#81
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
| |||
#82
|
|||
|
only crazy ppl play moderate and post here takes one to know one )
| ||
#83
|
||||
|
Quote:
I'm not mad I'm just pointing out what seems like hypocrisy in this post I happened to see. You don't know who I am but you say I've responded to every post you make? Pretty bizarre from my perspective. You signed up after me but same year and you have almost 10x as many posts as I do. Posts: 5,385 Posts: 718 In any case I'll take your lack of response to the actual discussion to mean that your claims were wrong. Edit: I was looking at your post history to figure out if I somehow had responded to you recently and I see you just came back to say "whats up" and your thread is basically full of the people you unfairly banned calling you out for it. It's pretty funny to me that you still believe you were a good GM. Pages of stories of players saying they got banned by you for nonsensical reasons and your response is that they all deserved it. Somehow you are the only GM who has this reputation but you still can't own it. You should have stuck to bug reports and dev work. I do actually think the overboard unstable GM is funny though and I'm glad I got to be banned by you. Thanks for the good times. | |||
Last edited by azxten; 11-17-2022 at 03:56 PM..
|
#84
|
|||
|
I'll drop a last post here, just for the trolls with their childish "porn" remarks etc. ;-)
Note that this was the primary point of the original post: "Playing on P99 should come with a warning of P99 forcing you to download their DLL injection file called "dsetup.dll"." No one has said anything about Project 1999 not being good, nor their rules not being fair, etc. The whole point was that this sort of invasive surveillance should always be advertised, because yes, it is illegal, very much so actually. Stating in advance that it is being done makes it less illegal, in some countries at least. The main point still being though, that why not state it, as that in itself should make for less rule-breaking, thus less time spent monitoring rule-violations, fewer people actually breaking rules, etc. In Europe it's called the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), where one'll find in article 13-14 that one must clearly inform about every kind of surveillance. No matter where a server/service is based, it can be found that it can be regulated through GDPR. It can also be found, that even with clear notification, said surveillance is still illegal. That said, "DLL injections" in particular can often in and of themselves violate the Council of Europe's Cybercrime Convention, which e.g. the US has also joined. E.g. as we saw with the Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal back in 2005. Well, I'm out then. Have fun all ;-)
__________________
– Calmethar.
| ||
#85
|
|||
|
Bruh. Imagine voluntarily signing into a video game, claiming you were "forced" to download it, being extremely confused about what it does and doesn't monitor, and then calling it "invasive surveillance".
People like you are why we have to click that pointless notification about cookies on literally every website now. | ||
#86
|
|||
|
Perhaps a /ready command?
| ||
#87
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
< Knights Who Say Ni >
Qeynos questing and leveling (all quests nerfed) | Off the beaten path 24-40. | |||
#88
|
||||
|
Quote:
No, offering a service for free doesn't give one carte blanche to use "dll-injections", especially not without informing the users. That much is crystal clear. To the trolls as well of course, they're just playing their silly games without end ;-)
__________________
– Calmethar.
| |||
#89
|
|||
|
If you have nothing to hide, why worry about privacy? Even if we assume that some kind of spyware is in fact being used to monitor windows, it’s not an issue unless you assume that someone cares about the YouTube videos you’re watching or the random news articles you’re reading, et cetera et cetera. Spoiler alert, nobody cares.
| ||
#90
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Personally I think they should have a statement about this functionality, require people to agree to it when creating an account, and this statement should explain how that personal information is being handled. I was curious so read a bit of GDPR to see how it would apply to P99 but as far as I can tell P99 isn't a business. It's an entity which under GDPR entities are only required to comply if they are based in the EU. One thing I found that is interesting was some laws have defined protected personal information as also being aggregate non-identifying personal information if collected on more than 1000 different entities. From a project perspective what is being done is in fact risky because there is a very remote chance that someone's computer is named "bobsmithat123stidaho" and let's say they have a peculiar taste in porn and a staff member has this data from window titles and puts it out there. That person begins to have standing to sue and with actual damages. The data could be obtained by a malicious actor for example it doesn't have to be the staff intentionally using it for bad reasons. In this case P99 would almost definitely be in big trouble. No one agreed to this, they didn't disclose it officially, in this instance it was enough information to identify an individual, and it caused damages. Totally remote never going to happen kind of thing but in reality these things happen sometimes. Of course these concepts are alien to most people. The risk is on the staff and it's their decision. I see little downside though. It's funny people would actively resist the idea that someone collecting personal information without your consent probably should stop doing that. Rogean said, "If you think what we're doing is bad you should see the other anti-cheat systems" referring to things like EAC and so on. The problem with that is those run with user consent via an agreement obtained duration installation. No such agreement exists for P99 regarding their data collection or usage. Why resist doing this? It seems immature to me but my mindset is very corporate and seeks to avoid unnecessary risks. My perception is there is concern that if this was disclosed it would threaten growth, weaken the protection, or it's "hard" to implement properly since P99 logins are tied into EQEmu. You can make an EQEmu account without agreeing to anything from P99. The license.txt file has a disclaimer about this but the problem is you don't have to agree to this to play on P99. It's like if you signed up for a Facebook account and after you were already logged in and using the product they E-mailed you a list of rules and described how they're harvesting your personal data. That won't hold up in court. Oh also since staff has commented on this they're now "knowingly" doing what they're doing in spite of people bringing these issues to their attention. Not even trying to be a dick I'd fix this up if I was in charge and this is how it is. Of course they could be comparing window titles on the client side and only sending a detection flag. Your computer name could be a one way hash for purposes of detecting boxing. There are a lot of assumptions about what is actually collected but then this gets into privacy laws about "processing" personal information as well. | ||||
Last edited by azxten; 11-18-2022 at 07:09 PM..
|
|
|