Just a rant on sim-crashing guns

Complain to Lindens for Less Buggy Client Software in the first place and quit making the whineass statements about how something in their crashing program is illegal.

I believe that it was irresponsible of me to release said weapon, however I don't believe I can be held accountable for its misuse. Consider... Smith and Wesson creates guns. People buy guns. Sometimes, people shoot other people with those guns. However, Smith and Wesson make sure that every customer knows that the gun is lethal, and they cannot be held responsible.

Me thinks you sound like a griefer. Even if you're fighting griefers, all this does is piss them off and cause more grief, as well as make you a griefer at the same time.

crashing a sim is techincaly a TOS violation, so is writing a weapon that does so. See Section 5.1

I've put in bold the applicable stuff.

... The gun does not break any of these rules either....

... The plan was to lag and piss people off and appeal to griefers and to tempt idiots to crash sims and to kill / push everyone within an ungodly range. ...

Also, just about anything can be used to detrimentally interfere with systems. ...

This debate is very similar to the typical debates on IT security. Is it good or bad to release exploits? Are you malicious if you release something or just when you use it?

Personally I am on the camp that supports releasing most exploits. Releasing them has always lead to better solutions. Especially if the used technique is easily reproducable. I'm pretty sure the author was well aware that the original idea was not spectacular enough for it to be totally unique. Hence whether he released it publicly or not does not matter in the long run as it would be used anyway. I'm only against releasing code that is too advanced and unique.

Even more it wasn't an exploit per se, its potential power exceeded the limits of what a sim could bear. You're caught speeding, do you send the ticket to Ferrari, Porsche, ...? No you don't. Sure they sold you a car that was able to pass the speed limit but you bought it knowing that. A serial killer mows down his victims with a professional high power chainsaw. Are you going to sue the manufacterer for selling it? There are thousands of examples.

Punishing those that create instead of those that use exploits has never solved anything. It pushes the creators to go underground and that's exactly where the griefers love to be too. As an end result you see as much grief but it's tons harder to understand it and get rid of it.

This debate is very similar to the typical debates on IT security. Is it good or bad to release exploits? Are you malicious if you release something or just when you use it?

Personally I am on the camp that supports releasing most exploits. Releasing them has always lead to better solutions. Especially if the used technique is easily reproducable. I'm pretty sure the author was well aware that the original idea was not spectacular enough for it to be totally unique. Hence whether he released it publicly or not does not matter in the long run as it would be used anyway. I'm only against releasing code that is too advanced and unique.

Punishing those that create instead of those that use exploits has never solved anything.

Speeding while illegal doesn't do any financial harm. A car has other uses besides speeding. A chainsaw has other users besides mowing down victims. A sim crashing gun has one use. While in RL you have a Constitional right to own a gun, in SL you don't. In RL if you owned a nuclear weapon they would arrest you faster then you could open your front door (they would kick it in); and if you flinched they would shoot you. A sim crashing gun isn't on par with typical guns, it's in the nuclear class.

Dianne, your methods are bit harsh. Why couldn't this thread just die a quiet death?... I consider this topic complete

In RL if you owned a nuclear weapon they would arrest you faster then you could open your front door (they would kick it in); and if you flinched they would shoot you. A sim crashing gun isn't on par with typical guns, it's in the nuclear class.

Call me wierd, but I prefer Melee weapons over guns. I've just never liked guns. Takes all the fun out of getting in close to someone. The current incarnatin of the LCK saber I've designed has the ability to deflect incoming projectiles, so it gives some amount of defense, though it requires good timing on the wielder's part to be effective.

I've been lag gunned before and it really is annoying to me. The goal of my LCK defensive method is to send the offending projectile right back at the person who sent it. It does so, right now, about 30% of the time.

I love weapons crafted with elegance and usability in mind, and If I find a weapon to not be "Sim safe" I won't use it. If one of my weapns is as such, I continue to work on it until it is.

Currently I'm working on the Soul Reaver. A little fan project.

But I'm woolgathering, I apologize.

I'm sorry, Ghordon. I like you. You're a good guy, but sadly, I have to say that if a person knowingly creates a weapon that has the ability to bring a sim to a crashing halt, and then release it, they should be held equally accountable as the griefers that use it. Regardless of your original intent, you should not have released this weapon, as I'm sure LL has had quite a few headaches from its use.

I know my own weapons can be used to grief. They have quite a bit of push to them, but never something quite to the point of dropping a sim. No one has ever even been ghosted by my work as far as I know. It's just...As weapon developers, there's just a line that should not be crossed.

I'm glad you've decided to take it down. That's a good thing, but unfortunatly, like you stated, the damage has been done and the weapon is out in the wild. I hope that it doesn't come back to bite anyone in the rear.