Open source is not piracy

[Set]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/bl ... l-property

Sry, you fail.

[RedEye]

While open source may not be Piracy, it sure as hill supports it. Emerald is the greatest offendor, since most convicted SL copy-bot users also used Emerald; largely because they can use their copy-making programs with it and not have any problems.

Open source is good, in that it allows improvement by the users; tailoring it to meet their needs. Regrettably, some users use open source viewers as a means of theft and worse.
Open source is not itself to blame. Open source is good in many respects.
Regrettably, there are people who use this open coding platform for less than honest purposes; hence the negative press. It is far easier to blame some lines of code for something, rather than to blame a person. Persons can sue; guilty or not. Code can't.

[Set]

Regrettably, there are people who use this open coding platform for less than honest purposes; hence the negative press.

I've seen more proprietary code used for dishonest things than open source and they usually don't get any bad press. Well, in the actual press, anyway. They might on some out-of-the-way geekery site on the web.

Ever heard of Alexa? It's this nifty little thing Microsoft shipped with XP to track all of your web surfing habits.

How about SecuRom? It's a form of DRM on DVD computer games I've heard likened to malware.



My point is, this whole thing is just stupid, and a sign to me that the big industries are getting desperate. This isn't going to help them, it's going to piss people off.

[JoshuaMadoc]

Therein lies another problem: People won't care enough about this until it's decades too late.

[Set]

Therein lies another problem: People won't care enough about this until it's decades too late.

Probably not. It's just so absurd.

I feel motivated to shoot for work at Canonical or Mozilla now. I want to support the Software Axis of Evil!

[Set]

Speaking of absurdity:
http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/02/2 ... bably-Work

Perfect example of proprietary evil right there. Regardless of your stance on piracy, it's ridiculous. They're going to go out of business entirely if they keep pulling this crap.

[RedEye]

Unless I'm mistaken (and most likely I am); aren't most MMORPG systems like that? Your compy becomes a "smart terminal" for some mainfnrame where the game actually happens.
I really don't see how this will affect anything.

[Aki]

Unless I'm mistaken (and most likely I am); aren't most MMORPG systems like that? Your compy becomes a "smart terminal" for some mainfnrame where the game actually happens.
I really don't see how this will affect anything.

No, not at all. When you play a MMORPG the game is actually processed on your machine like any other online game. It's just that all your progress is saved to the primary server (IE, your character is stored on it).

Which is somewhat similar (Asassin Creed 2's system will keep saves server-side, game is still played on the computer), but, uh, AC2 is not not a MMORPG. It's not even multi-player. It's a single player game. An anti-piracy system that requires access to the 'net to play a single player game is a massive intrusion on the player, as it assumes everyone has a always-connected, uninterpretable connection. It's greatly diminishing the worth of a single player game, as one of the draws of single player is the ability to play the game regardless of whether or not you have an outside line.

Hell, even Steam (A form of DRM in itself) comes with an offline mode so you can still play games purchased via Steam should you loose connection to Valve's servers.

I mean hell, a normal single player game, or even a single player game I bought with Steam? Valve could explode tomorrow and I'd still be able to utilize my purchase. If anything ever happens to Ubisoft's AC2 servers? AC2 owners are screwed. You can't boot it up ten years later and nostalgia your brains out like I can with, say, Half Life 1.

With an MMORPG you accept that are a limitation of the nature of the game - it's multiplayer and requires a server. It's unavoidable. But AC2 doesn't need this. It's single player.

That's why people take affront to the whole scheme.

Edit: Also, hilariously related, the scheme is already showing signs of epic failure.

[Set]

Edit: Also, hilariously related, the scheme is already showing signs of epic failure.

That is the funniest thing I've seen all night.

[JoshuaMadoc]

Reading that really pisses me off, it just serves to remind me that a) DRM is a pile of s***, b) Ubisoft has people so delusional that you'd think that their heads are too far up their arses for surgeons to pull them out of their arselands, and c) The victims still lay the blame of their faulty products on, in this case, the pirates.

Yes, people pissed off at the $130 price tag for FF13 are somehow being blamed for something that's completely the idea of some delusional ramrod in the upper echelons of Ubisoft. No, let's just forget that piracy is the reason why DRM came up. Look at right now - half of the people among you legit buyers secretly support this joke of a concept for AC2's DRM. And it's all your fault.