToS in any way, as Overwatch and WoW have the same ToS and similar add-ons for WoW exist with Blizzard's blessing. Where Blizzard draws the line is writing to game RAM, injecting mouse or keyboard commands into the game (though some macro add-ons exist, which do this with Blizzard's blessing) or communicating with the game servers directly. Even if it is, in fact, a ToS violation, that's not a legal or civil matter and Blizzard's recourse is to terminate the offending account(s). Again, if your point does, in fact, stand, it is not supported by this argument.
I did check out the site, and also read about the suit, etc... the program access overwatches protected game code through methoes explicitly prohibited mbyt the licencing agreement to generate their overlay. Blizzard draws the line where they please. Hell, they have the right to ban you if you don't use any cheating software at all, if you want to get technical. They can ban you for taking advantage of an unintended feature, i.e. abusing a bug. And they define what a bug is, as it's their code and only they know it's intent (though they're pretty crystal clear on their intent)
Regardless my point stands.
They hacked into blizzard's code, and use a modified version of it to generate an overlay showing the intentionally hidden information. So yes, they've broken into overwatch. Their customers of course pay for their original copy of the game, and then pay bossland to hack it for them. Their resulting versions ruin the game for legal customers, which means that prospective legal customers will be less likely to purchase it. So yes, they have made money off blizzard's back that has resulted in blizzard losing money, the basic premise that restitution addresses.
They didn't touch Blizzard's code, they used a read-only debugger (of sorts) to determine where the game s
Next time you reply to someone, don't use a phrase like "troll blather". It makes you look like a frothy fanboy or a Blizzard intern.
I'm a fan, for sure.
But I'm a fan because of the quality of their product and the efforts they go to to maintain it's integrity, which are fairly good reasons I think.
And my arguments are mostly from the perspectives of both Gamer and Developer, though I've never worked for Blizzard (and probably never would).
And I actually had tried a few different phrases before I settled on "troll blather" as I seriously couldn't think of a more apt phrase.
I mean, clearly you know nothing about the game, as all your evidence is third hand, you're calling it a clone of quake 3 (I'm assuming you did play quake 3? Clearly you've not played both), And just about every sentence in your post was a hyperbolic inaccuracy.
If I hadn't already posted and had mod points I would have done the exact same thing with the dropdown, but without adding anything extra.
No, not a trick question, a real one, I'm no expert at any sort of law. I just know that if when I sell the right to use the compiled result of code I worked on, without modification, and make that part of the contract - this would clearly impact the price - if I was selling you my source code and rights to modify it, I'd be charging - well not me, we're talking about Overwatch here, I paid $60 for my compiled non-modifiable copy, but I think the source code and rights to modify it would be easily in the millions of dollars.
Blizzard have decided to keep their project closed source and locked up, and simply sell licenses to use it that way. And Copyright law is the law that covers the rights to this I thought? So when someone hacks in, modifies the source code, and profits off it, I can see Blizz thinking the law should help protect them.
And when the whole entire driving intent it to access Blizzards game servers with these modified illegal clients, they're breaking yet more agreements and at that point they're damaging the entire overwatch playerbase. So you think there should be no legal recourse? Or is it a different legal area, like theft or digital trespassing or what? I mean I know most laws are old, and that the world today has a lot of issues the original law writers never considered, but that's not Bliz's fault is it?
Black market antibiotics are made without regulation, and are one of the largest contributors to antibiotic resistance. Assuming they were making good clean helpful drugs, then they aren't like Bossland, who aren't helping.
I said anabolics, as in steroids, not antibiotics. And they're helping cheaters cheat, which is exactly what Bossland is doing.
OK, I stand corrected on antibiotics vs anabiotics/whatever they're illegally producing but it doesn't change in any way my point - black market drugs are unregulated, and untested by the proper authorities, and as such unsafe, regardless of what they are, and they were developed at great cost by a different company who would like to recoup their cost legally by selling what they developed legally, etc... so sure, nitpick all you like.
My first point stands
It's like blizzard built a carpark, charged everyone $5 to park there, then some unaffiliated company sets up out front, stops people driving in, and offers them "easy parking service" for $10, pockets the money, drives round back, in through a no-public-access service entrance, then starts parking the cars wherever they like, blocking other genuine customers parking.
In your example, you've got someone standing outside the parking garage and collecting money in the course of depriving Blizzard of sales while, at the same time, depriving Blizzard of resources they build and maintain (parking spaces). While Bossland does charge for their software, said software does not allow access to Blizzard's services without paying (Blizzard) for them, nor does it deprive "legitimate" (defined by me as someone who pays for access, thereby including users of Bossland's software; if you have another definition, let's hear it) users of access.
Bossland is using private methods of access explicitly against the ToS to give game players access to more than blizzard gave those players rights or access to, and are charging these players for this access. Blizzard's regular customers are being impacted and receiving a worse experience, bossland is making a profit off blizzard's intellectual property.
So my first point stands.
Damn straight blizzard will march out front, tell them to take off, and that if they stop breaking the lock on the private entrance and bringing cars in illegally, oh, and all that money you've been collecting, taking out of our pocket, we want restitution for that too.
They're breaking no locks, users of Bossland's software pay Blizzard for access and connect to Blizzard's servers using Blizzard's software, the same way everyone else does. They're not taking money out of Blizzard's pockets, as Blizzard is still getting paid. So there's no restitution to be had, no matter how bad Blizzard (and you) may want there to be.
They hacked into blizzard's code, and use a modified version of it to generate an overlay showing the intentionally hidden information. So yes, they've broken into overwatch. Their customers of course pay for their original copy of the game, and then pay bossland to hack it for them. Their resulting versions ruin the game for legal customers, which means that prospective legal customers will be less likely to purchase it. So yes, they have made money off blizzard's back that has resulted in blizzard losing money, the basic premise that restitution addresses.
Still failing to actually add anything pertinent to the discussion or make much sense here mate.... but lets keep going:
See what I did there?
I sure do, but I'm sure you'll see it differently.
OK, I guess you didn't so I'll explain: I laid your argument out and pointed out all the gaping holes in it, which is what you attempted to do, but failed at. Unfortunately, I used logic and reasoning, and you're too busy playing semantics and pedant
I think that went over your head... Try reading the post again - keyword "imagine"...
Personally I think he* is partially right, the DMCA and associated shit shouldn't be used for something like this. If a game developer have a persistent world where money transactions are involved (subscription fees should be enough) they should also be required to make cheats and security intrusions (almost**) impossible. Maybe not to the degree that they should be considered banks but something close to that would be logical. Many hacks in games are due to a fundamentally fucked up development environment, hacking instead of developing mostly due to pressures to deliver something rather than deliver something working.
(* sexist, most likely true) (** given the current state of art for programming almost impossible is the best possible level of security)
OK, do me a favour, and remember that Blizzard is a for-profit company. Done that? Good. Now try to take the perspective of someone trying to ensure this company continues to profit. A little tougher? Got it yet? Good. OK, so now, you tell your devs you want "almost impossible" security, but to still make a profit. This is where you might imagine a kindly dev pointing out that there's this thing called "diminishing returns" that applies particularly well here, and they tell you that with the budget allowed, they've got as close to "almost impossible" as they can already. Getting "closer" will mean spending significantly more time (exponentially, actually) and turn those profits inside out. Now pretend you want to keep your job, and go hire a lawyer to stop these thieves like every other company in a similar situation does.
>"Oh, that's your son? Well doing what your son has been doing is actually against your ISP's TOS....they could cancel your service."
And that would be an actionable lie. So yeah, that's retarded.
Blizzard needs to allow private dedicated servers like games used to have. They don't like that, so they should have to deal with the resulting fallout.
Yeah, I'm also pissed that microsoft won't let me host my own copy of Win Server 2012 as I like. They claim it's their intellectual property or some such crap. So unfair I can't use all their hard work for myself however I like, and even profit off it myself.
It's like some people think if I want to have my own game server I should have to build my own game server, or find one someone is happy and willing to sell me, and pay for that.
And don't forget, having my own dedicated modifiable server would allow me to help fragment the playerbase, and subvert the in game expectations of players, so that fair competition (the single core purpose of the software) is unachievable.