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

Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 506 posts

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#451

Post by account42 »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #212
mrandish wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> open source server code if you are going to cease support When I was a senior exec at a big public tech company, there was a product we decided to discontinue and we thought would be nice to just open source. Somehow I ended up in charge of managing that process and was shocked at how complex, time-consuming and expensive it was in a multi-billion dollar, publicly-traded corp vs some code my friends and I wrote. Le…

> open source server code if you are going to cease support > Legal had to verify that there was no licensed library code used and that we had clear, valid copyright to everything there. I can tell you the other side of that equation. There's no poison pill -short of outright fraud- that will kill an acquisition of a software company, than open source code embedded deep in the product. I've been in both sides of the…

Hey I already liked the proposed law, you don't have to keep trying to sell it.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#452

Post by account42 »

Terr_ wrote: post #84
weberer wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't need to be open source, you only need to provide server binaries to download. This was the standard until circa 2010. People were able to host dedicated servers themselves.

That would be an improvement over nothing, but closed-source means that the game is still going to die as soon as someone finds a security vulnerability (or even just a gameplay glitch) that can't be feasibly patched. Imagine an MMO where special text in the chat causes viewers' clients to crash, or a glitch exists to duplicate items or money, or where anybody can crash the server to run arbitrary commands.

> That would be an improvement over nothing, but closed-source means that the game is still going to die as soon as someone finds a security vulnerability (or even just a gameplay glitch) that can't be feasibly patched.

No, it just means you need need to limit players to a trusted community - but that is usually how things work anyway because malicious players don't need any exploits to make a game unfun.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#453

Post by account42 »

bluGill wrote: post #72
weberer wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't need to be open source, you only need to provide server binaries to download. This was the standard until circa 2010. People were able to host dedicated servers themselves.

I want to host a closed search server that's not being updated on today's internet. It might be good enough for home use, but definitely not if I want my friends to connect.

For playing with your friends you can use a VPN to not expose the potentially dangerous server to the wider internet. And sandbox both server and client as much as you feel needed depending on the value of "friend".

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#454

Post by account42 »

neksn wrote: post #90
weberer wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't need to be open source, you only need to provide server binaries to download. This was the standard until circa 2010. People were able to host dedicated servers themselves.

Closed source binaries rot.

False. Expectations and environments change, but if you choose to you can also keep those constant.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#455

Post by account42 »

malfist wrote: post #142
neksn wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Closed source binaries rot.

GOG has a whole business around making old closed source binaries run

Technically most of their business is in packaging existing community-developed solutions to make the games run (dosbox, scummvm, compat shims and game-speficifc patches) into a nice installer. Not that that's a useless service.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#456

Post by account42 »

mjr00 wrote: post #57
georgeecollins wrote: post #40

It seems like the fair solution to this problem is to open source server code if you are going to cease support for an online game. That way the community has the opportunity to run their own servers if they want to. I also really support giving 60 day notice if an online game is going to shut down. Places I have worked have had policies like that for games they are sun setting and I think the best game publishers th…

> It seems like the fair solution to this problem is to open source server code if you are going to cease support for an online game. That way the community has the opportunity to run their own servers if they want to. It's nice in theory, but in practice many (most?) games are using middleware they don't have the rights to redistribute as open source. IIRC when the source code for Doom, the first major commercial ga…

So?

A) This state is not inherent but a result of there being no general requirement to release the sources. Middle ware would use different licenses if that was required to have any customers.

B) Omitting the sound code did not stop the community from releasing source ports based on that release, with sound of course.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#457

Post by account42 »

collingreen wrote: post #69
dminik wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has an easy solution. If the middleware cannot be used in a new regulatory environment then it will either die or adapt.

Sometimes the easy solution isn't easy for all sides or even realistic. "Fuck the publishers" is easy but not going to get a lot of publisher buy in. We all agree there is a foolproof method to fixing all bugs - delete all the code. We also all probably agree that isn't the optimal balance.

A lot of "hard" solutions are only hard until there is a legal/business requirement for them. Licensing is the poster child example for that.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#458

Post by account42 »

Permit wrote: post #314
dminik wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has an easy solution. If the middleware cannot be used in a new regulatory environment then it will either die or adapt.

This is not the only possible outcome. Another approach would be not to offer software within the affected region. U.S. local news is often not available to European visitors now due to GDPR. Similarly, Canadian news outlets are not available on Facebook due to Bill C-18. If I was an indie game developer I would consider this approach and simply avoid selling within California. Larger game studios would likely adjust…

Ok, then customers in California/EU would be at least aware of the deal they are getting and more ethical companies would have a competitive advantage. Sounds good.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#459

Post by account42 »

strags wrote: post #88
georgeecollins wrote: post #40

It seems like the fair solution to this problem is to open source server code if you are going to cease support for an online game. That way the community has the opportunity to run their own servers if they want to. I also really support giving 60 day notice if an online game is going to shut down. Places I have worked have had policies like that for games they are sun setting and I think the best game publishers th…

> That way the community has the opportunity to run their own servers if they want to. That might be fine for very small titles - where the "game server" is a relatively simple binary that can be run anywhere. Larger titles depend on a huge amount of infrastructure, for authentication, progression, matchmaking, etc... It's not feasible to open-source all of that, especially given that it may well still be in use for…

Excuses. If there is a legal requirement you can watch all those concerns evaporate away.

Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California

#460

Post by account42 »

ajvs wrote: post #312
LocalH wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any company that willfully chains a device to their cloud platform in such a way should get the same treatment, whether the cloud offering is free as in beer or paid. It's happening a lot more than you might think.

The way Kindles are being forcibly deprecated lately is another good example.

Yes, cases where the service deprecation causes physical e-waste are particularly egregious but we should also not underestimate the societal cost to breaking peoples workflow just because some company can't be arsed to responsibly sunset a service in a way that gives users options to continue it themselves.
Post reply on HN