The End

[LN2]

And what happens when that false authority is questioned? You're helpless to do anything but lash out with juvenile insults and hilarious conspiracy theories. It's simultaneously pathetic and entrancing to watch.

If all you did was bring it to Barry's attention etc. that's one thing. However, you didn't question the "authority". You undermined it. There is a very distinct difference there you just don't understand.

Alphamame as is was where 99.9+% of anyone even considering cheating intentionally wouldn't. Ok, so there might be one hacker out there that would break the security etc. and then make a bunch of fake inps for games they can't play for crap even. However, when you break it then publicly release or make some conversion utility that then just about anyone can easily cheat...that's a different matter. It's no longer 0.1% or less that could fake an inp...but now anyone that wants to do it could.

I love the mentality of hackers like you. You are the type of person that breaks into someone's house and robs them of possessions and money then tells them that was a lesson that they need better door locks and an alarm system. Gimme a break.

When I want "friendly competition", I look somewhere friendly, and when I want to post scores for the hell of it, I've got my own page for that already. I don't like your attitudes. Coincidentally, that's also why I did the INP hack. You only brought it on yourselves.

This place is friendly. It's a community. In a community the players generally respect each other and their ability to play games well. When someone like you shows disrespect toward Barry and the community by undermining it the way you did, then what kind of attitude do you really expect to see from us?

Of course among a large group there will always be a few that aren't as friendly etc. so what? Are you using that 1 or 2 people to misrepresent what MARP is all about? Even if you did...why does that motivate you to attack the group?

If you had discovered how easy it was to break alphamame and the encryption then you could have just e-mailed Barry about it....as a warning that it's not that secure so if he wants more security for alphamame then he should use a different encryption code or technique in doing things...and as a hacker you could likely even provide a few pointers to assist if Barry was interested in doing that.

However, you didn't do that at all.

As far as the open source license agreement with MAME etc., that's all true to an extent. Barry fulfilled that just fine by having all of the source available for alphamame except for the encryption part. The encryption part is NOT part of the mame project...so doesn't fall under that license.

[MDenham]

I have *an* idea for a way to make the AlphaMAME concept somewhat more secure (we're not trying to make this totally un-crackable, that'd require a fast RSA library and 256bit or longer keys, which we don't have at present), though I doubt anyone cares at this point, considering what this asshole has done...

...but let's just say that implementing this idea would only start working after someone had submitted one insecure .inp file to begin with.

[LN2]

I'm not all that familiar with different encryption methods but I'm guessing one of the reasons Barry used what he did in alphamame was because it has a lower CPU overhead than other encryption methods. You don't want to use some higher method that ends up slowing down alphamame by 25+%.

It needs to be something simple to keep the CPU overhead of encrypting the data as you play doesn't slow down your game.

[***PL***]

Back when m35 was released, I asked Nicola to address a potential cheating problem we had identified...

Response: I won't fix it and don't give a shit what you say

Status: Cheat still exists today and his position remains the same

Solution: Create a derivative TOURNAMENT version to minimize the most basic cheats since MAMEDEV is completely irresponsible and lacking in this regard

That is why Barry tackled this project. Why not do something PRODUCTIVE instead of DESTRUCTIVE???

[Haze]

Mame always has a potential cheating problem, its an open source project. As far as I know yes Barrys builds with no source for the encryption _are_ in violation of the license, but personally I don't mind turning a blind eye to it in this case because his reasons and intentions are clearly good, he also gives us any other changes he makes that could help drivers etc., I don't know what Nicola thinks these days but thats my take on it and its probably the only situation in which I don't mind.

In some ways alphamame inps were a bit annoying, they were useless for fixing / debugging drivers drivers although they did appear to stop cheating.

[LN2]

Haze, I don't see it as a violation of the license...although I would need to read that one carefully...if like the others(which I'm sure it is) then Barry only needed to open source the rest of alphamame...which he did.

There are many cases of open source projects where something new was added to it and kept out of the open source. For example if someone made a different MAME with a totally different front end GUI on it, I think as long as the project was constructed where you could build that open source without needing the front end GUI code then that code doesn't have to be included in that open source. Barry's open source could build a workable MAME....that just lacks the encryption. Encryption of the inp isn't part of the MAME project. If it was then you could make the case it falls under the license so would have to be included in the open source.

It's likely one reason the official MAME project was never interested in adding anything like that...cuz it would be open sourced and made moot anyway.

At least that's how I see it.

Are you going to state all that use some open source for handling zip archives in their applications or adding a mp3 player etc. have to open source the entire project? Of course not...

[INNUENDO]

Let me try understand. without ALPHAMAME, can I use non-alphamame emulators to upload again??

Let me know... I´m very confused...

[Chad]

well if you want to help preserve playbackability for the future try to use only ONE version. barry's new wolfmame seems like THE version to use, and it will have many of the cool features of alphamame along with the "PLUS" mame version stuff.

[LordGaz]

Here's an interesting article about digital home video copy protection, especially the bit about Protecting Digital Content.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_9 ... -2002.html

I thought of this thread while I was reading it.

Gaz

[Stig]

"Use in non-commercial products is allowed, andindeed encouraged. If you use portions of the MAME source code in your program, however, you must make the full source code freely available as well."

This is an exact paste from the mame.txt file. Good to see that current maintainer is ok with it. But as he said, it in violation of the license.

What Nicola Salmoria thinks will have to be checked ofcourse, when / if he comes back as a maintainer. But i do believe he is the coordinator still, but might be wrong on this.

Stig Remnes
Warblade Development Team
(http://www.warblade.as)

[LN2]

"Use in non-commercial products is allowed, andindeed encouraged. If you use portions of the MAME source code in your program, however, you must make the full source code freely available as well."

it's interesting you quote this line...cuz it's 1 sentence many have issues with.

if you make a program that is 99% yours and has some tiny aspect from the mame source in it then you are supposed to have your entire project open sourced?!?!?

The problem is "portions" and "program" are very vague. If you are making your own variety of MAME or some game emulator using game CPU core(s) from MAME I can understand the license but if your "program" isn't MAME related at all, just giving credit to using the device i/o or screenshot capture code etc. from the MAME source should be good enough.

For example, if you even just use code from the MAME source for reading and handling .zip archives within your "program", giving MAME credit for that should be good enough without having to open source the entire project...whatever it is. If you were making your own game and used device controller code or other i/o code from the MAME project or Quake etc. but that's it...nothing else isn't just giving proper credit for that small aspect good enough?

I'd bet many commercial games even use some snippets or use open source code as a good example of how to do this or that...where "portions" of the code are used.

There is obviously some line drawn somewhere. The question is where is that line.

The other aspect is if you make some module/add-on for MAME...like Bary's encryption stuff for alphamame... I don't think under the license he has to give that part of the source at all. Why?

...cuz it's an optional thing. As long as the project can compile and run without it then it's fine. Yes, he would have to open source the rest of the project since it's MAME....but shouldn't be required to open source a module/add-on thing IMHO.

The module is almost like a separate project that just plugs in to the MAME project. Again some lines for this must exists...but where are they drawn?

[QRS]

Actually I don´t think that Nicola cares at all. The only ones that cares (and destroys good ideas like Barrys Alphamame) is those that (in some weird way) tries to brownnose Nicola.
It is up to the man in charge of that project or the mame dev to 'enforce the laws' not the 'public police'.

Haze is the main man now, so I respect his words. Right now he sets the rules or interprets them.

If Haze would say "No way I will allow that" I would accept that. It is his will. Same goes for Nicola.

But if someone just plays police and hacks things and then refers to the MAME licence? Frankly I don´t care about his opinions period.

[BBH]

"Use in non-commercial products is allowed, andindeed encouraged. If you use portions of the MAME source code in your program, however, you must make the full source code freely available as well."

This is an exact paste from the mame.txt file. Good to see that current maintainer is ok with it. But as he said, it in violation of the license.

What Nicola Salmoria thinks will have to be checked ofcourse, when / if he comes back as a maintainer. But i do believe he is the coordinator still, but might be wrong on this.

Stig Remnes
Warblade Development Team
(http://www.warblade.as)

Wow Stig, you came back just to say that?

viewtopic.php?t=3327

ahhhh, memories...

[LN2]

QRS, yeah, if I felt it was a gray area I definitely would consult with one of the project leaders I was using "portions" of the source from and ask them what they felt was appropriate.

I think the license wording though is where there is a very large gray area so there are often issues among other developers and hackers and users etc. of what falls under the full open source license and what doesn't.

[tar]

THE END
I like dos alphamame 70.
I still use it.
Praiseworthy work Mahlemiut