Time Nick Message 12:27 ireallyhateirc Regarding SSCSMs, is there going to be some sort of licensing detection/handling mechanism? For example I'd expect that servers hosted and announced through official Luanti channels should be under a free/libre license just like mods on ContentDB have such requirement. 12:27 ireallyhateirc I mean the SSCSMs should be at least 13:40 stephan48 SSCSMs? 13:41 ireallyhateirc Server-Sent Client-Side Mods 14:03 sfan5 there are no plans and I doubt your idea has any majority 14:31 ireallyhateirc sfan5, then I'd expect at least the license agreement to be displayed before connecting, because otherwise server owners could put any license terms there 14:31 ireallyhateirc there needs to be some transparency 14:32 sfan5 the license agreement of what? 14:32 ireallyhateirc client-side mods? 14:33 sfan5 where would that come from? 14:33 sfan5 the client does not care about the license of images, sound or text either and we're not going to start now just because it's code 14:33 ireallyhateirc unless I'm misunderstanding something, with SSCSMs the server will be able to send mods to a remote client. Am I mistaken? 14:34 sfan5 no that's correct as far as the theory goes 14:35 sfan5 now we could of course force the server to provide a non-empty license agreement to display 14:35 sfan5 I estimate it would be equivalent to "dont care lol" for most servers 14:36 ireallyhateirc from a legal point of view if you don't provide a license it's "All rights reserved" by default which means you can't even play. 14:36 ireallyhateirc now we could of course force the server to provide a non-empty license agreement to display 14:36 ireallyhateirc yeah please do so 14:37 sfan5 this is evidently wrong because I don't remember unuspecting web users being sued for daring to look at a web page 14:38 ireallyhateirc Just because random websites prefer to be legally ambiguous doesn't mean we should make it a standard for Luanti? 14:38 celeron55 there's obviously an implied license that allows the user to run the code if the server sends code to the client using a protocol that's sole purpose is to provide the client code to run 14:39 celeron55 a protocol whose* 14:39 celeron55 if some legal system thinks otherwise that would be very funny 14:52 ireallyhateirc I don't really like the idea of running legally ambiguous software with zero support for such a basic thing as checking the license. If someone implemented the feature, would it be rejected? 14:54 sfan5 considering luanti doesn't have a plugin api (like e.g. browsers do) i think the chance exists 14:54 sfan5 it would certainly not be the default 14:56 ireallyhateirc the bare minimum I expect is that when a CSM is sent all its files get sent too (source code with license headers, READMEs, license files) 14:57 ireallyhateirc then I could at least read the licenses manually and block execution until I think the CSM is good 14:58 dzho yeah javascript just YOLOing code every which way has really played havoc with the widespread Berne convention default-to-on copyright restriction regime and no one has ever really properly caught up 14:59 dzho watching the cat-and-mouse game between Youtube and NewTube is a great demonstration of this 15:02 ireallyhateirc Just to be clear, I'm not against people making and playing on proprietary servers. But I personally don't want to be exposed to "you become Bill Gates' towelboy" license terms by simply pressing the "connect" button 15:10 ireallyhateirc So there either needs to be licensing transparency or a way to block non-local SSCSMs 15:12 ireallyhateirc btw stripping licensing info from CC BY-SA licensed media and sending them to client could possibly be considered violating the license? 15:15 sfan5 possibly 15:15 sfan5 MTG might have to ship an ingame command that replays the license file it has 15:19 Desour SPDX license headers could be easily read from sent SSCSM script files. I wouldn't be against adding a setting to warn if a server sends a script with non-free license. after all, one of our values is that we really like free software 15:19 Krock ireallyhateirc: most websites don't send the license along with the image, either. The media is used for displaying only. If you wanted to alter or distribute the file, you'd then have to get the license. 15:19 Desour and for media, we might actually consider also sending licensing information 15:20 Krock such information could be added to the EXIF fields but those are generally trimmed by optipng/pngcrush 15:22 sfan5 well it would normally be the responsibility of the website to reproduce the license information 15:27 Desour hmm, another issue is, if a mod would send a media file with dynamic media, or send code at runtime, it could circumvent a check 15:31 [ there should also be a way to modify SSCSMs otherwise freedom 1 cannot be exercised 15:38 sfan5 that poses a cheating risk so I guess we will have to prevent foss-licensed SSCSMs 15:38 Desour [: (<- ahhh, now I understand your name, it's a smiley now!) the standard luanti client will not include a way to modify sscsms before running them, and it will also not allow the player to add client provided SSCSMs. this is just to prevent easy cheating. recompiling luanti and changing anything is of course allowed, but server owners are also allowed to ban you, and we're allowed to disallow posts on the forums that promote cheat software 15:39 MTDiscord SSCSM licensing considerations are low-priority 15:39 MTDiscord as is the ability to exercise freedom 1 15:40 Desour freedom 1 says you can change the software. servers requiring you to run their code unmodified does not violate this 15:40 MTDiscord the realistic path for the latter will still be "ask the server owner for the sources" 15:41 MTDiscord if anything SSCSM will be an improvement over the status quo tbh because with them, you'll at least (if you're tech savy) be able to see part of the sources, when otherwise everything would be on the server 15:42 [ I expect servers to start doing cryptomining via SSCSMs 15:43 MTDiscord finally infinite money glitch in luanti 15:43 Desour @luatic: I would like to have a feature to store downloaded sscsm scripts to disks, because why not. 15:44 Desour [: if a server takes much CPU resources, it must mean the mod is complex and hence good! x) 15:48 [MatrxMT] store it to disk? It should already live in cache 15:48 [MatrxMT] I suppose you mean first-class support, not fishing it out of the waste-paper basket 15:53 Desour it's only in the cache if we use media download, and set the cache flag. and yes, I mean store it in such a way that the directory structure is kept :) 15:54 [MatrxMT] I would imagine this hypothetical download code would use caching, and media already does it so... 15:55 [MatrxMT] Anyway it's quite intriguing what you can find in your media cache sometimes 15:55 [MatrxMT] Easter eggs, or just stuff you don't know about from other means. 15:58 Desour obligatory mention of this copyright nightmare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRubE_ZrSEw 16:00 [MatrxMT] sam's entire life flashing before sam's eyes 16:03 ROllerozxa what a silly video 16:04 ROllerozxa split the video up and upload each part as a short and you will become a media empire 16:05 ROllerozxa 2 hours of random imagery and funny sound effects, very stimulating 16:06 ireallyhateirc that poses a cheating risk so I guess we will have to prevent foss-licensed SSCSMs 16:07 ireallyhateirc I hope that's just a joke. Security by obscurity doesn't work anyway 16:07 ireallyhateirc see any FPS game 16:07 sfan5 i guess we shouldn't try at all then 16:10 [MatrxMT] youtube music even identifies two songs... 16:13 Desour btw. if you need a sound for your alarm clock: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRubE_ZrSEw&t=394s 16:14 sfan5 can someone check if the homedecor(?) fire alarm is in there 16:17 ireallyhateirc Desour, thanks for considering my proposal btw, would be nice if that was a compile-time setting too so distributions can easily enable it (unless you make it the default) 16:18 Desour ireallyhateirc: which proposal do you mean (I lost track)? 16:18 ireallyhateirc SPDX license headers could be easily read from sent SSCSM script files. I wouldn't be against adding a setting to warn if a server sends a script with non-free license. after all, one of our values is that we really like free software 16:18 Desour ah I see 16:19 Desour distros could also easily patch defaultsettings.cpp and settingtypes.txt 16:19 Desour (or we just enable it by default) 16:20 ireallyhateirc whatever works as long as I'm not forced to learn C++ and fork the game (engine) to patch it 16:20 sfan5 should distros enable csm license enforcement by default they are essentially shipping a broken client 16:21 sfan5 (as games will increasingly rely on it) 16:27 ireallyhateirc sfan5, that's up to the distros to handle the smell. But AFAIK Desour proposed only license warning and not a complete blacklist. 16:27 ireallyhateirc a license warning doesn't break gameplay or prevent people from playing on proprietary servers, it just notifies them 16:28 ireallyhateirc you can leave the setting disabled by default but GNU FSDG distributions will enable it and ship a "broken" client