1. Updated Resource Submission Rules: All model & skin resource submissions must now include an in-game screenshot. This is to help speed up the moderation process and to show how the model and/or texture looks like from the in-game camera.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. DID YOU KNOW - That you can unlock new rank icons by posting on the forums or winning contests? Click here to customize your rank or read our User Rank Policy to see a list of ranks that you can unlock. Have you won a contest and still havn't received your rank award? Then please contact the administration.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. The 18th Icon Contest is ON! Choose any ingame unit and give him/her Hero abilities. Good luck to all.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. The Secrets of Warcraft 3 have revealed interesting works. The RESULTS for Abelhawk's Mini-Mapping Contest #15 have come out!
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Contestants are to create a scene set in the Stone Age. Come and see what you can come up with. We wish you the best of luck!
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Colour outside the lines! Techtree Contest #13 is a go. The contest is optionally paired.
    Dismiss Notice
  7. Night Rider gained several songs for his journey. The poll for the 12th Music Contest has started. Check it out!
    Dismiss Notice
  8. Greetings cerebrates, our Swarm needs new spawners that will have numerous children. Join the HIVE's 31st Modeling Contest - Spawners and Spawned! The contest is optionally paired.
    Dismiss Notice
  9. Join other hivers in a friendly concept-art contest. The contestants have to create a genie coming out of its container. We wish you the best of luck!
    Dismiss Notice
  10. Check out the Staff job openings thread.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
60,000 passwords have been reset on July 8, 2019. If you cannot login, read this.

Question of the century: why is it not allowed to discuss deprotecting?

Discussion in 'Site Discussion' started by GhostWolf, Jun 4, 2018.

  1. KILLCIDE

    KILLCIDE

    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2015
    Messages:
    3,494
    Resources:
    20
    Models:
    2
    Icons:
    10
    Spells:
    7
    Tutorials:
    1
    Resources:
    20
    I used to be for protecting maps in the case they did it solely to decrease map size, but with the new map size limit, I find it hard to see a reason to protect a map at all other than to hide the inner workings of a map. In this case, I find it rather selfish and distasteful. This community didn't grow because everyone hid their own creations.

    In terms of why we have the rule, all of the Staff members actually had a discussion about this rule last year, and we had all agreed to make it a site discussion, but we never came across to it xD
     
  2. Selaya

    Selaya

    Joined:
    May 30, 2013
    Messages:
    186
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Map protection still has a merit, most important what killcide's said (reducing map size); however unlike him I would disagree about the new increased map size limit making a reduction in your compiled (protected) release's file size less desirable.
    This is due to manifold reasons, most importantly these two:
    (i) Warcraft 3 population has a higher representation of people with lesser computer and internet specs
    (ii) Most bots throttle download to shit (100KiBps), and bnet itself throttles download (?, I unthrottled my bot and download speed is still kinda shitty).

    Besides that, I would always advocate for making it non-trivial to open and tamper with your release version. This is because the vast majority of potential cheaters are idiot kids who will only try the most straightforward way to open and tamper with your map, which in our case is using the default WE to open up your map and fucking it up.

    However, that doesn't make the valid reasons of deprotecting a map less so (fixing maps that got broken in 1.24, 1.29 for once), but I'm repeating myself here.

    (I would also recommend an unprotected
    source code
    release of your map, preferrably making it unplayable with a simple invalid trigger or w/e to prevent people from accidentally hosting this version of it.)
     
  3. Chaosy

    Chaosy

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    10,600
    Resources:
    18
    Maps:
    1
    Spells:
    11
    Tutorials:
    6
    Resources:
    18
    I have seen protected singleplayer maps.

    The.fuck

    That is selfish, if it is a popular multiplayer map I understand but otherwise.. fuck you if you protect maps.
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2018
  4. chobibo

    chobibo

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    2,692
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    You can also add [dev build] to the filename and explain that in the download page. However, some people claim that most people don't read anymore.
     
  5. TheSilverhand

    TheSilverhand

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2015
    Messages:
    62
    Resources:
    4
    Maps:
    4
    Resources:
    4
    If I didn't reduce the map size for a lot of my maps, they would be "Literally" Unplayable because when I use the "Protection" for some of mine it will reduce the map size by like.. 35.5% and instead of having like 13mb where as no one could play it, it would become 8.45 which is the fitting Number for MakeMeHost.com or Any other Blizzard host out there, the limit is 9mb a map.
     
  6. disruptive_

    disruptive_

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    149
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    I like how the discussion now has some ethical aspect now. You can be either a "selfish bastard" or a "lazy thief", as if you protect or not protect your map defines, not only your logical capabilities but also your moral code. Of course i'm joking.

    Just talk about the concrete interests already. Protection or not, it's just a freaking tool. You can do good things and bad things, or nothing at all (usually the latter). ?????. Not just because you allow deprotection or even speak about deprotection bad things will happen to the community or to anybody. But also, not just because you now allow it some good things will happen aswell. Usually people just adapt and do whatever they already were doing (ie. like following orders).

    And who cares actually. It's human nature, and you all are kind of asserting and reaffirm this again and again each time. You don't need to justify the logic or ethical viability of a tool. This discussion is more abstract of what it should. Unless the thread starter wants some kind of intellectual stimulation through this post and not a concrete result or policy change. I can hardly tell right now, because i'm beign abstract right now :ugly:.

    I really see some legitimate interests behind map deprotection, like free learning or to untap the potential of dead/lost maps that otherwise will be wasted, and more.

    You are not encouraging selflesness through map deprotection, and selflesness is just another value worth of protecting. You are not making people good or bad through this policy. In my opinion neither kind of norm, regulation, law can do this. Also what about the legitimacy of the will of the author of a map to bring us their creation under his/her terms, this is what inspires the creative and artistic industry. The virtue of regulation is precisely on how to ponderate each interest with eachother, a kind of ideallistic endeavour. But you all can start by presenting such interests right of the bat, instead of discussing the ethical implications or logical pertinence of map deprotection. That's for doctoral thesis that nobody will ever read.
     
  7. Rui

    Rui

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    8,433
    Resources:
    8
    Maps:
    8
    Resources:
    8
    Because you need to have a clear (and preferably coherent among staff) stand on activities people carry out in your website that promise to upset others. Be it trolling, posting pornography or... deprotecting maps.

    @disruptive_ you've nailed it with your first paragraph. "Selfish bastard" would, in fact, be a strawman.

    Let me make it clear, though, that I do believe unprotecting is okay if the author is gone and it is certain (not straightforward when it is or not) the author is gone, and is not returning. Or doesn't care in case he is. Every other reason I've seen lacks validity. Free learning is one of them. There are plenty alternatives to looking into a map. You can even ask the author himself. Be it tips to implement your own system or resources you're looking for. I remember I once asked @NWG_Jonas or @lord_Turin for a copy of "Battle for Middle Earth", for example. It's a map I've played since 2005 and I wanted to create my own spinoff. It was denied to me. And I had to accept and respect their will. It's that simple.
     
  8. chobibo

    chobibo

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    2,692
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    I believe deprotecting maps is okay, just don't distribute it. Distributing a map that isn't your work is a different issue. You don't even need to edit it, just distributing the file is something that's sure to piss off the author. Some people will argue that it's still not acceptable to distribute maps from authors who have no intention of retouching their work without getting their permission, and I think that's just fine.
     
  9. Selaya

    Selaya

    Joined:
    May 30, 2013
    Messages:
    186
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Deprotecting a map to steal it would obviously an offense, and generally maps that are still under active developement should not be allowed to bedeprotected at all.

    However, blanket banning any
    map deprotection
    discussion because you can, amongst others deprotect a map to steal it isn't a valid argument.
    By that virtue, we'd have to put some drastic restrictions on the other resource categories asw because rn people can just download icons/skins/models and steal them.
     
  10. Kyrbi0

    Kyrbi0

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Messages:
    7,768
    Resources:
    1
    Models:
    1
    Resources:
    1
  11. Mechanical Man

    Mechanical Man

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    5,373
    Resources:
    39
    Models:
    30
    Icons:
    3
    Packs:
    1
    Maps:
    4
    Tutorials:
    1
    Resources:
    39
    Yeah thats pretty retarded. Multiplayer is at some point understandable, also you must be constantly updating it, otherwise will end like an unplayable garbage anyway, so it forces the creator to be active. But in singleplayer, the creator can dump it, maybe active for a month to fix most gamebreaking bugs and then he can leave it. However with time more bugs are discovered, new versions of the game coming up that can break map/campaign and if it's protected no one can fix it (I'm looking at you, Helldoom) and the product can no longer be in approved section.
     
  12. deepstrasz

    deepstrasz

    Map Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    Messages:
    9,998
    Resources:
    1
    Maps:
    1
    Resources:
    1
    Yeah, with the next patch, I have to set my Mana Shield spell to 2 again so it won't break gameplay for what I'm working on...
     
  13. Rui

    Rui

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    8,433
    Resources:
    8
    Maps:
    8
    Resources:
    8
    @Kyrbi0 that's actually what @VGsatomi always said all along :)

    Not sure what matter you're speaking of. Unplayable I'll condone, due to the instability brought about by recent patches. But outdated maps don't become garbage just because time passes by. One example is the map already mentioned here: "LotR: Battle for Middle Earth". The map was pretty much finished at version 2.5 in 2006, and it was excellent. The update that followed (v3.1) was actually what ruined it.
     
  14. Mechanical Man

    Mechanical Man

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    5,373
    Resources:
    39
    Models:
    30
    Icons:
    3
    Packs:
    1
    Maps:
    4
    Tutorials:
    1
    Resources:
    39
    I'm speaking about cases old like Darky's campaign, which couldn't be played anymore after 1.15 patch (I think), since they added some functionalities, from what I remember, they added new keywords in jass like lightning and some variables had this name which caused errors in the code. I don't know aftermath though.
     
  15. PurgeandFire

    PurgeandFire

    Code Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,427
    Resources:
    18
    Icons:
    1
    Spells:
    4
    Tutorials:
    9
    JASS:
    4
    Resources:
    18
    It is an old rule. And pretty much all the major English-speaking modding sites enforced it (wc3c, TH, THW, wc3search). It had to do with culture and the impression you give off, more than actually preventing deprotection. When we tell people we don't support deprotection, that isn't going to stop them. They're going to just google it and carry on. But it makes our views on deprotection loud and clear, which in turn built trust and legitimacy throughout the site. And hopefully it guided others' to respect authors' decisions.

    Now it is a different story. But my only hesitation with reverting the rule is the fallout, culturally. That's difficult to gauge. I guess my question is: what do you guys think we benefit from by allowing the discussion of deprotection? And a question for everyone: would having resources/support/tools for deprotection change your opinion of the Hive?
     
  16. Rui

    Rui

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    8,433
    Resources:
    8
    Maps:
    8
    Resources:
    8
    @Mechanical Man If I recall correctly, you needed to open up the campaign in the campaign editor. Then, I don't remember which, either save the entire campaign, or the maps one by one. I think the latter is true. This is a different matter from the subject at hand, though. Or is it possible to protect a campaign? Has anyone done it?

    @PurgeandFire Speaking for myself, I never analyzed the question in terms of age, culture, or impressions. I respect and support map protection because I think people are entitled to their property, especially when that property is product of their hard work. It's a moral principle, one I'm glad society upholds. The question here is, does the Hive see it the same way?

    If it doesn't, and prefers to help robbing others, then yes, it would indeed change my opinion. Not that my expectations are high regarding such issues, but it'd definitely change for worse.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2018
  17. Spodacus

    Spodacus

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2015
    Messages:
    9
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Wouldn't the smart choice be to allow people to appeal to a specific person to deprotect maps, such as an old map that has ceased development, then have that specific person deprotect the map in order to avoid software distribution/know how distribution?
     
  18. Xonok

    Xonok

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2012
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    8
    Spells:
    3
    Tutorials:
    5
    Resources:
    8
    First of all, most people should not be discussing this. If you haven't produced any major work, then you should not be the one deciding what to do with others' effort.

    It would be nice if there was a way to fix old maps, but that's also a pretty fine line to walk. For instance, at one point I wanted to take over the development of GoU. I didn't get permission, probably because the author is entirely inactive. In cases like this there is a clear benefit to having someone able to deprotect stuff, but then again that also comes with a lot of responsibility.
    What if the original author would rather let their project die than let anyone else do it? If so, letting mods hand the project over to someone else would be detrimental and would drive off authors from the site.
    I am against simply allowing free deprotection, even if we don't personally distribute those maps, because there are other sites that will. I am against it because if deprotection is too easy it will mean that the people taking over projects don't have to prove any kind of capability, so there would be a flood of bad and even more broken copies of those maps.
    There might be some limited way that deprotection is good, such as to keep old projects alive. But if anyone on the staff can just freely give away that right, then that changes things a lot for us. It would mean that whatever you upload is no longer yours, because someone else can just decide to give it away once you stop updating it.

    Thus, I don't think deprotection should be discussed here in most cases, because in most cases it really is just lazy people not willing to put in the effort. However, I also think there should be a way to fix existing maps if given permission by the staff. This would be limited to fixes only, because just handing the project over can go against the author's wishes.
    If only for fixes, it would be fine, but then there's the question of difficulty. Properly protected maps can not be restored to a form that is as easy to update as the original, so it would take some serious willingness to fix the map. Chances are it would only be done for really popular maps, but then again those really popular maps usually don't get abandoned either.

    If you just want to open up a map to learn, there are actually other way. Most of the time you can ask here on the forums and someone will explain how to achieve what you wanted. If it's something complicated, there might be specific people that know about them. For instance, there is this one person that knows how to make a UI out of units and make it work without lag in multiplayer.

    All this said, it would be better if people ask the original author for permission and just deal with whatever the response is.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2018
  19. chobibo

    chobibo

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    2,692
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    One benefit I could think of is the improvement of already existing protection techniques. It's also not easy to deprotect maps so I doubt lazy people would be into the activity that much. Most likely they will beg other people who knows how to deprotect the map for them.
     
  20. GhostWolf

    GhostWolf

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,836
    Resources:
    2
    Tools:
    1
    Tutorials:
    1
    Resources:
    2
    You don't need to improve existing "protection" techniques. Nowadays they involve external DLLs and Lua, and you cannot open them in any way. People cried so much about the return bug allowing viruses with Jass, but the same people are fine with running corrupt maps that can so easily do the same.

    Regardless, I thought the Hive community was about sharing and being open, i.e. a modding community, and not adding arbitrary rules about corrupting files, but seeing the general sentiment in all of the comments so far, I guess I was wrong.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2018