Jump to content

  •  

Learner


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#21 SolarStar

SolarStar

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 39 posts

Posted 08 December 2014 - 06:25 PM

I would like to see encrypted traffic for communication whenever possible. But I don't think it is that simple. When Learner does it, the NSA will knock on his door the next day and give him a national security letter. (Google it if you don't know what it is). I have only spoken to Learner in englisch; I automaticly asume that he lives oversea. But another interesting question, where is the new sever, physically ?

#22 butler

butler

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1434 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 09 December 2014 - 01:04 PM

Encryption can be done (but that tends to mean the connection is slower) and usually the US gov will privately get a company to supply them with the info.

However, if Learner has registered the company outside the US, this is probably different, even within the countries with the spying coalition. France/Germany registered would take away jurisdiction, and probably allow for more noise to be done. iirc, eurolaws are being reworked on this (which ALDE didn't like, which is pathetic, but I digress).

#23 themuntdregger

themuntdregger

    Official Troll

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1001 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 19 December 2014 - 08:05 PM

Yup, no surprise i'm pretty big on the virtues of free speech. To some extent that's reflective of a great many peeps my age and who were brought up at a time when liberalism and permissiveness was the zeitgeist of all right thinking people. Ofc, a lot then changed economically and politically with the result that successive generations have generally got progressively more conservative, materialistic and paranoid to the extent that bright young shiny peeps prolly have nightmares imagining the shit we oldfags used to get up to.

And ofc it was peeps of my age that first colonised teh intawez so very long long ago and fashioned it in accordance with our values and attitudes, placing at its centre the bright and shining beacon of hope, truth and justice that was Usenet. In those heady far off days, you could say what you liked to whoever you liked, and most peeps usually did. Indeed, some peeps turned it into a veritable artform.

Whilst privacy was something that was rarely ever mentioned, it was inherently understood and universally respected. Exploits were almost unknown and sysads, as a rule, were generally too busy painstakingly downloading text based pr0n to go looking at other peeps private messages. Ofc, all that changed the moment the hairy hordes of AOL were let loose to ruin the intawebz and turn it into the giant pr0n soaked, ad ridden, virus infested, smoking crater that we all know and love today. Hence why sysads now spend most of their waking hours endlessly deleting shit and desperately trying to avoid consigning the 1% that isn't a Nigerian begging letter or an advertisement for a Swedish penis enlarger, into the bit bucket.

I can therefore understand how the inclination for a sysad to check someone's private messages arises, although I can similarly understand why peeps prefer that doesn't happen. However, I do agree that sysads should avoid boleeting or moderating private convo's. I say 'avoid' rather than 'not' because there are circumstances where its necessary and/or desirable to avoid legal liability, protect minors or comply with statutory requirements. However, in the interests of fairness, I think its important that the nature of any private communication interception be clearly disclosed to players so as peeps are aware and can make informed decisions.

As far as spamming peeps using the new OL pm system (which I must say is excellent and very well done Learner), I feel its important that we avoid a 'rules based' approach to dealing with the issue (a la Eternal Lands). One man's spam is another man's sandwich, so interpretation of whether something is spam is very subjective, even if a message is unsolicited, unwanted, uncomplementary and sent to the same person 50,000 times. Bear in mind that reiteration is an accepted artistic device with a long and honourable record, eg no one gets upset when Coleridge Taylor's drones on about being 'alone alone all all alone, alone on a wide wide sea' in his infamous ode to the ancient mariner, or questions whether if its really art. Hence, if I send 50,000 pm's to Geoffrey, each one telling him he's a puffed up little toad, I don't think peeps should hurl about accusations that it amounts to abuse, or imagine that it amounts to anything less than art.

However, Coleridge Taylor's infamous capacity for spam was ultimately limited by the limited resource available to him. Had this not been the case then I expect that some 18th century busy body would have boleeted it and no doubt followed it up by sending a steam powered pm saying 'you were muted by Burn'. Anyhow, the critical point to be taken from this is that there are less divisive ways to limit spam than checking ppl's private convo's. Plus, I guess we'd all rather Learner spent his valuable online time coding more excellent stoofs for OL, and not lol'ing his arse off at Puffy the Toad getting royally griefed.

If peeps want to spam then we should embrace it and attempt to harness this inescapable force of nature for the good of the community, ie using it to produce something that the game is (at least imho) desperately in need of. Nope, i'm not talking about dragons all in different colours of the rainbow, or indeed bots (although we could really do with something slightly more efficient than the market chan to enable us to buy/sell stoofz, eh Learner?). No indeed, what I am talking about is postage stamps....... (oh yes).

As we all know, postage stamps cost money and, that's the major reason why peeps (other than big businesses selling double glazing, home finance and other pointless shit) use it to spam the crap out of everyone. Hence, whilst someone might think it fun to send Ena a butt load of spammy messages when it don't cost them a bean, they are less likely to be inclined to do so if they have to buy stamps with hard earned gc for the priviledge. Indeed, even if they do spend the equiv of a entire set of camp pink armour (plus matching gai glowy sword) on a spamfest of near galactic proportion, at least we (teh community) have the benefit of the ensuing gold sink.

Yup, so that's my great idea, in-game stamps that you need in order to send a pm to an offline player. Set the cost at say 10gc and make them purchasable from an NPC in SK. That way, you'll also improve sales of invisibility potion, mm capes, increase the number of pk'ers and avoid having Learner sniggering like a fox when he reads the love letters you've been sending to Ena.

#24 butler

butler

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1434 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 20 December 2014 - 10:19 AM

I'd say 1-2gc for stamps. 10 is around pickaxe level, which I don't like the idea of for communication. If at all possible, I'm against the stamps, but hey ho.

Also, you managed to squeeze Coleridge and Burn into a paragraph. That is fantastically weird.

Also, progressively, a lot of young people have been getting conservative (or let's say, a very conservative version of a political ideology). Issue is a lot of them just listen to propaganda and don't ever delve into understanding anything. The amoung of times I've had to play devils advocate and say Thatcher was a stupid stubborn woman but not Evil, and that tories have a deeper ideology than the happy go lucky nationalists up north. A lot of people are now very well stemmed in adverts and not reality. (I am perfectly fine with any free speech as long as it isn't homophobic/racist/antisemitic/sexist or in other words being an asshole to someones fundamental values.) Also, Churchill would have never been able to get away with half the crap he said (and governing while drunk) today.

An interesting and wholly munty post.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users