Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

minecraft.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 478 posts

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#351

Post by netdur »

TheDong wrote: post #144
RGBCube wrote: post #86

Even if they made it Source Available it wouldn't hurt them much, because Minecraft is very easy to pirate and the reason anyone pays for anything at all is because you need an account in Mojang's authentication servers (which people do not want to move off of for various reasons). Hell, they could even make it Open Source with a clause preventing other companies from using to code to make a profit. It's too big to f…

> Hell, they could even make it Open Source with a clause preventing other companies from using to code to make a profit Such a clause would immediately make it Source Available not Open Source.

by that logic GPL wouldn’t be open source either since it also adds restrictions unlike the fuck license

nowadays github is filled with so-called open source projects under GPL3 but the maintainers want you to pay for a dual license

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#352

Post by matheusmoreira »

NwpierratorR wrote: post #339
AyanamiKaine wrote: post #335

There is always one thing that I found so facintating with the modding scene in Minecraft. Because Minecraft does not have a modding api but the java byte code can be changed. People simply developed their own way of creating an API. There are 2 main modding APIs. Forge/Neo-Forge and Fabric. [1]Fabric uses Mix-ins while [2]Forge uses a more event based system that is added to the source code of minecraft where they a…

> I wonder from a modding perspective would it be better if all public methods are just the API users can call and they themselves create a way for mods to exist? It's the way vintage story implemented modding. They developed the whole game as engine + modapi + hooking engine for stuff outside of hookapi. Then most of gameplay is implemented as mods on top of engine using api and hooking. And those tools are open sou…

> mods are automatically pushed to the clients

I'm surprised this hasn't become a malware distribution channel yet.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#353

Post by vintermann »

immibis wrote: post #296
nisegami wrote: post #64

I consider Microsoft to be genuinely evil as an institution, but this is still nice to see.

Notice they're only doing this after the game is ensloppified (they make their money from merch and movies now, not from game sales) and after the game code suffers from so much inner-platform effect that modding it directly isn't as useful any more. The inner platform effect is when, in an effort to make it so people don't have to use the original programming language because programming is complicated, you create a…

Their model seems to be to keep Java Edition reasonably pure and close to the original spirit (with most of the original developers working on that), but do all the minebux exploitation on Bedrock, where a big majority of the children players are. The main evil thing they've done to Java players is the account migration, but even that was sort of understandable given how questionable Mojang's original account system was.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#354

Post by kgwxd »

squigz wrote: post #244
kgwxd wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fear it's the first step to announcing the discontinuation of Java Edition development.

I don't really think this would be the end of the world, would it? Much of the content they've added over the past few years has been of questionable merit, at least to me. Surely at some point they'll run out of ideas that can reasonably fit inside vanilla Minecraft? (But no, I don't think they're going to stop JE development. I'd bet it's still the far more popular version, and they probably still make plenty of mo…

-Surely at some point they'll run out of ideas that can reasonably fit inside vanilla Minecraft?

Exactly...? How much content is built with Bedrock edition and Marketplace Add-on's?

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#355

Post by throwaway290 »

rstat1 wrote: post #243
throwaway290 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your mod uses variable name FooBar in ways Microsoft don't like, Microsoft sues you for copyright before the judge would have to admit it was just coincident.

They've had plenty of opportunity to do this and haven't, so would find it incredibly unlikely they would magically start to have a problem now Not to mention doing would basically kill game as one of the biggest reason people even still play Minecraft is the modding scene, not the minimum viable effort that have been the official updates for last number of years.

don't think they could do it previously because the code is not open and any names are a result of deobfuscation so clashes are accidental

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#356

Post by throwaway290 »

circuit10 wrote: post #320
throwaway290 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your mod uses variable name FooBar in ways Microsoft don't like, Microsoft sues you for copyright before the judge would have to admit it was just coincident.

Wouldn’t the structure of the code be be more copyrightable than the names?

community makes mods, they don't duplicate game code structure, and if they do it's clearly by accident because the code is obfuscated

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#357

Post by Supermancho »

pjmlp wrote: post #324
zelphirkalt wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is probably because Java took this design philosophy (or I should say dogma) to heart as its very syntax and structure encourages to write code like that. One example: It does not have proper modules. Modules, the one thing that most people can agree upon that are a good thing, enabling modularity, literally. Another one: You cannot have simply a function in a module. Shit needs to be inside classes or mixed up wi…

It is called packages. There is nothing on the modules as programming concept that requires the existence of functions as entity. Again, Smalltalk did it first, and is actually one of the languages on the famous GoF book, used to create all the OOP patterns people complain about, the other being C++.

In java, it has to be a class in a package. Packages are sane enough. That isnt the point.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#358

Post by vintermann »

immibis wrote: post #299
squigz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the only version that matters is 1.20.1!

In reality, Minecraft gets less Minecrafty in every update, and your baseline is whenever you bought it. I bought the game after they added fences and fishing rods and before the Nether. The nether ruined the game, beds ruined the game, hunger ruined the game, potions, enchantments, villager trading, and hoppers ruined the game, but redstone and minecarts and dungeons didn't ruin the game because those were added bef…

I'm not opposed to changes, but every official change Minecraft makes, narrows the design space for mods. Forestry added bees, then Mojang added its own bees which where quite different, and now Forestry's bees look more than a little odd. Sheep used to not drop meat, the witchery mod added mutton as a drop if you killed a sheep in werewolf form, and some mechanics around that. They now would look a little odd. Chocolatey added a ton of structures, among them pigmen cities, now pigmen have been rebranded as piglins and also have their bastions, which are quite different from Choco's cities. Are they better, worse? Who knows? To me what matters more is that they probably wouldn't have been made today. Mojang canonized one thing in that space.

But a lot of things Mojang has added, if they had been mods some random developer made, we probably wouldn't have been putting in our modpacks. A new tier of armor, which requires a tedious grind in the nether to get? That's like baby's first mod. Happy ghasts? Pretty fun, and impressive that you can stand on them, but like the morph mod, kinda ridiculous and definitively doesn't belong in every pack. Eventually, if they keep doing it like this, Minecraft will be as ridiculous as the old kitchen sink modpacks.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#359

Post by legobmw99 »

undeveloper wrote: post #209
ZeWaka wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, since 2019 Mojang has been providing the mappings instead of everyone having to use community-created ones.

Very few people use mojang mappings -- the two big modloaders, forge and fabric (and their derivatives) have their own mappings respectively, due to the restrictions of the mojang mappings. It's possible to use the mojang mappings, but much less common.

(Neo)Forge primarily use either mojmaps or Parchment, which are the Mojang mappings with some extra goodies like docstrings and parameter names

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#360

Post by StopDisinfo910 »

bonesss wrote: post #344
anonzzzies wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the professors actually said C was dead because Java was clearly superior. In our uni (around 1998/99) all professors said that except the Haskell teacher who indeed called Java a mistake (but c also).

Turns out everyone was completely wrong except for that one guy working in Haskell. Tale as old as time.

Java was probably close to 50% of the job market at some point in the 2000s and C significantly dried up with C++ taking its place. So I'm afraid everyone was right actually.

To be honest, I'm convinced the reason so many people dislike Java is because they have had to use it in a professional context only. It's not really a hobbyist language.

Post reply on HN