Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Warp wrote:
The law is a blunt instrument. If you give the lawyers permission to prosecute high-profile linkers, they will abuse that power to prosecute low-profile ones too. Thinking that such laws will only be used to prosecute the big-time pirates is naive and utopistic.
Bobo the King wrote:
Yes, we should be concerned about cases like this and I am troubled (though not panicked) by SOPA because it cannot be enforced in any consistent manner, but we must be very careful about how we protest it.
Bobo the King wrote:
If you'll reread my first reply to you, you'll notice I share your concerns about the criminalization of linking to pirated material.
Bobo the King wrote:
People like this guy are what SOPA was made for and if I were more confident that SOPA would be used only to prosecute his kind, I would have no objections to it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Warp wrote:
Bobo the King wrote:
In this case, however, the guy was distributing pirated material. When you are a distributor, you have to know you're playing with fire.
No, he wasn't. He was linking to copyrighted material, not distributing it. Read the damn article.
Wikipedia wrote:
In February 2010 charges for fraud and copyright infringement in relation to the website TV-Links were dismissed by a UK court which ruled that linking alone did not amount to copyright infringement.
Prosecuting people for linking to other websites is irrational. No wonder it's not illegal in most countries (including the UK). It's those other websites that should be prosecuted for distributing illegal material, not people linking to them.
Criminalizing linking creates tons of problems:
- What if you link to a website that contains illegal material, but you don't know that? (For example the illegal material might be in a subpage you haven't visited. Are you required to browse the entirety of a web site and assess its legality before you can legally link to it? How would you even know if some material is illegal?)
- What if you link to a website that contains no illegal material, but afterwards illegal material is added to it? Can you be prosecuted retrospectively?
- What if instead of a direct link to the illegal material, you give a link to a page containing links to illegal material? Should that be illegal as well? What if you add one more step (give a link to a page having a link to a page having a link to illegal material)? How many indirection steps are necessary before it becomes legal? There has to be some physical limit because else every single link in the internet would be illegal.
- What if instead of a link, you provide textual instructions on how to get to the page where the illegal material is hosted? (For example "write this and this into google and click the link that says that and that".) How obscure must these instructions be before they become legal?
Those are just some of the problems with criminalizing linking.
Nevertheless, even if linking to illegal material was stupidly criminalized, the punishment should be proportionate to the severity of the crime. Simply linking should not be as punishable as directly distributing the material using your own hardware and network resources.
If you'll reread my first reply to you, you'll notice I share your concerns about the criminalization of linking to pirated material. That's not the point.
I said that you could defend this guy on technical legal grounds. That is what you are doing. But I want to re-emphasize, what he did was immoral. This wasn't a social media site or forum where people happened to submit links to pirated material, this was a central hub for finding illegally distributed TV shows and movies.
People like this guy are what SOPA was made for and if I were more confident that SOPA would be used only to prosecute his kind, I would have no objections to it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Warp wrote:
Bobo the King wrote:
I checked your reference and I find your defense of this guy ludicrous. While you may be able to defend him on technical legal grounds, I think what he was doing was clearly immoral.
You don't understand. It's not a question of whether it's technically illegal or not. It's a question of disproportionate punishment.
If someone is fined 2 million dollars for copying 24 songs, or demanded to be extradited to a foreign country to be put in jail for up to 10 years for linking to other websites, that's what I call disproportionate punishment and immoral. (Especially since there have been cases where corporate executives have committed fraud worth of hundreds of millions of dollars, and got laughably small sentences for it.)
"Copying 24 songs" is an entirely different matter. My stance is that they shouldn't vigorously prosecute people who pirate content. In this case, however, the guy was distributing pirated material. When you are a distributor, you have to know you're playing with fire.
How many hits did his website get? Everyone who went to his website to view shows illegally cost advertisers and distributors untold revenue. For example, I may have used his website to watch an NBA game (I can't recall). NBA League Pass's broadband service costs $30 per month. I'm unwilling to pay that, especially for one game, but I will not deny that I cost the NBA significant revenue. Multiply that by 10,000 or 100,000 viewers and suddenly a $2 million fine and significant jail time don't sound so unreasonable. I will not address the legality of extradition except to point out that much of the distributed content seems to have come from America, which may be the legal grounds for extradition.
And no one is arguing in favor of the disparity in sentences between corporate criminals and petty thieves. There are some very sad stories in that regard.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Lex wrote:
Where did you get that idea? I never said anything like that.
Edit: To clarify, the only thing I'm objecting here is your statement that the law should only be understood by those with law degrees. I have not taken any "side" in any of the previous discussion. I read that line and felt like it would be useful to broaden your mind in regard to who can interpret law. Also, I'm not Warp, in case you got mixed up.
People who don't major in a subject and are still qualified to profess on it are the exception, not the rule. Yeah, they can be right, but they almost never are.
As a simple example, I found myself arguing with someone on economics. They made it clear that their background was in YouTube videos that push a specific narrative. I mentioned my modest but formal background in economics in college. They mocked me and told me to, "Open [my] eyes and get a real education." I gave up.
Put another way, so-called "experts" can be and often are wrong (varying wildly, depending on the field). I know firsthand because I make mistakes constantly. Yet the layperson is wrong almost all the time. If, statistically speaking, experts are wrong half the time and those without a formal background are wrong 95 percent of the time, do you really want to boil it down to one person's word against another's?
The real litmus test, I think we can agree, is a person's claims standing up to your own skepticism and a thorough vetting of their sources, regardless of their background in the subject.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Lex wrote:
As a scientist, you should have a healthy skepticism even regarding your own learnings. New theories don't come about if old theories (example: Earth-centric universe) are considered absolute truth. In the same way, it should be considered that what a lawyer tells you to be true about the law may not be true. Research is productive. The law is something written to be interpreted, just as nature is something which exists to be understood.
No disagreement there, but I fail to see how that helps your argument in particular as you're the one who seems to have preconceived notions about what the law says in this situation. "I don't know the laws, but my gut says extradition shouldn't apply," won't cut it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Lex wrote:
Bobo the King wrote:
The threat of extradition is interesting, but the legality of it is so convoluted, I wouldn't pretend to understand it (and neither should you, unless you have a law degree).
So nobody can understand the law except those with law degrees? That's ridiculous. Don't give up before you even try. The law is freely available to the people for a reason.
That's why he has lawyers (or "solicitors", more appropriately). All your impotent rage does nothing for him. You want to study international laws and extradition treaties and get back to me? Be my guest.
As someone with a background in science, I'm bothered when people who clearly don't know what they're talking about try to tell me how the world works. I try to extend the same respect to others.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Billy wrote:
Then we ARE gonna get in trouble if they're THAT strict about it. :O
We don't link to ROMs, only YouTube videos of playthroughs. Get back to TASing.
Warp wrote:
Note that copyright holders in the US are getting more and more egregious by the year.
For example, there's this citizen of the UK who administers a website that provides links to copyrighted material. Note that he doesn't distribute any copyright material, only provides links to it in his website. Neither he nor the server itself are in the US. Also note that just linking to copyrighted material is not illegal in the UK.
Now the copyright holders are trying to make the UK extradite this guy to the US so that he can be put in jail (in the US) for up to 10 years. That's right, copyright holders are now demanding foreign countries to extradite foreign citizens to the US so that they can be put in jail for 10 years in there. And not for distributing copyrighted material, just for linking, which isn't illegal in that foreign country.
I checked your reference and I find your defense of this guy ludicrous. While you may be able to defend him on technical legal grounds, I think what he was doing was clearly immoral.
Yes, we should be concerned about cases like this and I am troubled (though not panicked) by SOPA because it cannot be enforced in any consistent manner, but we must be very careful about how we protest it. "I dislike SOPA because thepiratebay might be shut down!" is not a valid protest. "Richard O'Dwyer merely provided dozens of links to websites where movies and TV shows can be illegally downloaded!" is not a complaint that will be taken seriously. The threat of extradition is interesting, but the legality of it is so convoluted, I wouldn't pretend to understand it (and neither should you, unless you have a law degree).
Everyone here, on a website devoted to speedruns on illegal copies of games, is familiar with piracy. I even support piracy to the extent that it is a protest against monopolistic corporations such as the MPAA and RIAA. However, those who link to websites with pirated content en masse must be prepared to pay the consequences and we should not be quick to defend them. If we do, we become our own worst enemies.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
crollo wrote:
English is not my native language and I might express myself in a way which might be hard to understand sometimes.
From what I can tell, your English is immaculate and I have had no trouble understanding you. Other people, however...
crollo wrote:
I don't suggest to replace you competent TAS:ers with some bot either, but rather trying to come up with some idea where more people could help making the runs as perfect as possible. Only problem is that we can never know that this game is 100% complete without trying every possible combination - right?
To repeat myself, yes, it would be helpful for certain parts of some games. For example, I could have a distributed computing version of my Carmen Sandiego bot up in a matter of hours. The only problem is that no one would care. Other games and small portions of other games could also be botted in this way.
crollo wrote:
Maybe "TAS@home" won't keep people interested due to that fact, but I don't see why people would assume it contains virus or something if the download is hosted on TASVideos.
I wouldn't want to download any executables from this website. I like the TASes you guys produce, but as for trusting you enough to put a .exe on my hard drive? Nahhhhhhhh...
I'd stick to Lua scripting. Anyway, it's hardly relevant because there is no such program and I doubt there ever will be.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Brandon wrote:
Everyone is so fixated on the term "brute-force" here. If I even remotely understand what crollo is saying, he's not suggesting creating a framework for brute-forcing various games; he's suggesting that we combine our resources to run heuristic algorithms instead of just using our own computers. I personally think this is a good idea, although I'm not sure how high the demand would be for it. How often do people write bots for TASes that take days to process? I honestly wouldn't know. If you want to put time into writing the program, I'm sure it'd find some use, but I doubt many people would be willing to make the same investment unless the demand is much higher than I would assume.
I agree, and I've been biting my tongue because I don't have much to add to it. I've even had similar ideas in the past, but didn't bother bringing it up because it would amount to, "Hey guys! Here's something we can do but no one will!" "Hey Bobo! Yeah, that's a great idea we'll never implement!"
Derakon wrote:
Also keeping in mind that if your expected runtime for a singlethreaded program is only a few days, it might well be easier to leave it singlethreaded than it would be to go to the work of figuring out how to split the job up into sub-jobs to farm out to separate threads, let alone to send to remote machines.
Lunar Pool is a situation in which a server farm could have paid off, since it took months for the job to run on just Bisqwit's computer. But those kinds of situations are currently, I suspect, the exception rather than the rule.
I'll mildly disagree with your first paragraph. Yes, if we want this to be its own stand-alone compiled program that runs on tens of thousands of computers to "solve" a game, it would be too much trouble and will never happen. (Not to mention we'd never find enough people willing to run it. "Download TAS@home! We swear it doesn't have a virus in it!") On the other hand, if you just have a straightforward bot in Lua and just want to increase your processing power tenfold, that should be very easy to do, depending on the game and the bot. A well-programmed bot for certain games should just take an integer as its input, then run through all integers to find the optimal solution (if not, most bots should be adaptable to that method). At that point, it's just a matter of dividing up the parameter space accordingly, then distributing appropriate versions of the bot to the users. The only difficulty would be getting everyone to consistently run the program and report back every day, but I suppose others could pick up the slack for one or two no-shows.
I think Lunar Pool is a great example of how it could work. We'd divvy up the parameter space (shot directions and powers), then have each computer analyze the results only for its shots. Any overlap would be minimal.
Another example would be my Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego bot (*raises eyebrows suggestively*). I was only able to analyze the strategy for each level to a depth of 1, which-- long story short-- meant quite a few levels were beaten in four turns instead of three, two, or one. This is what bisqwit called a "greedy algorithm" for Lunar Pool (I don't know if that's the formal name for it, but I instantly knew what he was talking about when he brought it up). With a network of a few dozen computers, I could probably bump the search depth up to 2 or 3 and shave another twenty minutes off the run. Gosh, do you think it'd be accepted if it were faster???
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
natt wrote:
Billy wrote:
I called Nintendo of America customer service yesterday
That sounds like a bad idea. There are a lot of bad places to get your legal advice from, but I think "from the opposition" is one of the worst. And from a customer service line? They're just low level employees with scripts to read. They have neither a legal background nor any knowledge of the company's desires and intents beyond what makes it on to their scripts.
If you want real legal advice, retain a lawyer recommended to you by the EFF. Otherwise, just stay off the radar. Regardless of the actual law involved, they will start litigation against you if they don't like you and you're big enough of a pest (intimidation by legal threats).
Expanding upon that point and tying it in with my own, Nintendo is always going to come down hard-line when it comes to their official policy towards ROMs. What did you expect?
Billy: "Hi, I have a question regarding ROMs."
Poorly-paid customer service representative who hates their job: "Okay, how can I help you?"
Billy: "I was wondering if it is legal to use an emulator."
PPCSRWHTJ: "Nintendo does not condone or allow illegal use of its intellectual property. Any unauthorized manufacturing, distribution, or use of ROMs will result in full legal action and a fine up to and including $20,000 and six months in prison."
Billy: "Yeah, but what if it's for a tool-assisted speedrun?"
PPCSRWHTJ: "Oh, a TAS? Why didn't you say so? Yeah, TAS away. We won't bug you. You want to know our favorite ROM sites?"
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Not to derail the topic (in fact, if anything, I think I can only "rail" the topic), but I've always perceived video game companies as not giving a crap about what we do here for a few reasons.
First, we don't distribute ROMs, so nothing we do on this site is technically illegal.
Second, we're their biggest fans. As I recall, George Lucas had to be reined in after he got a little lawsuit-happy and went after fan works following the success of the Star Wars franchise. I'm not saying all companies turn a blind eye to shady business surrounding their IP (especially when there is often limited communication between the company and its legal department), but I perceive that savvy companies allow this kind of stuff to happen as long as it's in exaltation, not piracy.
And third, we give them good publicity. TASing is just another way to keep people thinking about video games. I, for one, am almost completely out of the video game industry, having played virtually nothing over the past year. If it weren't for TASing, I probably wouldn't be involved at all, and that would make me a former video game player instead of a potential customer. I wouldn't be surprised if there are many others for whom TASes (whether watching or making them) give them a little extra incentive to stay abreast of the industry.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
The sad thing is that the "fastest TASer" is really the best programmer. In strict terms, I'm referring to botting, but even in general, an expert TASer needs to know how to find useful information, process it, and display it on the screen efficiently with a Lua script. To truly master the art, you need to have a strong foundation in programming and have a good understanding of things like ROM architecture, data structures, and common programming habits that go into making a game.
I can honestly say that I think we're all impressed by your passion and dedication to TASing, Billy, but I will warn you now: you must bring a large bag of tools to the table, and if not, you must be willing and prepared to expand your skill set. Otherwise, you will almost certainly be disappointed. Undirected effort alone will do very little for your success.
Came expecting this. What I got was far stranger.
Edit:moozooh wrote:
...In fact, it would be less than 1% even if all nine categories would be published. There are currently 809 games featured on the site that aren't Super Metroid...
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
CoolKirby wrote:
Bobo the King wrote:
There will always be a place on this site for a SMW run that completes the game roughly as it was intended and includes the entire credit sequence. This is not such a run.
The 3 frame slower run they're talking about starts from the Yoshi's House "Thank You" screen and proceeds through the enemy roll call to the credits, all with no music and no sound at all. It's not the full credits, and with full silence, it's not very entertaining.
Yeah, I'm aware, and those all genuinely detract from it. I'd have brought it up myself, but I decided if I got lost in a rant, people wouldn't take my post as seriously.
But yes, CoolKirby is right: it's not even the unadulterated credit sequence. I prefer this version by a significant margin.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
DarkKobold wrote:
I don't feel like this one ends, quite the way the other movie ends. Could you add the 3 frames, and link to that movie?
The music continues, and the splash screen just fades in. Not really the same as "reaching the credits"
Nahoc wrote:
I second this. You should really use those 3 extra frames to get the "full credits".
I'll reiterate my preference for the submitted version, which I stated in the game's topic. There will always be a place on this site for a SMW run that completes the game roughly as it was intended and includes the entire credit sequence. This is not such a run.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
I also support ais523's and Patashu's mentions of the Sonic games-- they're probably the most popular games with multiple endings, as would be classified by this site.
However, the quintessential "multiple ending" game to me is Chrono Trigger.
Anyway, if you're still confused, watch both the Sonic 3 and Knuckles any% and the Sonic 3 and Knuckles 100% runs and take note of their endings. (And to make Patashu's point more clear the label has nothing to do with the Doomsday Zone! It's entirely about the ending cinematic, nothing whatsoever to do with gameplay.)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
DarkKobold wrote:
kaizoman666 wrote:
dunnius wrote:
I think getting the full credits would be preferred if it is possible. (that other video started from "Thank You")
Nope, its not possible. The base of the glitch lies in $0100, the game mode. According to this chart, there is a fade for Yoshi's House (1C), a fade for the enemy list (20), and a fade for the end (26). However, there is no fade nor load for the credits themselves. This is because that is part of Bowser's code, and can not be easily accessed without him.
So yeah, the most of the credits you can get is from the Yoshis. Personally, I find going straight to the end more entertaining because it provides an even bigger "broken" feel. I suppose a bonus game Yoshi's House is pretty crazy too, but skipping the whole thing would leave a lasting impression on the viewer.
Going straight to the end screen doesn't really feel like anything other than an accidental glitch, more than an intentional game ending. Additionally, unlike the yoshi credits, the music of the level keeps playing, which makes it seem more like just a splash screen, and less like an actual accomplishment.
I disagree and I'd like to throw in my two cents in favor of the THE END screen. One deciding factor for me was the lack of music during the enemies roll call. Another thing in the THE END screen's favor is that for a popular game like Super Mario World, almost everyone has seen the ending 50+ times, so it's nothing special at this point. With the more abrupt ending, I rather like the punctuation of it.
Edit: Don't forget: Chrono Trigger reminds us that fast completion warrants fast credits.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
ElectroSpecter wrote:
I'm torn on this idea. It would be cool to see a perfect bonus on each stage, but at the same time it's sort of using the idea "doing ______ is impossible so I'm hacking the game to make it possible."
I've had plenty of moments in games that I've TASed where I've been very very close to breakthroughs that would change the whole run, but as of yet are still impossible to attain... In these cases I don't think hacking the game is appropriate, because once you hack a game to make your run better, there's no stopping you from hacking the game until your character moves at 700 pixels a frame and can go in a straight line to the end. I realize the ring case is a little different, but I'm just stating why hacking the game to achieve a result leaves me a little uneasy.
I see your point, but the key thing here is that this sounds more like a demo run to me in the first place. It may help the run's judgment if Felipe (or whomever) specifically nominates it as a demo and not as a full-blown, speed-based TAS. If it's already going to be a demo run, why not just make it an outright hack? As I see it (and one of the judges should pipe in to back me up if I'm right), a run on a subsequent hack that's less invasive would obsolete the old run, regardless of speed. That seems fair to me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
I think the goal is unusual enough that it would be better to submit it with the intent of having it published as a demo run. As such, I would recommend making a small hack to either move the unreachable rings or decrease the number of rings needed for a perfect bonus.
