|
|
| Author |
Message |
nenolod
Idler
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 335
Location: A box!
|
 Posted: Nov 05, 2004 7:31pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| magpie wrote: | | nenolod wrote: | | So now it's moral to support censorship? Do you just believe everything you hear? Or is it that you just say this in order to defend your software? Because those are two very different things. Clarify. Also, please be sure to explain your "morals" because if you way morals over ethics, you cheating your userbase and yourself. |
If it's a private network the owners are perfectly within their rights to censor things. Don't like it? Use another net. Also, there are some things I think should be sensored - use your imagination, I'm sure you can think of things young children shouldn't be exposed to.
| nenolod wrote: | | Actually, kill can be removed from Shadow entirely, as any other command. Even the core ones. All you have to do is remove the module. I know of a few networks in Japan which have done just that. |
Ok....you missed the point though.
| nenolod wrote: | | At the time of this writing, there is no way you can intercept messages in ShadowIRCd, either via Shadow itself or any module. |
Rubbish. It can be modified to do so, which was Codemastr's point.
| nenolod wrote: | | 1) Why must you compare IRC to real life? They are two different things. |
Doesn't mean that young children using IRC shouldn't be protected. I'm not saying I condone censorship on all networks, but on ones specifically designed for a certain audience, it often has a valid use.
| nenolod wrote: | | 3) Not even Unreal's spamfilter can prevent sexual harassment from occuring, so what does that have to with the topic on hand? |
No filtering system is 100% accurate or effective. |
My bloody point is that this thread has devolved into a Shadow vs Unreal thread... part of which was my doing when I decided to reply to someone who wanted *this* to occur. The reason *I* chose to respond to codemastr in such a manner was because he was helping fuel the fire that I started when someone tried to troll this discussion into a Unreal vs Shadow debate. Being involved with both Unreal networks and Shadow networks, they both have their own advantages... it depends on what direction a network wishes to go in. Shadow's simbans are not intended to compete with Unreal's spamfilter. That's the point I was originally intending to *make*. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
zeke
Idler
Joined: 04 Oct 2003
Posts: 324
|
| Posted: Nov 05, 2004 8:21pm Post subject: |
|
|
*gets out his list of people he does/doesn't respect...*
*puts nenolod's respectability rating back up some* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1122
|
| Posted: Nov 05, 2004 8:47pm Post subject: |
|
|
lol nenolod .. make didn't work .. try gmake  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nenolod
Idler
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 335
Location: A box!
|
| Posted: Nov 05, 2004 9:05pm Post subject: |
|
|
| katsklaw wrote: | | lol nenolod .. make didn't work .. try gmake |
Like configure says, use gmake if make doesn't work.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nenolod
Idler
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 335
Location: A box!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
codemastr
Idler
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 353
|
| Posted: Nov 05, 2004 10:11pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | So now it's moral to support censorship? |
It is moral and ethical to want to promote a common level of decency in a private chat network. Do keep in mind here, that the concept of "private" is key here.
| Quote: | | Do you just believe everything you hear? |
I have no idea what this statement has to do with anything.
| Quote: | | Or is it that you just say this in order to defend your software? |
I think the size of Unreal's userbase speaks for itself.
| Quote: | | Because those are two very different things. |
Indeed, unfortunately, neither is relevant.
| Quote: | | Also, please be sure to explain your "morals" because if you way morals over ethics, you cheating your userbase and yourself. |
You misunderstood completely. I did not in anyway imply that I was imposing my morals on Unreal users. On the contrary, Unreal allows a network to decide, individually, what the level of ethicality will be for that network. My point was thus, if UserA runs a server that is designed for use by those in the range of ages 8-12, they have a right, and frankly, a responsibility, to ensure that the environment they provide to these children is both clean and appropriate. Unreal provides them with the tools necessary to accomplish this goal.
| Quote: | | Actually, kill can be removed from Shadow entirely |
Sure it "can" be. And it can in Unreal as well. However, as you later mention with hooks to intercept messages, you say you have no intention of providing potentially abusive tools. Well what you are stating with kill is, Shadow will give you the gun, however, you can choose not to pull the trigger. My point is simply, many things *can* be abusive. This mere fact alone should not be reason enough to halt its pursuance.
| Quote: | | Using this line: reject privmsg matching :*irc.* would block the message instead. |
In that case, other than the fact that you *say* it isn't for blocking spam, it seems exactly the same as Unreal's spamfilter. The fact that you say it wasn't your intention doesn't mean that it somehow prevents this "abuse," as you call it. Just because you say "it's for stopping drones" does not mean it cannot be used to stop spam. So saying Unreal's is abusive, and yours is not is false.
| Quote: |
Then do you mind explaining how angrywolf's spy module works? Many of us would like to know. |
First of all, if "many of us," would like to know, I'm wondering why you are the first person to ever ask me how it works. But anyway, your statement once again proves your ignorance with Unreal's spamfilter. I never said Unreal does not provide something that could potentially be abused. I said the spamfilter provides no such method. Allow me to quote you, "Unreal's spamfilter may look nice on the outside, but the way it works allows very abusive modules to be written." You state that spamfilter allows modules to be written for abuse. In fact, Angrywolf's module has nothing to do with spamfilter. In fact, had you done your homework, you would have found that the m_spy module existed long before spamfilter did. So yes, Unreal does provide a tool that could potentially allow for abuse. But let me make a comparison. A cutlery produces millions of knives each year. The majority of these knives are simply used to cut food; however, there are a few that will be used to murder people. Does this mean we should stop using knives? I don't think so. The fact that a few people use an instrument, that was designed for a legitimate purpose, have decided to use it for an illegitimate purpose does not make the instrument intrinsically evil. It makes those people evil. The hook, HOOKTYPE_USERMSG, which is what Angrywolf's module used, can be used for unethical practices. However, it was not designed for such things. You neglect all the "good" features it does. For example, many people get tired of color codes, this hook allows modules to create a usermode to allow users to have color codes stripped from messages they receive (my NoColorUmode module), it allows users to disable private messages (Syzop's privdeaf module), it allows a module to let users turn of DCC receiving (Angrywolf's noctcp), and it allowed Angrywolf to implement the precursor to spamfilter, adwords, among many other things. So I don't think the fact that someone *can* abuse it is reason enough to remove it. The fact is, it serves many more legitimate purposes than illegitimate purposes. Plus, bad people will tend to do bad things. Going back to the cutlery example, if the cutlery did stop producing knives, then the murderer would simply decide to kill his victim with a baseball bat, perhaps another item that should be banned, and if that were banned, he might decide to simply use a rock. So if someone wants to create a feature to log user's messages, they will manage to do it, even without the hook. You may doubt this, but it is true, and I have proof. The old +I mode in Unreal. We removed it because we realized that the majority of its uses were unethical. It is virtually impossible for a module to add such a feature to Unreal (no hooks are provided that would provide its function). So what did the coders do? They created a .patch file that modified Unreal to add the functionality they needed.
| Quote: | | Why must you compare IRC to real life? They are two different things. |
You're right, they are vastly different. However, the idea of "public space" and "private space" applies to both, a concept you seemed to have missed again.
| Quote: | | Not even Unreal's spamfilter can prevent sexual harassment from occuring, so what does that have to with the topic on hand? |
You're absolutely right, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Good thing that wasn't what I was talking about! If that's how you read my comments, you completely and totally missed my point. My point is, you would most certainly infringe on my "freedom of speech" in that instance. Once again, I refer to that concept of "private space," which you seem to have glossed over again. When I am in your private home, my freedom of speech is subordinate to your rights as the owner of that house. You set the rules, and if I do not follow the rules, you tell me to leave. You would not simply say I am expressing my "freedom of speech." My point had nothing to do with sexual harassment. The words I used in the insult were irrelevant, you looked at a very minor portion of my comment and ignored the meaning of the whole. But if you insist, I'll use a better example. I walk into your house, uninvited, and walk up to your 5 year old son. I begin shouting every obscenity I can imagine at him. Would you leave me be, or would you remove me from your home? I think, and hope, you would go with the latter. To state my point once again, I was in your home, I must play by your rules.
I'd strongly suggest you reread my post. You seem more intent on trying to prove me wrong than actually responding to what I said. You clearly misunderstood every single point I've made. Since I do not want to see this decend into an IRCd war debate, this is most likely the last thing I'll say. I simply do not appreciate it when the programmer of another IRCd basically insults my work. I have never said anything bad about ShadowIRCd, in fact, I've said many good things about it. Then, I come here, and when someone states that your feature seems similar to Unreal's spamfilter, I find that you quickly jump in to say that spamfilter is abusive. I personally find such comments rude and uncalled for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nenolod
Idler
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 335
Location: A box!
|
| Posted: Nov 05, 2004 10:24pm Post subject: |
|
|
| codemastr wrote: | | Quote: | | So now it's moral to support censorship? |
It is moral and ethical to want to promote a common level of decency in a private chat network. Do keep in mind here, that the concept of "private" is key here.
| Quote: | | Do you just believe everything you hear? |
I have no idea what this statement has to do with anything.
| Quote: | | Or is it that you just say this in order to defend your software? |
I think the size of Unreal's userbase speaks for itself.
| Quote: | | Because those are two very different things. |
Indeed, unfortunately, neither is relevant.
| Quote: | | Also, please be sure to explain your "morals" because if you way morals over ethics, you cheating your userbase and yourself. |
You misunderstood completely. I did not in anyway imply that I was imposing my morals on Unreal users. On the contrary, Unreal allows a network to decide, individually, what the level of ethicality will be for that network. My point was thus, if UserA runs a server that is designed for use by those in the range of ages 8-12, they have a right, and frankly, a responsibility, to ensure that the environment they provide to these children is both clean and appropriate. Unreal provides them with the tools necessary to accomplish this goal.
| Quote: | | Actually, kill can be removed from Shadow entirely |
Sure it "can" be. And it can in Unreal as well. However, as you later mention with hooks to intercept messages, you say you have no intention of providing potentially abusive tools. Well what you are stating with kill is, Shadow will give you the gun, however, you can choose not to pull the trigger. My point is simply, many things *can* be abusive. This mere fact alone should not be reason enough to halt its pursuance.
| Quote: | | Using this line: reject privmsg matching :*irc.* would block the message instead. |
In that case, other than the fact that you *say* it isn't for blocking spam, it seems exactly the same as Unreal's spamfilter. The fact that you say it wasn't your intention doesn't mean that it somehow prevents this "abuse," as you call it. Just because you say "it's for stopping drones" does not mean it cannot be used to stop spam. So saying Unreal's is abusive, and yours is not is false.
| Quote: |
Then do you mind explaining how angrywolf's spy module works? Many of us would like to know. |
First of all, if "many of us," would like to know, I'm wondering why you are the first person to ever ask me how it works. But anyway, your statement once again proves your ignorance with Unreal's spamfilter. I never said Unreal does not provide something that could potentially be abused. I said the spamfilter provides no such method. Allow me to quote you, "Unreal's spamfilter may look nice on the outside, but the way it works allows very abusive modules to be written." You state that spamfilter allows modules to be written for abuse. In fact, Angrywolf's module has nothing to do with spamfilter. In fact, had you done your homework, you would have found that the m_spy module existed long before spamfilter did. So yes, Unreal does provide a tool that could potentially allow for abuse. But let me make a comparison. A cutlery produces millions of knives each year. The majority of these knives are simply used to cut food; however, there are a few that will be used to murder people. Does this mean we should stop using knives? I don't think so. The fact that a few people use an instrument, that was designed for a legitimate purpose, have decided to use it for an illegitimate purpose does not make the instrument intrinsically evil. It makes those people evil. The hook, HOOKTYPE_USERMSG, which is what Angrywolf's module used, can be used for unethical practices. However, it was not designed for such things. You neglect all the "good" features it does. For example, many people get tired of color codes, this hook allows modules to create a usermode to allow users to have color codes stripped from messages they receive (my NoColorUmode module), it allows users to disable private messages (Syzop's privdeaf module), it allows a module to let users turn of DCC receiving (Angrywolf's noctcp), and it allowed Angrywolf to implement the precursor to spamfilter, adwords, among many other things. So I don't think the fact that someone *can* abuse it is reason enough to remove it. The fact is, it serves many more legitimate purposes than illegitimate purposes. Plus, bad people will tend to do bad things. Going back to the cutlery example, if the cutlery did stop producing knives, then the murderer would simply decide to kill his victim with a baseball bat, perhaps another item that should be banned, and if that were banned, he might decide to simply use a rock. So if someone wants to create a feature to log user's messages, they will manage to do it, even without the hook. You may doubt this, but it is true, and I have proof. The old +I mode in Unreal. We removed it because we realized that the majority of its uses were unethical. It is virtually impossible for a module to add such a feature to Unreal (no hooks are provided that would provide its function). So what did the coders do? They created a .patch file that modified Unreal to add the functionality they needed.
| Quote: | | Why must you compare IRC to real life? They are two different things. |
You're right, they are vastly different. However, the idea of "public space" and "private space" applies to both, a concept you seemed to have missed again.
| Quote: | | Not even Unreal's spamfilter can prevent sexual harassment from occuring, so what does that have to with the topic on hand? |
You're absolutely right, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Good thing that wasn't what I was talking about! If that's how you read my comments, you completely and totally missed my point. My point is, you would most certainly infringe on my "freedom of speech" in that instance. Once again, I refer to that concept of "private space," which you seem to have glossed over again. When I am in your private home, my freedom of speech is subordinate to your rights as the owner of that house. You set the rules, and if I do not follow the rules, you tell me to leave. You would not simply say I am expressing my "freedom of speech." My point had nothing to do with sexual harassment. The words I used in the insult were irrelevant, you looked at a very minor portion of my comment and ignored the meaning of the whole. But if you insist, I'll use a better example. I walk into your house, uninvited, and walk up to your 5 year old son. I begin shouting every obscenity I can imagine at him. Would you leave me be, or would you remove me from your home? I think, and hope, you would go with the latter. To state my point once again, I was in your home, I must play by your rules.
I'd strongly suggest you reread my post. You seem more intent on trying to prove me wrong than actually responding to what I said. You clearly misunderstood every single point I've made. Since I do not want to see this decend into an IRCd war debate, this is most likely the last thing I'll say. I simply do not appreciate it when the programmer of another IRCd basically insults my work. I have never said anything bad about ShadowIRCd, in fact, I've said many good things about it. Then, I come here, and when someone states that your feature seems similar to Unreal's spamfilter, I find that you quickly jump in to say that spamfilter is abusive. I personally find such comments rude and uncalled for. |
At the time that I wrote that post, I was not in a good mood, and under other circumstances it wouldn't have been written.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EqualSlashed_Brian
Lurker
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 222
Location: IRC
|
| Posted: Nov 07, 2004 1:23pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nenolod, most parents do not know why IRC is. What are you on about? Most kids find IRC on their own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1122
|
| Posted: Nov 07, 2004 1:58pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EqualSlashed_Brian wrote: | | nenolod, most parents do not know why IRC is. What are you on about? Most kids find IRC on their own. |
You theory is a bit flawed since I see just as many parents as I do kids on IRC. In fact most of the kids I see are nearly adults themselves. The youngest kid I know on IRC is 11 and he uses his dad's copy of mIRC.
Most parents aren't some clueless zombies that roam the planet in some mystical fashion. Most of the "tricks" that kids do that they think their parents are clueless about are the same tricks that the parents tried years before the kids were born. Just some a new name. Weed in 2004 was weed in 1964. Todays parents didn't have computers when they were kids, but they know more about how kids act than kids do.
Based solely on your short comment, EqualSlashed_Brian, It's appearent to me that you are a young person and/or not yet a parent yourself. As a parent I find your statement ignorant and unfounded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
codemastr
Idler
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 353
|
| Posted: Nov 08, 2004 1:45pm Post subject: |
|
|
katsklaw, perhaps your personal experience suggests otherwise, but based on the evidence, EqualSlashed_Brian is right. Why are there so many tools out there to monitor children's internet usage? It isn't because parents are up-to-date on what their kids are doing, it is because they don't know what they are doing so they let someone else handle it for them. I know of many parents who are completely clueless when it comes to computers. They know how to visit websites, check their email, and use Microsoft Word, other than that, they are lost. And, if you doubt this, just go ask the owner of a local computer training center how much he makes from giving lessons. So as far as I'm concerned, the evidence indicates that most parents, at least in the US, do not know anything about IRC. Just as a test, I asked both my parents what IRC was, neither of them knew. And my parents are not computer illiterate, my father has been working in the computer industry for many years, yet he had never heard of IRC.
But, you are right, most people on IRC are not 5 year olds, which makes sense, because 5 year olds can't read, let alone type! But there are many under 11, you just don't know where to look. IRC is being integrated into other things. For example, many games now use IRC for chatting during online gaming. I've also read that Sega Dreamcast had the ability to use an IRC server for chatting while playing online. Computer and video games are things that kids play. I know I got my first Nintendo system when I was 6 years old. My little cousin got a Nintendo 64 when he was 8. When games start integrating IRC, then you start to get more and more children. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1122
|
| Posted: Nov 08, 2004 7:30pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
1) Parents have no business introducing their kids to IRC. By doing so, the child is introduced to all sorts of predators and other garbage.
|
TV and video games don't? Just by letting kids leave the house can introduce "all sorts of predators and other garbage". Lets get real for a second. The home is an educational institution as is a school. What your kids learn is from what you teach them. Teach them good solid values of right and wrong and you won't have to worry as much when they see "garbage".
| codemastr wrote: |
Why are there so many tools out there to monitor children's internet usage? It isn't because parents are up-to-date on what their kids are doing, it is because they don't know what they are doing so they let someone else handle it for them. |
Ever heard of the Rating system? .. how about the V-Chip? monitoring systems because many parents are "clueless" to what their kids watch?? or how to operate a TV?? ..not exactly. Try more like babysitter. Cyber software is the same thing .. a babysitter.
| codemastr wrote: |
I know of many parents who are completely clueless when it comes to computers.
|
and I know many that aren't clueless, so why does that make me wrong and someone else right? Because you agree with them?
The truth is closer to that fact that both of us are exposed to different crowds. I mainly hang around clueful parents you clueless parents. Don't bother with producing statistics because I don't believe in them. Who cares if JoeBlow inc interviewed 5000 parents and asked if they knew what IRC was and they all said no? .. the next 5000 just might all say yes.
I can find 50 people that have no clue what a computer is .. I can find 50 that do. So is the statement that most people know what a computer is true or false? The answer is it's true is some areas and false in others.
I think you should give parents more credit than you are. I know that the parents I know, and I practice this too .. there is a saying that states: "Just because I didn't say anything .. doesn't mean I wasn't watching."
At about the age of 25 I had a talk with my mom about some things that I did as a kid ... I felt like I was confessing .. she smiled .. nodded and simply answered "I know".
Try it sometime, sit down with your parents 10 or 20 years after you moved out .. talk to them about something you did that you are positive they don't know about. You might find out that YOU are the "clueless one".
| codemastr wrote: |
So as far as I'm concerned, the evidence indicates that most parents, at least in the US, do not know anything about IRC.
|
Perhaps you can be so kind as to provide us with this so called "evidence" that is not based upon your opinion but an actual survey conducted and certified by 3rd parties on enough parents in the US to total 51% that they do not know what IRC is. That would be the only way I would believe any statistic.
nuf sed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
null
none
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 26
|
| Posted: Nov 09, 2004 2:21am Post subject: |
|
|
| The IRCd looks interesting.. looking forward to playing with it a bit more. *ignores silly argument* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Register
Log in
