Live data from Hacker News

Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

minecraft.net

401–410 of 478 posts

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People could set up 3rd party auth systems and eliminate the need for mojang

You can already do that and some do. Mojang, for some incomprehensible reason, even lets you disable auth in the official server's settings (`online-mode=false`).

It's not incomprehensible. It enabled LAN games without outside internet access.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#402
post #304

One and only account (Mojang) that I can think of that I lost because it got taken over, and I couldn’t get support to help fix it (something about “go make another Mojang account”?)… and since I don’t really get the migration process they did or final outcome, it’s more of a “oh well losing that sucks”.

This situation was a lot more common than people might think. If you bought the game before Notch introduced the EULA (late 2011 if memory serves), what they did was also probably illegal, since they didn’t have the legal boilerplate in place that would allow them to brick the game the way that they did. There was a streamer trying to start a class action over it a few years ago, but I don’t think anything ever came…

What they did was illegal, and you absolutely can (and are encouraged to do so by Microsoft) sue them in small claims court for your Minecraft account back.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#404
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sounds maybe, but the music? If there's one game whose music I always turn off instantly it's Minecraft. Touhou Youyoumu Minecraft ain't.

Interesting, I love Minecraft's music. I do listen to it intentionally outside of the game, but it's not quite the same as having it suddenly start up during gameplay. The first I heard of someone "obviously turning off the music" was, I kid you not, yesterday, and now I'm hearing it for a second time today. Would woulda thunk!

That specific coincidence is a great example of the "Baader-Meinhof phenomenon"

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#405
Minecraft modding has done so much to get young people into CS. I started learning Java when I was 10 because I wanted to do modding. At university, I met so many people who had the same experience. The tooling developed for Minecraft modding is world-class and better than what is developed during PhDs. It's very advanced, and people internalized the JVM and Java spec. One problem, though, is that Mojang's updates often change much of the foundation, and upgrading mods is very time-intensive. Mojang announced in 2012 that an official modding API is in the works. This is another step.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#406
post #373

We paid for minecraft java edition and have no desire to use the online features. Microsoft logs us out every damn time we close the software, which means my grade schoolers have my (now guessable) MS account password (and I scorch-earthed the account, because this is so dumb I won’t trust or use their crap moving forward). Has anyone figured out how to pirate the binaries? I’d like to remove the yellow sticky note w…

Use an alternate launcher, like MultiMC, and if you're not using the online features anyway, you can just "Launch in Offline Mode", which will just be unable to authenticate with legitimate servers.

You'd still need to log in to update the game (I think), but for your purposes it'd probably work pretty well.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#407

Does removing obfuscation implies any performance speed-up for Minecraft Java, or were the obfuscations done in Java with zero-cost?

The obfuscation in question was just name mangling, so it was probably ~zero-cost. Possibly slightly negative cost, depending on the relative verbosity of method names.

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#408
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First time I have heard of object-oriented obfuscation. I get it, but in general I don't get the OO hate. It's all about the problem domain imo. I can't imagine building something like a graphics framework without some subtyping. Unfortunately, people often use crap examples for OO. The worst is probably employee, where employee and contractor are subtypes of worker, or some other chicanery like that. Of course in th…

For me, it's the fact that the mess of DAOs and Factories that constituted "enterprise" Java in the 00s was a special kind of hellscape that was actively encouraged by the design of the language. Most code bases don't need dynamically loaded objects designed with interfaces that can be swapped out. In fact, that functionality is nearly never useful. But that's how most people wrote Java code. It was terrible and taug…

Funny, given that interfaces are the good part (especially compared to inheritance).

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#409
post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This situation was a lot more common than people might think. If you bought the game before Notch introduced the EULA (late 2011 if memory serves), what they did was also probably illegal, since they didn’t have the legal boilerplate in place that would allow them to brick the game the way that they did. There was a streamer trying to start a class action over it a few years ago, but I don’t think anything ever came…

What they did was illegal, and you absolutely can (and are encouraged to do so by Microsoft) sue them in small claims court for your Minecraft account back.

> and are encouraged to do so by Microsoft

Source? It seems that if they wanted people to get their lost accounts back, there's more efficient, less expensive ways of doing it?

Re: Minecraft removing obfuscation in Java Edition

#410

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…

> modding it directly isn't as useful any more.

Can you elaborate on this? This seems like a strange way of saying, "it's easier to mod little things with data/resource packs" - and mods are still absolutely necessary, as data/resource packs can't do everything. But they're great for, say, adding tags to random items (something I do regularly) or - the most obvious usecase - texture packs

Post reply on HN