Complaints about not having Unreleased code yet

Tremulous
108

Because people want to host their own servers (to not participate in your petty politics).

You’re using my code and no amount of mental gymnastics (like making up convenient definitions on the spot) changes the fact.

Yes, independent server owners are literally Adolf Hitler.

It’s really easy to get lost when no one else but you knows WTF you’re talking about. How is “I fucked up” an excuse? Are we even using the same language?

[quote=“Wiktionary”]excuse ‎(countable and uncountable, plural excuses)

  1. (countable, uncountable) Explanation designed to avoid or alleviate guilt or negative judgment.[/quote]

Or is “I fucked up” an explanation? Of what exactly, that you fucked up?

109

WRONG. u’re just making up bullshit in an attempt to get us to allow u to exploit the last of this community.

i am not using ur code. u’re a fucking crook, and no amount of mental gymnastics (like mentioning that GH is using ur code) changes that fact.

PS: where did i say that GH is not using ur code ?

yes.

read the above post, u fuckwad.

110

I’m certainly not the only one who would like to host another server.

Where did I say you (singular) are using it? I thought it was pretty clear I meant GrangerHub as a whole.

FTFY.

¹ I assume @Matth is the “NIGGER,” am I correct?

Calm down, it’s just an Internet discussion. You can always just turn the computer off.

111

@enneract , couple of posters called you a thief in hyperbole. Even though I believe you have exhibited behavior here that is of poor conduct, I disagree with the sentiment that you are a thief. I have no reason to believe that you are a thief nor that you have nor intend to commit any other crime. Such accusations and other personal attacks don’t benefit productive discussions. Your poor behavior doesn’t make some poor responses to said behavior by some posters any less poor. But poor responses to poor behavior is the objective of trolling.

Additionally, I believe your intentions are irrelevant to the complete releasing of the code. The code isn’t unreleased by GrangerHub to withhold it specifically from you, nor specifically from anyone else. You and anyone else can choose to do anything the license permits (or even choose to do nothing at all) with any released code, and hopefully the best uses will be successful.

What GrangerHub has chosen to do with the released and unreleased code is work on it and prepare it for a good shot at a Tremulous revival, and GrangerHub’s choices, in how at this point in time GrangerHub works on the code, has been made for the purpose of fulfilling that goal (and a big part of our intentions to achieve that goal is releasing publicly the code when we have determined it sufficient enough in quality to accomplish GrangerHub’s goals).

You may or may not share GrangerHub’s goals as among your goals. You may or may not disagree that our choices in approach will achieve those goals. You may not like the intermediary situation with our approach. That is fine, you are entitled to your own opinions and views. But we have every legal right to make these choices. We are exercising our freedom the software’s license provides. It is in the nature of freedom that not everyone else will like one’s choices in use of one’s freedom, and freedom doesn’t guarantee that one’s choices will lead to desired results, freedom can be a very messy thing, but hopefully our choices will work.

WRONG, technically everyone who has produced code/assets/etc that we are making use of in 1.3 counts as a contributor to 1.3, even if they may not have contributed with the intention of this specific project using those contribution and/or may not be currently working on new things that may contribute to this project (cough cough VACATION™ cough cough).

@enneract has at least been a past contributor to some public Tremulous code that we have incorporated into some of the 1.3 code. (To be clear, he has released more than the code of his we will use, so don’t take my use of the word “some” as a statement of the total amount of code he has released, the initial release doesn’t require all of his released code).

Of course if he wanted to, he could even publicly contribute towards remaining items on our TODO list to assist the 1.3 project in achieving its goal earlier, or even work on things that are not on our TODO list and make the case for incorporating such work into the 1.3 project. If new work is completed, is made available, is relatively straightforward to incorporate into this project, and would benefit this project, then that is certainly something to consider incorporating even if we didn’t plan for it. The same applies to any other potential Tremulous developer independent from GrangerHub.

But also if he wanted to he could work on independent Tremulous development that he might apply as his own mod of 1.3 for his own modded Tremulous server(s) upon the 1.3 release. Or he could even mod and host hist own modded 1.1, gpp, and/or protocol 71 (which would benefit from players using the pre-release client) server(s) now, provide a game play experience and atmosphere people would enjoy, and put in a serious effort to attract and retain players from even outside of the current Tremulous playerbase.

Speaking of excuses, it seems that someone has been using the fact that some of our code is currently unreleased as an excuse (the term scapegoat is applicable as well) for not retaining players on their server, and ignoring the facts that there are fundamental problems (more than just related to multiple protocols) in the game and community that has existed long before GrangerHub started (the very same that GrangerHub is working to solve), the fact that attracting and retaining players even for a single server would take a great deal of additional hard work than in many other currently active games until those problems are solved, and the fact that just hosting any server (even if it had the multiprotocol feature) is not enough to attract and retain players in the long term as the experience is more than just the technology itself.

Ok, that’s enough tl:dr essay writing by me for today, time for more coding :slight_smile: .

1 Like
112

Actually, there are other people who want to host multi-protocol servers, including @faceman and perhaps the OC server crew, along with a number of other people who dislike the “petty politics” of GH.

I get that English isn’t your first language, but “we fucked up” is not an excuse or an explanation. It is nothing more than an admittance of failure.

Which is almost literally impossible and most definitely a waste of time and effort.

I don’t think any other server owners share in your delusions of a Tremulous revival, they only want to host a better server than GPub for the sake of those who still play and complain about GH every day. However, without the multi-protocol code, no server can ever be “better” than GPub, and thus no server can get off the ground since it would be impossible to attract one half of the playerbase or the other. It’s not an excuse, it’s a simple fact of how competition works between servers vying for a share of the playerbase. If any other competent server owner had the multi-protocol code, GPub would be dead in a week. Obviously you know that and refuse to share that specific bit of code because it would result in a smaller audience for your delusions and eventual (read: improbable) Tremulous 1.3 release. I refuse to believe you are too stupid to understand that.

113

That is good to hear, I’m all for new servers being setup, I look forward to seeing many new independent 1.3 servers pop up upon the initial release (perhaps some may be interested in looking into hosting protocol 71 servers in the meantime once the updater is being publicly tested with the pre-release client).

I disagree with that statement completely. Sure far more projects (of any kind) fail than succeed, and noone can determine with certainity if any project will be successful in their goal before the goals are met. So it is very easier to say that any given project will fail, than to start and run a successful project. But there is still a huge number of projects that are successful despite this fact, and those projects would have certainly no succeeded if they were never started. No risk, reward.

It is even easier to say that our attempt at a successful Tremulous revival will likely fail as there has been previous attempts, and no such attempt has been successful so far. But if no more attempts at a Tremulous revival are made, then it would be certain that a Tremulous revival will not take place.

Risking failure to and facing challenges to follow through on a vision is not delusional. Even if we do fail, the experience in this project alone has been worth the attempt. But it can’t be said at this point in time that this project has failed. If anything, we are continuing to make good progress.

I’m all for healthy competition where servers will strive to be the best, and if GrangerPub strives to be the best, it can only get better with good competition. When we have the initial release with a lot more server milestones completed than just multiprotocol, all server owners would be able to have a better chance at hosting higher quality servers right out of the box.

I don’t know that. Additionally, whether or not that will happen when we have the initial release of 1.3, not releasing 1.3 yet has nothing to do with keeping a specific currently active game server active, rather the current purpose of that game server is to keep the Tremulous playerbase alive during this transition. The sole reason 1.3 hasn’t been released currently is because it isn’t ready for a proper initial release yet.

114

everyone is free to host infinite amounts of servers. still, u have yet to show that the inability to host multi-protocol servers prevents contributions (tough luck showing that, when the potential modding community is empty).

now that is incomprehensible. i have no fucking idea what u’ve just meant to say.

doesn’t matter, though this NIGGER’s role does partially come from what @Matth said.

congratulations, u’ve successfully lost track of the context.

  • a debate re-emerged: why has there been so little progress ?
  • the cause was traced back to the lack of contributors; as usual, @enneract argued that this was because the closedness of the multi-protocol code discourages contributions.
    • here, „contributing” means non-GH-team members working to write or submit code.
  • some have called @enneract a thief based on his previously debunked plans with the multi-protocol code.
  • i didn’t disagree, and used the term „crook” to concur.
  • @enneract used the broad meaning of „contributor” to conclude that i called all contributors thieves.
  • i pointed out that that is faulty logic, because @enneract is not a contributor in the topical sense („contributor (see above)”).
    • in other words, i didn’t implicitly call others thieves.

congratulations, u’ve successfully lost track of the context. it was @enneract who proposed that „we fucked up” was an excuse (that noone is interested in), though this was later discovered to be unintentional, as a result of him „tl;dr”-ing — that’s what he gets !

  • @Matth called us dishonest in reference to not meeting PROMISE™ed deadlines, saying that admitting to have simply „fucked up” would be more honest, if that’s the case.
  • i linked a long-ago post, nominally „explanations”, that detailed what went on pertaining development, specifically, that we simply called an overly low estimate of how much tasks would crop up, ergo we „fucked up”. this was to show
    • that we weren’t setting knowingly unrealistic deadlines, ergo we weren’t dishonest; and
    • that we already admitted to having fucked up, even before @Matth’s post.
  • @enneract said that noone cares about excuses.
    • does this mean that any explanation offered to disregard dishonesty, is an excuse ?
      • if yes, then @enneract should have responded to @Matth with „noone cares about excuses”, under the grounds that „those r what @Matth asked for”.
  • later, @enneract admitted that he actually didn’t follow the link, and simply assumed that the linked post only puts the blame on other things, thus that it contains no admittance of fucking up.

WRONG. „we fucked up” is an explanation for not having finished Tremulous 1.3 by the deadlines („we were fooling ur ass all the long, we actually had no plans to create Tremulous 1.3” would be another explanation, but that’s not true).

1 Like
115

Yes, definitely, that’s why the TODO list is 90% red.

Then why not allow that competition now? You have outright denied any competition for a full year now.

But not releasing the multi-protocol code directly ties into GHub’s desire to force everyone onto Tremulous 1.3.

It’s still not an explanation. An explanation would be “we misjudged how long it would take to do x y and z” or “one of our developers has no arms, and he got shot in the foot and so he can’t type with that foot anymore”. According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, an explanation is “the act or process of making something clear or easy to understand : the act or process of telling, showing, or being the reason for or cause of something”. Saying “we fucked up” does not make it clear what happened that resulted in Tremulous 1.3 not being finished by the deadlines. We already know they fucked up, or we wouldn’t be complaining about them not finishing by the deadlines. It also doesn’t tell or show the reason for or cause of the failure to complete 1.3 by the deadlines. It just admits failure.

116

WRONG. „we fucked up” is very clear and understandable to everyone; at most, it is not too detailed — some may prefer surprizingly more details than u’d be happy with. another WRONG. without hearing „we fucked up”, u don’t know whether we fucked up, and it’s possible that we didn’t fuck up. to recognize such a case, take a closer look at where u quoted from. and in that case, it’s not just that the community would be complaining — yet another WRONG —, i’d be in the worst rage ever.

121

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

122

Now that the source has been released expect a lot more botting.

123

Perhaps, but dealing with bots has always been an issue for admins to deal with (sure cases have been rare so far in regards to the GrangerPub server). Various admin related features being worked on for 1.3 should help admins mitigate the issue to a certain extent further.

Btw, not all the source code has been released yet. The source code you are referring to is the recently released code for the multiprotocol version of Slacker’s QVM (GrangerHub Forum - Tremulous Forums). There is going to be some more code we will be releasing when we are ready for public testing of the Pre-Release Client (and when we have subsequent minor releases through the updater before the 1.3 initial release), and there will be substantial code released when we have the initial release of 1.3.

With that said, as mentioned earlier in this topic, most of the code we are working on for 1.3 has already been publicly available. Which includes DarkLegion’s Tremulous repo on github, GrangerHub’s installer/updater repos on github, blowFish’s Tremulous repo on github, various mod repos we have ported code from, and the build system on the test7341 server generates/includes a patch of the cgame/ui in the distributed pk3 file each time it builds/packages them.

124

Security through obscurity is not security.

1 Like
125

Botting is a problem in even the most popular games (CSGO). Every time you patch a fix the creators of the hack work around it. I’m not sure if you would see a similar battle between each sides on something like tremulous, there is really nothing to gain from coding hacks in a dead game.

What is your suggested solution besides observation and review?

126

There is no other solution. Aimbotting (or triggerbotting or wallhacking) can’t be prevented because it doesn’t rely on any bug or design flaw.

The best you could do is make it easier for admins to spot hackers. Server-side demos are interesting; they’re like server logs but they log literally all in-game activity.

1 Like
127

WRONG. it depends. nowadays, at the very least, obscurity often poses a hard barrier for a sufficient amount of vulnerability seekers for a reasonable amount of time, thus security that is reasonable in some way, eg. commercially reasonable (for example, the ). it is plausible, that in some decades, the same obscurity (of open source) could be automatically defeated by advanced searching/approximation algorithms; the world has to move towards formal verification.1

1 it is also possible, that along time, a constructive, positive solution for P = NP will be found, leading to a CRAZY™ world.

128

It might sometimes work for a while, but it’s still infinitely worse than actual security.

Especially in this case. Hackers could move all their botting code to the client if they had no cgame sources. Preventing wallhacking this way is even more pointless, since you can make those even at libGL/driver level.

129

yes, but only if u invoke hyper-deep theories, something outside the understandibility horizon of most ppl.

WRONG. this is not such a case; see:

no, it would take too much effort to deobfuscate the entity code, which could be twiddled daily. especially the Tremulous community (by the LAW™S_OF(R)_PHYSICS(C)) never had the willingness ⨯ resources to accomplish such a thing. for example, i’ve heard that the KoR server successfully prevented aimbots by changing the cgame/ui code at regular intervals.

130

Sometimes it’s much simpler than that.

For example, one of the principles followed when designing Quake 3 was “never trust the client.” All game computations (movement, hit testing, etc.) are done by the server itself. Whoever wrote Minecraft wasn’t so smart and made clients compute their own movement and send it to the server. Code obfuscation didn’t stop hackers from flying and teleporting for too long. On the other hand, this kind of hacking is simply impossible to do in Tremulous.

Deobfuscate what? Both the cgame ABI (for aiming/shooting your gun) and the network protocol (for knowing where enemies are) are fixed and no one’s going to download a new client every day.

1 Like
131

yes, in this regard, security isn’t entirely fucked up. however, there is almost an infinite amount of things about Quake 3 / Tremulous — or servers —, and in a lot of them, security isn’t „actual”, but „reasonable”.

WRONG.

can u give some pseudo-code using the (pseudo-(?))ABIs for determining where to shoot ?