Do you think it's necessary for BIS providing lockable binPBO?

[sbsmac 0]

A pbo is a binarized file. The only way to view the contents in a human-readable format (well, I've known guys who 'program' in binary, but they are more like cyborg vampires) is to use something to decode it - either ArmA itself or something else.

Not so - drag almost any mission pbo into notepad and you'll see it consists of a some header information followed by a simple concatenation of the files in the mission. Some of those files may be 'binarised' which is simply a form of binary packing rather than any kind of encryption but sqf and sqs are never binarized. :-)

[JdB 151]

Following up on the previous questions that I asked to see what wonderful addons and mods had resulted from peeking into other people's content without permission, to which I "surprisingly" got very few reactions:

How many of the people that have opened other people's models/scripts to learn from them because they (were disappointed that they) could not find any tutorials or samples, have since used this knowledge to create tutorials on their own, or have released sample models/scripts of their own as "open-source" learning material?

Seeing as so many of these people keep claiming the "open-source" nature of the community, and blaming addonmakers for not making this information public, but having to contact them privately instead which took too long in their opinion, it would be interesting to know how many of you have converted your private knowledge into public knowledge (freely down-loadable) since looking at EULA protected models/scripts.

RHS members (I was one at the time) made tutorials for OFP, Soul_Assassin alone did a lot of additional tutorials for ArmA1/2. Rock even started an [initiative] to organize existing tutorials/resources, and achieve the production of more tutorials. [GLT]_Myke released many tutorials/reference models. All of these "elitist" addonmakers shared more knowledge openly with the community than any of the nay-sayers in this topic (with the exception maybe of one or two, but not that I'm aware of).

So that means that these people complaining about addonmakers keeping knowledge to themselves aren't using this knowledge gained for the good of the community either, and/or to make addons and mods for public release with the know-how they gained. Demanding others to give to the community, or else taking it on their own accord, without giving anything back. There's a name for people like that. "Hypocrites".

Edited November 10, 2010 by JdB

[t_d 47]

How many of the people that have opened other people's models/scripts to learn from them because they (were disappointed that they) could not find any tutorials or samples, have since used this knowledge to create tutorials on their own, or have released sample models/scripts of their own as "open-source" learning material?

I wrote this biki article. Most of the stuff I learned is spread in form of forum answers here though.

[ProfTournesol 956]

So that means that these people complaining about addonmakers keeping knowledge to themselves aren't using this knowledge gained for the good of the community either, and/or to make addons and mods for public release with the know-how they gained. Demanding others to give to the community, or else taking it on your own accord, without giving anything back. There's a name for people like that. "Hypocrites".

Well, first of all there's a lot a ways to help other community members apart from writing tutorials. Answering PM, answering editing forum, giving clearance to re-use your own work etc. But i tend to agree about the tutorial thingy, those ones are really useful to newcomers and are obviously made by senior modders (Rock etc..), but looking into other members work is still essential to learn IMHO, and it's very productive to the community if the purpose is to release new things. This is a way to reward the community for being "open source" orientated.

Modifying existing models / textures and to a certain extent, scripts without permission is and always was bad thing.

[dmarkwick 261]

Following up on the previous questions that I asked to see what wonderful addons and mods had resulted from peeking into other people's content without permission, to which I "surprisingly" got very few reactions:

How many of the people that have opened other people's models/scripts to learn from them because they (were disappointed that they) could not find any tutorials or samples, have since used this knowledge to create tutorials on their own, or have released sample models/scripts of their own as "open-source" learning material?

Seeing as so many of these people keep claiming the "open-source" nature of the community, and blaming addonmakers for not making this information public, but having to contact them privately instead which took too long in their opinion, it would be interesting to know how many of you have converted your private knowledge into public knowledge (freely down-loadable) since looking at EULA protected models/scripts.

RHS members (I was one at the time) made tutorials for OFP, Soul_Assassin alone did a lot of additional tutorials for ArmA1/2. Rock even started an [initiative] to organize existing tutorials/resources, and achieve the production of more tutorials. [GLT]_Myke released many tutorials/reference models. All of these "elitist" addonmakers shared more knowledge openly with the community than any of the nay-sayers in this topic (with the exception maybe of one or two, but not that I'm aware of).

So that means that these people complaining about addonmakers keeping knowledge to themselves aren't using this knowledge gained for the good of the community either, and/or to make addons and mods for public release with the know-how they gained. Demanding others to give to the community, or else taking it on their own accord, without giving anything back. There's a name for people like that. "Hypocrites".

I'm not sure what you hoped to gain by this tirade, but it seems to be entirely misplaced. What have I given back to the community, the one I learned everything I know from? Well, I give my addons for similar purpose. That's what I meant by the culture feeding and nourishing itself.

You seem to be thinking that I should be compelled to make tutorials, well, it'd be nice, but it's not on my list of things to do. I've made some, but I think my commitment is reflected in the open nature of my work. To be sure, everyone who makes an addon is by that simple action giving back to the community.

I'm still surprised that we have such a discussion really, we make addons for pleasure, for free, for everybody. If for some reason there is a reason not to do any of that, well, there is the upgrade to VBS2 which might be more appropriate, or the simple act of not releasing. The objections to encryption are well documented here and are valid. I don't have a strong objection to model-specific encryption, to be honest if it appeared I'd probably be none the wiser seeing as I don't really deal with modeling, but other people do and I suppose it's those who should have the louder opinion for that.

---------- Post added at 06:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:56 PM ----------

You seem to have misinterpreted my post. This statement was one I chose to comment on, a statement written by other users (just in my own words) and I wrote my opinion to that statement beneath that stating that there isnt really much info given by BIS but the community. And this info isn't well sorted or structured.

Ah, yeah you're right I misinterpreted :) It looked to me like you were.... well, you know :D

[jw custom 56]

Following up on the previous questions that I asked to see what wonderful addons and mods had resulted from peeking into other people's content without permission, to which I "surprisingly" got very few reactions:

How many of the people that have opened other people's models/scripts to learn from them because they (were disappointed that they) could not find any tutorials or samples, have since used this knowledge to create tutorials on their own, or have released sample models/scripts of their own as "open-source" learning material?

Seeing as so many of these people keep claiming the "open-source" nature of the community, and blaming addonmakers for not making this information public, but having to contact them privately instead which took too long in their opinion, it would be interesting to know how many of you have converted your private knowledge into public knowledge (freely down-loadable) since looking at EULA protected models/scripts.

RHS members (I was one at the time) made tutorials for OFP, Soul_Assassin alone did a lot of additional tutorials for ArmA1/2. Rock even started an [initiative] to organize existing tutorials/resources, and achieve the production of more tutorials. [GLT]_Myke released many tutorials/reference models. All of these "elitist" addonmakers shared more knowledge openly with the community than any of the nay-sayers in this topic (with the exception maybe of one or two, but not that I'm aware of).

So that means that these people complaining about addonmakers keeping knowledge to themselves aren't using this knowledge gained for the good of the community either, and/or to make addons and mods for public release with the know-how they gained. Demanding others to give to the community, or else taking it on their own accord, without giving anything back. There's a name for people like that. "Hypocrites".

Thats completely nonsens, people can look at our stuff just aswell as we at theirs.

[TRexian 0]

And, some of us respond to questions in the forum as best we can - both to provide the information (I almost said 'benefit of our experience' but I'm not sure how much 'benefit' I can provide) and to help encourage people in their own journey in mod-making.

I have tried to make as much of my stuff 'public' in the sense of being posted and searchable here and at OFPEC. I have a Blender-to-ArmA tutorial sketched out, but the Blender tools changed that workflow, and to be honest, I haven't figured out that entire workflow!

But, for as great as Mondkalb's tut is (for example - there are many others), sometimes, when you're trying to make YOUR addon, you just hit a barrier that isn't directly addressed in a tut. The easiest, most effective (both in immediacy of time and long-term learning) way to get the answer (in my experience) is to look and see how another modder reached a solution.

That is my experience. Others may have different experiences.

[janh 0]

Modifying existing models / textures and to a certain extent, scripts without permission is and always was bad thing.

I strongly and entirely disagree. In science, it is ideas that are most valuable to drive forward research and development. Without ideas, nothing would move in our society. Similarly modding has always benefited widely form exchange of ideas and samples. This modding community would most likely not exist or be disfunctional and minimal if addons were not following the open source thought. Maybe without this powerful, and free modding community OFP would never have achieved its wide acceptance, and we never would have seen an ARMA2, nor be following this forum anymore.

What I feel is a bad thing is people not giving proper credit to the original idea, and the people having come up with it. Though of course this is only true in case of intentional ignorance.

This discussion about locked PBO's is very sickening. I would for my part not use and promote such locked addons. I hope other people would as well, as it really would irreversibly damage the foundation of the ARMA community.

[TRexian 0]

Hey - you know what, I think the 'peer review' paradigm (as opposed to an analogy) is apt. I can think of 2 scripts (the house-search, and the improved patrol) that both benefited from basically a direct kind of peer review.

And, there is the corollary where the open review of the ideas and methods doesn't impinge on the IP interests of the original scientists/creators.

Interesting thoughts. :)

[ProfTournesol 956]

I strongly and entirely disagree. In science, it is ideas that are most valuable to drive forward research and development. Without ideas, nothing would move in our society. Similarly modding has always benefited widely form exchange of ideas and samples. This modding community would most likely not exist or be disfunctional and minimal if addons were not following the open source thought. Maybe without this powerful, and free modding community OFP would never have achieved its wide acceptance, and we never would have seen an ARMA2, nor be following this forum anymore.

What I feel is a bad thing is people not giving proper credit to the original idea, and the people having come up with it. Though of course this is only true in case of intentional ignorance.

This discussion about locked PBO's is very sickening. I would for my part not use and promote such locked addons. I hope other people would as well, as it really would irreversibly damage the foundation of the ARMA community.

So we don't disagree at all, you only forgot to read the "without permission" part of the sentence.

[janh 0]

So we don't disagree at all, you only forgot to read the "without permission" part of the sentence.

The point is yours...

[Evil_Echo 11]

....

Seeing as so many of these people keep claiming the "open-source" nature of the community, and blaming addonmakers for not making this information public, but having to contact them privately instead which took too long in their opinion, it would be interesting to know how many of you have converted your private knowledge into public knowledge (freely down-loadable) since looking at EULA protected models/scripts.

....

So that means that these people complaining about addonmakers keeping knowledge to themselves aren't using this knowledge gained for the good of the community either, and/or to make addons and mods for public release with the know-how they gained. Demanding others to give to the community, or else taking it on their own accord, without giving anything back. There's a name for people like that. "Hypocrites".

I wrote a significant chunk of the documentation for a popular mod at one time, a number of guides for different topics, and then an entire wiki for that same mod. That work was done despite of the opinion of a number of people who did not place any value on documenting their work nor spending much time providing support. Often hours were spend tearing into PBO's to find answers for the user base. Meanwhile the old guard who wrote the code, made the models in question, etc. did not take too kindly to sharing what they knew. They were too elite or too stressed out to deal with such menial matters.

I've seen good people like CarlGustaffa take on the mantle of providing support for products. CG's passion is the Domination mission - a huge product that was suddenly abandoned when the original developer had a temper tantrum. Without CG, Domination might have died off. And without the helpful postings by him and others like him BIF would a sterile forum, barely any help at all to A2 players and new developers.

What was done in the days of OFP means nothing to A2/OA. Either you're currently active and helping or you're just resting on your laurels expecting to be worshipped. That kind of stagnation is the death knell of A2. So those that don't want to help, make threats/demands without giving back ( new models, software, documentation, answering questions, etc )- just leave and we'll be much better off without you.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Evil_Echo

[soul_assassin 1750]

everyone wants to help, not everyone wants their work open source in some cases. You missed the point completely.

[max power 21]

There are scientific aspects to the community. The community is not a scientific institution, however, and lacks the structure of proper attribution and publishing. If community resembles a scientific institution in any way, the Biki would not be lacking in any way. In the current community, even with people who feel they have full access to other peoples' files, the biki is in whatever state it's in. We have only ourselves to blame.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Max Power

[jw custom 56]

everyone wants to help, not everyone wants their work open source in some cases. You missed the point completely.

Maybe you missed the point complete because you sounds like your work is being stolen if someone takes a peek at your code!

[max power 21]

Maybe you missed the point complete because you sounds like your work is being stolen if someone takes a peek at your code!

That's a bit of a caricature of the argument.

Also, if someone is taking a look at your code and uses your hard fought solution to a problem without attribution, what do you call that? Is it stealing or is it just being a douche?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Following up on the previous questions that I asked to see what wonderful addons and mods had resulted from peeking into other people's content without permission, to which I "surprisingly" got very few reactions:

All of them? I'm guessing just about every addon there is has information that some time came from poking. Poke and peek was even the two very first computer commands I ever learned :p Uh, and I even remember a bunch of addresses - that's actually a bit scary :D

How many of the people that have opened other people's models/scripts to learn from them because they (were disappointed that they) could not find any tutorials or samples, have since used this knowledge to create tutorials on their own, or have released sample models/scripts of their own as "open-source" learning material?

I've done tutorials for non Arma/Gaming in the past. Often those doing the tutorials are still learning themselves. When you're past that stage tutorials get kinda hard to write. I learned a lot from tutorials when I was fresh, before the Ofpec crash. Since restore the site has been unusable for me as a resource (I don't see anyone mention it so it might be only me). As for sharing information I'm doing it fairly frequently on these forums. And, why look for a tutorial when I know the answer is staring me in the face? Tutorials are also outdated very quickly, or may even teach bad practices because good practices wasn't the intended scope of the tutorial. By studying and modifying Domination I've basically learned everything I know (which by your standards may not be very much, I don't know, and I don't care). As long as I'm able to have fun doing this, I will.

Seeing as so many of these people keep claiming the "open-source" nature of the community, and blaming addonmakers for not making this information public, but having to contact them privately instead which took too long in their opinion, it would be interesting to know how many of you have converted your private knowledge into public knowledge (freely down-loadable) since looking at EULA protected models/scripts.

Huh? Care to elaborate what you consider private and public knowledge in a very open community? Where most such knowledge once came from the very same actions? What's next? "Since I gave you this info on a PM I prohibit you from releasing anything using that information without locking it"? Far fetched, I know, but still... Could happen.

There's a name for people like that. "Hypocrites".

*shrugs*........

Btw, tutorials the way we used and knew them, is a bit of a thing in the past. Then we downloaded them and read them offline since a 14.4 dial up connection (I think that's where I started :p) to a forum all the time was expensive. They're still useful for the utter newbie, but for the intermediate nothing beats a good example with everything put into proper context.

My understanding of your position is that the author's EULA is akin to divine rule.

Yeah that's pretty much where I wanted to go with my "use allowed only while standing on your head" example. Freeware is protected by copyright. Everybody screams about copyright infringements east and west, without understanding the principles of it, or the philosophy, which is:

The exclusive rights are however balanced for public interest purposes with limitations and exceptions to the exclusive right - such as fair dealing and fair use. Copyright theory says that it is the balance between the exclusive rights and the limitations and exceptions that engenders creativity. Copyright does not protect ideas, only their expression or fixation.

An EULA demanding "don't peek, this is protected by copyright" or such nonsense I can't take seriously, since it defies it's very purpose, to engenders creativity. Especially considering "open source" is endorsed by the creators of the product we use. That's why allowing protection is so dangerous.

If you want it to be a trade secret, an open information based community isn't the place to be in.

If you want it to be a patent, such protection isn't free.

If you want more protection than copyright can offer, contact ION :p

Ok thats way too extreme. I don't mind people seeing how I do things but how it is taken and used should still be up to me. Models have nothing of educational value in them really (for other modelers), thats why the argument is so hard.

It's really not more extreme than demanding possibility to lock ;) I actually support this more than the lock, but both have unfortunate consequences. Especially if we have to choose all or nothing instead of models only.

If BIS forces us to use any of the CC licenses while endorsing openness, it will be all for the better.

1. Copyright law will still enable you to obtain protection for anything being exploited commercially (not only models). Rock has already shown that it is fully possible to claim damages for such use. Means the legal system works to protect your commercial interests.

2. We avoid having ridiculous EULA's that some may choose to disregard (in a highly personal and possibly wrong fashion, creating a dispute) for the reason of being unfair or even illegal (EULA's are problematic at best), ref my "you have to use standing on your head" example.

3. ND might not be prevented on a small scale (it shouldn't really concern anyone that much either, and I even think it's healthy), but my suggestion here would limit the damage potential of such actions.

4. It prevents change in ownership. I can steal someone else's work and claim it as my own, but the community wouldn't let me. That system works already. At least regarding sites of respectable nature. For sites of non respectable nature, see #3.

5. You can poke at other peoples work, learn from it, and check they are not thieves themselves. Textures and sound files are also a valuable source to learn from. BIS own sound files is/was in a format that was "weird". Other peoples sounds were de-wss'able without turning into garble. I eventually was able to find a tool that unpacked BIS own files, but thanks to poking I have a better understanding of what kind of sample rates and depths works with what configs. Even textures, although for me here, not as much as in other applications. Well, finding textures correct .paa format maybe. Had some problems before figuring out it was the tool I used that caused the problems. Would this list be available without poking? No. And I find it very valuable (none of those red commands are documented yet).

Also, if someone is taking a look at your code and uses your hard fought solution to a problem without attribution, what do you call that? Is it stealing or is it just being a douche?

I'd say a douche most likely. You've got a point though. Attribution is important to the best of ones ability, and most readme's (or even scripts themselves) does this. Crave for attribution is certainly not a reason to implement something as huge as protection for.

[max power 21]

I'd say a douche most likely. You've got a point though. Attribution is important to the best of ones ability, and most readme's (or even scripts themselves) does this. Crave for attribution is certainly not a reason to implement something as huge as protection for.

Not on it's own, but in combination with all the other reasons, not so unreasonable.

[noubernou 77]

I wrote a significant chunk of the documentation for a popular mod at one time, a number of guides for different topics, and then an entire wiki for that same mod. That work was done despite of the opinion of a number of people who did not place any value on documenting their work nor spending much time providing support. Often hours were spend tearing into PBO's to find answers for the user base. Meanwhile the old guard who wrote the code, made the models in question, etc. did not take too kindly to sharing what they knew. They were too elite or too stressed out to deal with such menial matters..

We shared plenty of what we knew, and if we didn't give you the right answers or all you thought was needed you had the code, from git even, there to look at.

If I remember correctly the big blow up was that you didn't like wagn compared to mediawiki. :rolleyes:

It's really not more extreme than demanding possibility to lock ;) I actually support this more than the lock, but both have unfortunate consequences. Especially if we have to choose all or nothing instead of models only.

If BIS forces us to use any of the CC licenses while endorsing openness, it will be all for the better.

1. Copyright law will still enable you to obtain protection for anything being exploited commercially (not only models). Rock has already shown that it is fully possible to claim damages for such use. Means the legal system works to protect your commercial interests.

2. We avoid having ridiculous EULA's that some may choose to disregard (in a highly personal and possibly wrong fashion, creating a dispute) for the reason of being unfair or even illegal (EULA's are problematic at best), ref my "you have to use standing on your head" example.

3. ND might not be prevented on a small scale (it shouldn't really concern anyone that much either, and I even think it's healthy), but my suggestion here would limit the damage potential of such actions.

4. It prevents change in ownership. I can steal someone else's work and claim it as my own, but the community wouldn't let me. That system works already. At least regarding sites of respectable nature. For sites of non respectable nature, see #3.

5. You can poke at other peoples work, learn from it, and check they are not thieves themselves. Textures and sound files are also a valuable source to learn from. BIS own sound files is/was in a format that was "weird". Other peoples sounds were de-wss'able without turning into garble. I eventually was able to find a tool that unpacked BIS own files, but thanks to poking I have a better understanding of what kind of sample rates and depths works with what configs. Even textures, although for me here, not as much as in other applications. Well, finding textures correct .paa format maybe. Had some problems before figuring out it was the tool I used that caused the problems. Would this list be available without poking? No. And I find it very valuable (none of those red commands are documented yet).

Creative Commons would create an environment that would not be suitable for most teams, especially if you are suggesting Share Alike or Attribution as those would dilute your IP in most attempts to try and prevent commercial use of it. The only CC option I could see for something like ACRE (which it basically falls under by default since people can see the code, but we lock down the use of it) is the cc by-nc-nd version.

Allowing modders to license their work in any non-commercial fashion I think is the best way to go about it.

[ffur2007slx2_5 11]

That's the reason why addons become more and more completed just in order to not let it being stolen so easily. lol

[jw custom 56]

That's a bit of a caricature of the argument.

Also, if someone is taking a look at your code and uses your hard fought solution to a problem without attribution, what do you call that? Is it stealing or is it just being a douche?

You guys keep saying "taking/stealing/selling"....

I'll say it again, it's not okay to steal other peoples work, it's not okay to take/re-use other peoples work without permission. There's a difference in learning from looking and do a plane copy/paste.

But the question still stands, have the "elite" in here never opened a bis pbo to solve a problem they had, maybe even re-used bits of code from there?

Of course they have but thats another story i guess!

Edited November 11, 2010 by JW Custom

[max power 21]

I know you're trying to expose some people as hypocrites but I think that discussions about future ideas are more productive than discussions about past individuals.

It's a but underhanded, I think, to call someone elite in a pejorative way, then to put quotations on it as if they are the ones calling themselves elite.

Moreover, I think we can describe the merits of old systems vs. new systems without resorting to the old 'everyone is doing it' defense.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Going in circles - again? :rolleyes:

Did someone found a proper and working solution or got a good idea how to protect creator's ip? What about encrypting parts of p3d's?

[jw custom 56]

I know you're trying to expose some people as hypocrites but I think that discussions about future ideas are more productive than discussions about past individuals.

It's a but underhanded, I think, to call someone elite in a pejorative way, then to put quotations on it as if they are the ones calling themselves elite.

By "elite" i mean the skilled modders/scripters or whatever who have been around for a long time. It seems to be mainly them who want things locked up.

Moreover, I think we can describe the merits of old systems vs. new systems without resorting to the old 'everyone is doing it' defense.

So the old system worked fine until the "elite" got so good it's not necessary for them to peek anymore?

[lightspeed_aust 681]

ive been modding for years now mainly in Ghost Recon and now here - so here are my two cents from a personal point of view -

i mod bcoz i love it - it is almost addictive at times even though you hit the wall occasionally and need a break from it.

as long as ppl give credit for using other ppls ideas then that should be sufficient - if creators dont want ppl using their stuff (knowing that it can be unpboed) then they should make it very clear!!!

otherwise, they should harden the f* up and be happy that ppl would use their work and ideas in the first place.

this is a community - this community wouldnt be what it is unless thousands of ppl had shared their modifications and scripts and thousands more ppl wouldnt be able to enjoy the fruits of our labour.

you're not getting paid for it - you do it for the love of modding - so enjoy it or dont do it...period.