 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in ROM Hacking. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - ROM Hacking - The Open-Source Exception |
New poll |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
Guy Perfect                   Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| As the sun began to set beneath the horizon, causing the future to unfold in its wake, and stars from the twinking expanse of the great beyond became ever more vivid in the eyes of integrity and steadfastness, a new wonder streaked across the softly moonlit sky and struck awe into all who were fortunate enough to behold it.
This marvelous entity provided of itself a lifebringer that brought a new vitality to an otherwise scortched world filled to the brim with corruption and decay. The new salvation, which the natives have come to call Open-Source, remains ever-present behind the protective barriers put up by the oppressors, and they know that the time draws near when their trusted fortitude will begin to fail and crush them under its weight. Great power has been given to the oppressed as the source code of tremendous feats of coding has become available to them; and with it, they are able to forge new weapons of terrible power to strike down those who once held them at the mercy of a bulk licensing scheme. To those who wish to provide the world with nourishment and revive them from the pits of agony, Open Source shines brightly as a beacon of hope to all who once again are able to look upon the sky and see what light it brings. But to those who exist to further their skill, bandits come from the corners of the earth to snatch up what they have created and retain all power for themselves; never to use it for any good. Basiclaly what I'm saying is that it may not be in people's best interest to release source code to the ROM Hacking community, since people will just take it and say "Hey, look what I have! Power!" Instead, as VL-Tone and I have discussed briefly in the past, documentation of whatever it is software does should be distributed instead of source code. That way, knowledge can be shared and anyone with determination can recreate whatever it is the software is able to do. As such, more skill is improved, more knowledge is shared, and it's really just a better deal all around. |
|||
MathOnNapkins  1100  In SPC700 HELL  Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| I strongly disagree. How many times have you seen a tool that was adequate, but lacked certain features you wanted? Or perhaps you wanted to know how to decode certain types of graphics or sounds. Without that you have to reinvent the wheel and waste hour upon hour when a competent person could be looking at source learning at least twice as fast how it works. This is especially true when someone makes a tool and then leaves the scene. They'd probably not be willing to add said features. Or even worse, what if it has some nasty bugs? Who's going to want to hack a binary .exe file to modify it via IDA Pro or whatever? Almost no one. Having to recode a whole new program is reinventing the wheel.
However, if the source is very hard to read, you might have to end up writing your own program anyways  .
Documentation is a nice alternative but it only goes so far. Other than the abstract fear that someone will take credit for your program (OHNOEZ), I don't see your point. It's only if they tried to sell software intended to be free without permission. But you don't really need source to do that. |
|||
Dan Purple Leever Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6288 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| I really don't see the point in keeping things closed. The ROM hacking "community" is relatively small. Repeating other people's efforts are wasteful. It's totally in the best interest of everyone to release source code. I don't even see how you could argue that it isn't. | |||
|
Guy Perfect Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
For the purpose of quality control, I stand firm to the idea that we're not here to mooch off of other people's work. We're here to share ideas and techniques, not software. For the record, my statement is debatable and I don't intend to force it on anyone as absolute truth.
Originally posted by MathOnNapkinsPerhaps the projects that you've encountered in your experience was somehow structured such that you were able to uncover the intricacies of what the program did just by examining the source code, but I can confidently say through experience that the delicate interoperability of different parts of a program lead you on a digital paper trail that may or may not lead to the desired knowledge in question. With thorough documentation, however, you get the intellectual rationalle behind whatever the program does. This means the work is already done. Documentation on level editing, for example, means the hacking is already completed. The only thing you'd have to do is implement it in programming and poof: replica. Originally posted by MathOnNapkinsAgain, the "wheel" is the documentation, not the source code. Think of it like a car. Do the wheels make you go? No, the car uses wheels and has an engine to make the wheels move. Likewise, it's the knowledge and technique of what is done to a ROM that makes software go, but it still needs an engine to do anything. If you want some other kind of a vehicle than a car, such as a monster truck or a bicycle, you still end up using wheels to make it. The exact thing that those wheels are used for may vary, but they're still what the vehicles are based off of. And you can't use the source code of a bicycle to build a monster truck. Originally posted by DanThis is one of those "I'm completely unwilling to agree, so I'll consider anything you say as incorrect" kinds of posts. Consider that there can concievably be some legitimate reason for doing so that you haven't thought of. I would appreciate that in the future, you supply some observable evidence to support your comments. Releasing documentation and withholding source code means that a person's project will remain unique to them and anyone who so wishes can easily--that's right: easily--create their own project that may or may not have the same features. This ensures that people, in the ROM Hacking community in particular, will be able to further their skills and understanding of what goes on in any given game. Besides... Take Sappy 2005 into account. Microsoft Visual Basic, runs on Windows XP. Even if the source code was available (if it is, make sure you call me many bad names), it may not be very helpful for the Solaris users out there. Documentation is a fool-proof, cross-platform compatibility artifact. It also remains useful through the ages. |
|||
|
||bass Administrator  Since: 11-17-05 From: Salem, Connecticut Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by BGNGThey make MONO for solaris you know. |
|||
|
Guy Perfect Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| Spaffy 2005 is not .NET, which is what Mono exists to support.
Before anyone else posts with the sole intention of trying to make me look bad, make sure you have something with a little substance before posting it. |
|||
|
The Onyx Dragoon 150  Since: 11-17-05 From: Somewhere between Mars and Jupiter, Sitting on an Asteroid Last post: 6283 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
| Computer Programming is, since It's been around, something that has kept growing, expanding, and breaking through many barriers that were once thought to be impenetrable...right?
If so, then hiding your source code away from crackers and pirates won't help. Sooner or later, someone should be able to find the secrets in you program. So, I say that limiting source codes isn't such a good idea, since no one wins. |
|||
|
Guy Perfect Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| Well, I don't feel that having my programs broken into is much of a concern, but I don't feel that people taking and modifying source code to suit their needs is the best way to handle things.
Don't get me wrong: If there's a piece of software that benefits a large number of people, like the OGG Vorbis and Theora specifications or the OpenOffice.org suite, then releasing the source code is truly beneficial, as there's is a community of people working together to make those programs ever better. But for the ROM Hacking community, I believe, a level editor here and a graphics editor there don't typically reach "truly beneficial" status. Since we all exist to work with data and find out how it works, using source code is somewhat in contrast to that end. Releasing total documentation, however, means that no secrets are being kept. It's simply a way to ensure that people will have a better understanding of how the software works, as well as enabling them to make their own software to do the same thing, with their own source code to modify to their love's worth. |
|||
|
Glyphodon Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6320 days Last view: 6301 days |
| ||
| Force people to program a totally new system rather than modifying an existing app. Ha ha. (Geiger's debug, anyone?)
Spend your time writing a separate documentation rather than just commenting the code. Ha ha ha. Open source code would cause people to believe to believe they have power and that is bad. Ha ha ha ha ha! "more knowledge is shared" when code isn't released open source. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! This is even funnier than the one with pages over the validity of the name "Rom hacking". Keep it up, this stuff is great. |
|||
|
Kyoufu Kawa Intends to keep Rom Hacking in one piece until the end  Since: 11-18-05 From: Catgirl Central Station Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| Bad thing with using Sappy as an example in this is that -documentation- is worth more than -code- in this matter. | |||
sp Micro-Goomba Since: 11-25-05 Last post: 6623 days Last view: 6623 days |
| ||
| First I want to state that I'm a bit of an extremist/open-source zealot. Why? In my opinion people who don't open-source their freeware are assholes. I can forgive them if they have legal reasons for not releasing their code but any other excuse definitely falls on deaf ears with me.
Good, that's out of the way. Now about the topic. I firmly believe that more information = better than and available source code is more information than any documentation could ever contain. Arguing for more documentation while simultaneously arguing for closed source is completely grotesque in my opinion. The core of all progress is the simplification of earlier inventions. That's not just the case for software, but for the rest of the world too. In the years after Gottlieb Daimler invented the automobile it was so complicated that it was seen purely as a tool for engineers who know to fix their cars basically on the fly (because early cars were difficult to control and broke down a lot). Only a few decades later, people like Henry Ford managed to simplify automobiles so far that even normal people could use them. This is not just true for cars, but for most if not all inventions. Combine this with another aspect of life. There are no geniuses. Nope, none. Isaac Newton once said that "If I have seen further [than certain other men] it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants". Using this sentence he tried to explain why he invented so much more than his contemporaries. He studied the history of his field a lot more than others and studying that gave him an advantage over others. He knew what was already tried and failed and he knew what wasn't tried yet and could concentrate his efforts on those areas. There are other examples. Who invented the telephone? Graham Bell? No. The telephone was invented by (at least) Antonio Meucci, Charles Bourseul, Johann Philipp Reis, Cromwell Varley, Poul la Cour, Elisha Gray, Thomas Edison and finally Alexander Graham Bell. The invention of the telephone was not the work of a genius (because they don't exist). It was the work of many people who studied what their ancestors in the fields of electrical engineering developed and they all improved on these ideas. It's the same with the steam engine. Think James Watt invented it? Nope. By the time James Watt made his significant contribution to the steam engine some hundred of them were already running in Great Britain. James Watt merely studied them and found ways to improve them. We don't have to limit this to great inventions. Here's a ROM hacking example. If FCEUXD had not been open source there would most likely be no symbolic debugging or conditional breakpoints in NES emulators today. I do not have the time to develop a NES emu myself just to make a better debugger. I am not sure if even have the skills to write my own one. I can, however, guarantee you 100% that I would have never implemented anything like I did in FCEUXD SP if I couldn't have built upon the work of the earlier contributors to the FCE/FCEU/FCEUXD project(s). And - in my fairly biased view - this would be quite unfortunate. I really like symbolic debugging and conditional breakpoints. What I want to say is that a closed source policy is against many of the most important aspect of inventing and developing. You want to deny us the ability to build on the works of our "ancestors", you want us to reinvent the wheel over and over again, you want to deny us the necessary simplification (for example in the form of libraries that could be developed for common tasks) to make quick advances, you want us to be geniuses (which don't exist) and you want to force us to be the first "giant" in line over and over again. I ask you, how's that any better than just making programs open source? |
|||
|
Guy Perfect Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| I entirely agree with you, sp.
The difference is that I don't feel this community exists for the sake of invention, but for that of knowledge and technique. Source code cannot talk, but people can. Therefore, documenting things in human language as opposed to programming language will better help to ensure that people have an understanding of what it is they do and see. |
|||
|
Kyoufu Kawa Intends to keep Rom Hacking in one piece until the end Since: 11-18-05 From: Catgirl Central Station Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| I shall write a document on Sappy's formats asap, then. | |||
Gavin Cheep-cheep Vandalism is not tolerated Since: 11-17-05 From: IL, USA Last post: 6356 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Originally posted by BGNG perhaps I'm missing something, but why does one being more useful than the other mean that only one should be released?? If you truly believe, source + documentation is the obvious solution. |
|||
|
Guy Perfect Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| Just as data hacked from a ROM is useless unless something is done with it, the same goes for software documentation. So a document is written about ROM data and the person has the source code... While the source code would provide a way to show how implementation of the documentation could be done, it's not going to do much in terms of productivity.
A person who has documentation and source code will look at it and say "Hmm. Okay. Now I know how it works" and walk away. If the program code already exists, then what's the point of reading the documentation in the first place? |
|||
|
Mega-Dog Since: 11-19-05 From: Minnesota Last post: 6301 days Last view: 6282 days |
| ||
| 1st off releasing Source with a project is the developers choice. I chose not to since all my code has Copyright on it, but if people do ask about something I do usually help and such. I don't think I ever released a Source of a EXE of mine and probably never will. But it is the creators choice, it should not have to be fore uppon us. | |||
|
Simon Belmont Except I'm totally fucking hyped about Dracula X: Chronicles.  Since: 11-18-05 From: Pittsburgh Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by BGNG Maybe because ther eare other people with more innovation, who know how to make things better than half the shit see come out of this community. Also, on another note: It's the fucking internet, who the hell cares if billybobthorton39202398 stole your 1337 h4x editor. it's not like you're getting paid to develop them. |
|||
dcahrakos  490 Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6496 days Last view: 6496 days |
| ||
| I would have to agree that it is the dev's choice here, if they dont want to on a freeware project, I can see why, I wouldnt want someone to take my app, change the name, some text and what not, and call it their own...providing the source code makes it 100% easy to do that, if you just release the app you dont have to worry about that, unless you have some guy who knows asm, or hex, and hacks the exe, but odds are that isnt going to happen and if it did im sure they would not be able to change it to the extent of the original author not knowing its theirs. Personally I dont release the source to anything of mine, although lately ive been thinking about it..
im not totally against releasing the source, since I myself like to look at other peoples code to see how certain things work, or how their coding style is....but in the end, its up to the developer and no one elsee. |
|||
|
Xkeeper Took the board down in a blaze of glory, only to reveal how truly moronical ||bass is. Since: 11-17-05 From: Henderson, Nevada Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| I have a great idea! How about we release both, so that the people who love source code get it and the people who want to learn more about how a ROM works in the human language can still understand it? | |||
|
MathOnNapkins 1100 In SPC700 HELL Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by GavinOriginally posted by BGNG Fucking ditto. It's bad enough doing all that hard work myself to document something and implement it. I don't want to make someone else waste time on stuff that took me a long time to do/figure out. BGNG, you have so far failed to state an example of anything extremely negative that would result from releasing source. We have the following things I'd like to respond to: 1. A person who has documentation and source code will look at it and say "Hmm. Okay. Now I know how it works" and walk away. So they leave the scene because of this? They stop programming altogether? I'm confused as to what you meant here. If someone just walks away then they weren't that dedicated anyway so who cares? 2. Source code cannot talk, but people can. That's what IRC/AIM/MSN/etc is for. Source code does talk, btw. It speaks volumes more than documentation. 3. Documentation on level editing, for example, means the hacking is already completed. For an experienced coder, yes. But for someone who is learning, definitely not so. If you know the machine code for your target console, but suck at Java or C++, etc, implementation can be a bitch. By giving working examples of how to implement certain types of editing you are both education them as romhackers and as programmers, should they take the time to look the code over. I strongly believe that keeping source closed hampers other hackers from learning how to do what they want to do. Again, the "wheel" is the documentation, not the source code. Think of it like a car... Okay back up. Forget about similes and metaphors. Take a program like Lunar Magic, or the Snes9x GSD build, or even Temporal Flux. Now tell me with a straight face that it would be easy to build a replica of such a program given sufficient documentation. I'll be waiting. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - ROM Hacking - The Open-Source Exception |
| |
