In a dungeon, I just wanna pull out my Dwarf's Double Blade Axe, lop the head off a goblin and escape with the gold. At work, I just wanna go into the php file, remove the fucking ampersand, roll it out and go home. Either one however, requires sign-off and verification from multiple parties.
They'll try telling you that you "can't do that without creating a subversion branch first". Or "You can't do that without a level 6 Ring of Hurt".
Either way, you're better off just going to Home Depot, buying a real axe and running down all the goblins that stand in your way.
When I print out a PDF, I don't just read it. I deface it with a pen. I take notes, circle things, draw boobies, etc. If the kindle was also a tablet, and I could annotate... I may have a use for it. I'm waiting for the Kindle / live-scribe hybrid.
You know, when you have to squander the solace of a remote filming location to make your box office smash, the least you can do is clean up after yourself. Hollywood, can you please clean up all that fake snow you left on Mars?
Thus, the facts were:
* There is a GPL violation (their denial has to be proven in a court, strings in executables and the bug above clearly show it)
* Atari could not release source codes because of Nintendo NDA
* Atari could not put GPL clause because of Nintendo NDA
* Atari could not "buy out" ScummVM from us
* There is no possibility to double license ScummVM, at least SCUMM engine
* We do not need any money as a "bribe to keep silent"
It's a hack. When moving technology forward, you need to pick your battles when asking "should we not improve this service? It will break the hacks"?
All in all, you are displaying text on a page. Google's job is to take text that humans can read and make it text that humans can find.
I agree, spam is a problem, but this kind of obfuscation will only get you so far. It's the same argument that can be said about MP3s. If you can hear it, we can steal it. Same as "if you can see it."
Spam stinks, but in the end, even with these tricks, you are making your address public. Public information will be harvested by mortals and robots alike.
Is this a good idea? I think the real answer is "it depends". But whatever you do, don't pull me out of the game! A cheat mode? This takes us out of the immersion. Find a way to achieve the same thing in the spirit of the particular game.
As a game designer, you should make decisions on what makes the game most enjoyable. If it's difficulty that makes the game fun, and accomplishment that makes it rewarding, then no. Don't do this.
If the levels themselves are fun and by making something too hard, you are denying access and making your game boring, then sure.
However, even when this IS warranted, I would be willing to bet that there is something less lame than a blatent "cheat" mode. I mean, skin it as something that's actually a part of the game.
If you are a commando fighting insurgents? Maybe you can activate "special forces" that come and help you. You get to play the game you otherwise might have missed out on, but you simply don't get that "bravery" badge.
We call it cheating? How about making it a feature that becomes some part of the game?
next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores... will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the.. two SGI machines, each with just under 3500 cores in total
How is that 10x faster? I imagine because the new v. old cores are not equally comparable. In that case, why talk number of cores at all?
I actually led them on for quite a while by asking dumb naive questions. I was trying to go so far as to find out where to send the check. I think they wanted a credit card number. I did get a company name at one point, but it was something generic. It didn't come up when I later googled it. I write the name down but must have tossed the paper.
I wasted a little of their time, and had fun doing it. Does that count for anything?
It's not DEAD-SIMPLE. I'd imagine the only real way is to kill "visited" functionality all together. Blocking images will just block that one exploit. JS isn't needed for this exploit, but it could be used to create other ones.
If a page has the rule: a:visited { color: red; }
And I have a link element with id="myElement". I can just do something like: if($('myElement').style.color === '#f00') alert('scream real loud (with ajax, or load an image.. or something)');
I just thought of that one off hand. Someone may be able to come up with something trickier that requires no js.
The point here is, the solution is not dead simple.
The excuses they use in opposition to Net Neutrality have viable compromises/work-arounds. It seems like they can still be evil to the consumer in a Net Neutral World. It's just harder to but a barrier to competition, so that consumer would have alternatives. The only reason I can see is that they are trying to be anti-competitive which is, well.. monopolistic/evil/illegal.
Suppose Net Neutrality were there accepted rule:
Would it be in violation for a website to offer a faster experience to premium users? I don't think so. I think it's okay for a site to throttle their out-going traffic. This has nothing to do with shaping traffic en-route.
Would it then be in violation of Net Neutrality to run a promotion with Comcast, say: "Sign up now and get a life time pass to the ESPN Express Lane (TM)". I don't think so. They are not restricting access by messing with the Tubes.
I think the real reason they wouldn't do something like this is because it wouldn't stop a newcomer for providing a better experience for free. It's clearly an intent to squeeze out the competition and limit choice for consumers.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, PHP's Level 4 ring of Hurt was the worst. Level 5 kind of put some putty over the duct tape. Level 6? Yet to be found.
In a dungeon, I just wanna pull out my Dwarf's Double Blade Axe, lop the head off a goblin and escape with the gold. At work, I just wanna go into the php file, remove the fucking ampersand, roll it out and go home. Either one however, requires sign-off and verification from multiple parties.
They'll try telling you that you "can't do that without creating a subversion branch first". Or "You can't do that without a level 6 Ring of Hurt".
Either way, you're better off just going to Home Depot, buying a real axe and running down all the goblins that stand in your way.
Looked decently documented to me. Assuming you are familiar with the op codes.
When I print out a PDF, I don't just read it. I deface it with a pen. I take notes, circle things, draw boobies, etc. If the kindle was also a tablet, and I could annotate... I may have a use for it. I'm waiting for the Kindle / live-scribe hybrid.
You know, when you have to squander the solace of a remote filming location to make your box office smash, the least you can do is clean up after yourself. Hollywood, can you please clean up all that fake snow you left on Mars?
Video or it didn't happen.
Here you go:
http://sev-notes.blogspot.com/2009/06/gpl-scummvm-and-violations.html
From The blog Post:
The finals
Thus, the facts were:
* There is a GPL violation (their denial has to be proven in a court, strings in executables and the bug above clearly show it)
* Atari could not release source codes because of Nintendo NDA
* Atari could not put GPL clause because of Nintendo NDA
* Atari could not "buy out" ScummVM from us
* There is no possibility to double license ScummVM, at least SCUMM engine
* We do not need any money as a "bribe to keep silent"
It's a hack. When moving technology forward, you need to pick your battles when asking "should we not improve this service? It will break the hacks"?
All in all, you are displaying text on a page. Google's job is to take text that humans can read and make it text that humans can find.
I agree, spam is a problem, but this kind of obfuscation will only get you so far. It's the same argument that can be said about MP3s. If you can hear it, we can steal it. Same as "if you can see it."
Spam stinks, but in the end, even with these tricks, you are making your address public. Public information will be harvested by mortals and robots alike.
Is this a good idea? I think the real answer is "it depends". But whatever you do, don't pull me out of the game! A cheat mode? This takes us out of the immersion. Find a way to achieve the same thing in the spirit of the particular game.
As a game designer, you should make decisions on what makes the game most enjoyable. If it's difficulty that makes the game fun, and accomplishment that makes it rewarding, then no. Don't do this.
If the levels themselves are fun and by making something too hard, you are denying access and making your game boring, then sure.
However, even when this IS warranted, I would be willing to bet that there is something less lame than a blatent "cheat" mode. I mean, skin it as something that's actually a part of the game.
If you are a commando fighting insurgents? Maybe you can activate "special forces" that come and help you. You get to play the game you otherwise might have missed out on, but you simply don't get that "bravery" badge.
We call it cheating? How about making it a feature that becomes some part of the game?
next generation Sun supercomputer kitted out with 12,000 cores ... will offer a tenfold increase in performance over the .. two SGI machines, each with just under 3500 cores in total
How is that 10x faster? I imagine because the new v. old cores are not equally comparable. In that case, why talk number of cores at all?
Maybe it's because you followed directions. They wanna screen out the people who are likely to read the fine print!
I actually led them on for quite a while by asking dumb naive questions. I was trying to go so far as to find out where to send the check. I think they wanted a credit card number. I did get a company name at one point, but it was something generic. It didn't come up when I later googled it. I write the name down but must have tossed the paper.
I wasted a little of their time, and had fun doing it. Does that count for anything?
Asked if I had seen a .. Sandra O'Connor... or something like that. I forget.
Because I sure as Hell ain't clicking on any ads, Honey. I blame the virus. I'm going to go dispose of these bad bad magazines right now.
Agreed. And in my over-excitement of creating a counter-example, I forgot to acknowledge the cleverness of this solution.
If getting your site in Bing's search results means big bucks, they're gonna Game that just the same. You'll see the crap come flushing in.
>> speculation on what the world of search would look like if Yahoo exited the field.
Similar to how the world of racing would look if stuffed turtles left it.
It's not DEAD-SIMPLE. I'd imagine the only real way is to kill "visited" functionality all together. Blocking images will just block that one exploit. JS isn't needed for this exploit, but it could be used to create other ones.
If a page has the rule: a:visited { color: red; }
And I have a link element with id="myElement". I can just do something like: if($('myElement').style.color === '#f00') alert('scream real loud (with ajax, or load an image.. or something)');
I just thought of that one off hand. Someone may be able to come up with something trickier that requires no js.
The point here is, the solution is not dead simple.
How are they going to QA this in a production setting? Stage kidnappings? Bombings? I'd stay clear of the next Mac World. Shit's going DOWN!
Unless by Irony, you mean "like rain on your wedding day"
The excuses they use in opposition to Net Neutrality have viable compromises/work-arounds. It seems like they can still be evil to the consumer in a Net Neutral World. It's just harder to but a barrier to competition, so that consumer would have alternatives. The only reason I can see is that they are trying to be anti-competitive which is, well.. monopolistic/evil/illegal.
Suppose Net Neutrality were there accepted rule:
Would it be in violation for a website to offer a faster experience to premium users? I don't think so. I think it's okay for a site to throttle their out-going traffic. This has nothing to do with shaping traffic en-route.
Would it then be in violation of Net Neutrality to run a promotion with Comcast, say: "Sign up now and get a life time pass to the ESPN Express Lane (TM)". I don't think so. They are not restricting access by messing with the Tubes.
I think the real reason they wouldn't do something like this is because it wouldn't stop a newcomer for providing a better experience for free. It's clearly an intent to squeeze out the competition and limit choice for consumers.
It's going to be something like: BankofAmericaElementium
"What was that 'one in a million' talk all about then"?
There's a tiny chance anyone on here will ever kiss a girl, but we still sit puckered up just in case. You know we all do. Muuuuuaah.
>> Mars might experience a close encounter with Jupiter -- whose massive gravity could hurl the Red Planet out of our Solar System.
Woo hoo! Let's colonize it now. We won't have to worry about the inter-stellar travel problem.
I tell myself "it's just a website". Naive? Perhaps, but it puts a smile on my face.