[BadVista Advocate] A few thoughts on games

[Don Hensley]

No question will ever sound dumb to me. The only "dumb questions" are those 
that are never asked. 

"Artificial Sacristy" is a condition where something is actually easily and 
readily available, and so it's "dollar value" (a loose term I'm using broadly 
here) should be low.  Then you create an artificial barrier to people 
actually obtaining it, thereby making it's "dollar value" artificially high.

As in the air we breathe --we do not pay anyone for it because it is plentiful 
and readily available --a not scarce resource (I'm side stepping how clean 
the air may, or may not be, for now). 

But assume for a moment that I find a way to lock you in a room that I alone 
can control the air supply to... you would find the value of air to be any 
price I set it at... even though air is, if not for me having you locked in a 
room I control, still a free non scarce commodity.

That is what "Artificial Sacristy" means.

Today it is most apparent in the fact that any "thing" (music, movies, etc.), 
that can be copied in digital form, is no longer scarce at all. So the 
***AA's try to use DRM to create an artificial condition where some other 
thing is made scarce in order to make the actual thing have an artificially 
high value.

In this case it is the legal right to copy any digital work they "own".

You see the digital data (song, CD, etc.) is not scarce at all. Every person 
on the planet could have three copies of some digital thing, and it would not 
have diminished any ones copy of that thing.

So what happens is some people attempt to make the "right" to have a digital 
copy into a scarce commodity (lock you in their room), even though the 
commodity is not really scarce at all.

This is a artificial state, as it does not reflect reality at all --just as if 
I have you locked in a room I control the air to, it does not make air 
scarce, it makes your "right" to that air scarce. So you will perceive the 
value of air as being high, when the reality is it is my artificial control 
of your access to air that is of high value, not the actual air.

It is a huge trick being used to make people see things as the makers of 
artificial barriers would have you see them --not as the reality is. They 
determine what you perceive as "reality" by virtue of the artificial barriers 
they have erected.

Thomas Jefferson put it best:

He hated monopoly and was determined that the patent process shouldn't serve 
it. The peculiar character of an idea, said Jefferson, is that 

... no one possesses the less because everyone possesses the whole of it. He 
who receives an idea from me receives [it] without lessening [me], as he who 
lights his [candle] at mine receives light without darkening me.

I riped that from JEFFERSON AND TECHNOLOGY 
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi792.htm

Which you might enjoy reading.

If I didn't quite get your question answered in a way that makes sense to you, 
or if you have other questions, do not hesitate to ask more, I will do my 
best to help you at least understand the point of this, even if you 
ultimately come to a different conclusion about these issues.

Learning is important, and the future will be lived by you and all young 
people, not me, or my generation --we are about to pass from the stage, which 
is as it should be. But as Jefferson pointed out; ideas are all one can truly 
give without diminishing themselves. So while I live I intend to try to share 
what ideas I may have, or that I have learned from others. 

My only goal is to make every ones candle help bring more light to the room we 
all live in.

Don.
****************************************
 On Friday 04 May 2007 07:34 am, Sunnz wrote:
Sorry if this sounds real dumb...

But what do you mean by "artificial sacristy"?

I am a non-native English speaker and just past my teens... so yea...

2007/5/4, Don Hensley <Don at donhensley.com>:
> Actually you have a good point, but you are coming at the 'Games' problem
> from a different view point then mine.
>
> You see that's what I said in #1 : closed source.
>
> Inherently I simply do not believe in artificial sacristy as being a valid
> business model. And if the only way for any business to make money is by
> creating artificial sacristy, then their business model should die. For me
> it is that simple.
>
> Yes I am aware that what I just said will be heard by some as "You are
> taking the food out of my mouth!". What I'm really saying is find a
> different business model.
>
> It is actually very friendly and well meant advice. Much as I would have
> given to the local Stage Coach line in the old west, as I saw the train
> coming closer inch by inch and mile by mile.
>
> History is simply chock full of similar examples --and littered with dead
> business models, that today we laugh about and say "wow were they ever
> foolish. They could have turned their company from a hay storage loft into
> a wood storage yard, to feed those steam engines on the trains." and each
> consecutive example down the line : Wood Yard into diesel storage facility,
> etc, etc.
>
> The notion of using a general purpose, user owned, device, i.e., the
> computer as a horribly restricted  controlled by some other entity, i.e.,
> Microsoft, is not going to continue to be a valid business model for it
> relies on conditions that are rapidly fading into the past.
>
> The first rule people learn, as part of life, is that what you totally
> control, you own. Or to put it more concisely: What you can destroy with
> impunity, you own.
>
> The lesson that is emerging now is one of people discovering they are
> empowered to destroy that which once they could not.
>
> The prime example today would be Digg. It will be interesting to see how
> Digg manages to survive. Yes I'm pleased to see they gave up and said they
> would stop trying to take down the number. All that did was leave them at
> the TOTAL mercy of the AACS-LA, who can now sue them out of existence.
>
> No I don't like that thought either, but that is the reality of the DMCA.
> See this article by the EFF:
> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005229.php
>
> So yes the users discovered power --the company that owns Digg simply
> realized that it was over either way, users would destroy it, or the
> AACS-LA would destroy it if it went along with the users.
>
> It is going to be interesting to see how this works out. The only thing
> that may save Digg now is if the AACS-LA wises up enough to not want any
> more user revolt in areas that would actually seriously hurt them (the
> AACS-LA).
>
> You see that is what we are living through right now. A revolution. If the
> human race wins, then business based on artificial scarcity will lose. If
> the business that rely on artificial sacristy win, then the rest of us
> become slaves.
>
> You might wish to read this: The Grand Unified Theory On The Economics Of
> Free http://techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939.shtml
>
> It would help to read the entire series.
>
> So that is where I come from, goodbye to artificial sacristy, hello to a
> better world.
>
> For the first time in all of human history, we stand at the door to a
> society of plenty.
>
> This is a brand new thing for us, it will come unevenly, and in many ways
> painfully, at first only a few will understand the change. I do not expect
> to live long enough to see the society of plenty bloom.
>
> But I damn well intend to do my best to insure that it is not still born.
> And if that means some people having to learn a new business model, well
> them's the breaks.
>
> No one can say I (and others) are not trying to warn them. They can save
> themselves if they want.
>
> Yes this IS a war. It is being fought every day all around the globe. Be
> aware of it, think about which world you would like to live in --artificial
> sacristy or a society of plenty.
>
> And you probably thought the issue of games was important to me or people
> like me, because of what I wrote about them.
>
> Actually it's just a way to get people to start thinking about some rather
> more important stuff.
>
> Thanks for reading my little ramble. See what happens when you get an old
> man started...
>
> Don.
>  *******************************
>  On Friday 04 May 2007 01:56 am, Sunnz wrote:
> Another tricky thing to develop games on Linux is GPL.
>
> Ok, I don't know that much about the underlying workings of GNU, so I
> am on the assumption that a lot of programming API and libraries on
> Linux are licensed under GPL, and if you make use of the API and libs,
> your game would be a derivative software and have to license under
> GPL.
>
> The implication of GPL is that you are free to distribute the
> software, binary and/or source code... companies who have invest large
> sum of money wouldn't want to do this, perhaps it is ok to open source
> the code, but they certainly want people to pay for each copy.
>
> And if they somehow develop their game without the use of GPL'd libs,
> there would be a lot of wheel re-invention going on, therefore
> increase cost for the unfortunate, minority of their target.
>
> Please correct any mistakes, I am basing this on assumptions about GNU
>  libs...
>
> 2007/5/4, Lam YongXian <news at adolflam.com>:
> > > Most of us here understand that the reason a lot of games are only
> > > available
> > > on Microsoft platforms has to do with 3 things:
> > >
> > > 1. Closed source code
> > >
> > > 2. Dependencies on proprietary ancillary code (.net, Direct X, etc.)
> > >
> > > 3. (Microsoft FUD): Fear that all us GNU/Linux bad guys will steal the
> > > game...
> > > Pirates all.
> > >
> > > Well think about this for a minute.
> > >
> > > All Windows games that can be played on just a single computer --not
> > > Internet
> > > dependent on some outside server, have already been cracked --and not
> > > by GNU/Linux guys --we don't use Windows so what would we do with a
> > > Windows game, even if it was cracked? So it's Windows bad guys that are
> > > cracking (pirating) Windows games, not all of us.
> > >
> > > So #3 simply has no bearing on GNU/Linux users at all, for any Windows
> > > game
> > > that is ... lets call it 'self contained'.
> > >
> > > Now as to games that are not 'self contained'. Well, all of those have
> > > tons of
> > > cheats... the list of cheat sheet sites for any Windows game or games
> > > is simply endless. So 'Windows only' games come down to he who cheats
> > > best wins.
> > >
> > > Now ask your self if that really makes any sense to play a game that
> > > only by
> > > cheating can you really get somewhere at the game?
> > >
> > > Free Software games, on the other hand, are not likely to have 'cheats'
> > > as a
> > > practical part of the game --at least not for long, because either some
> > > one
> > > will patch it so that is no longer possible, or they may simply
> > > incorporate
> > > it into the game for the use of everyone (it becomes a feature that
> > > really is
> > > a new feature).
> > >
> > > Makes Free Software games a lot more fun because you can play it with a
> > > lot of
> > > faith that how you do will be based on your ability to play --not the
> > > other
> > > guy's ability to cheat.
> > >
> > > This relies on having the source available to all, which is why #1 is a
> > > stopper for us GNU/Linux types. Honesty is only insured by
> > > transparency.
> > >
> > > That only leaves problem #2... Well after a little thought about
> > > problems #1
> > > and #3, it becomes sort of obvious that #2 only exists to insure vendor
> > > lock
> > > in --not for the game, for the real vendor that wants everyone locked
> > > in --Microsoft.
> > >
> > > So if you want to play Microsoft's games (they are too, if you can only
> > > play
> > > them on Microsoft's OS, no matter who they nominally 'belong' to), then
> > > by all means do so.
> > >
> > > Just don't complain that GNU/Linux is bad because you can't play
> > > Microsoft's
> > > games on it... We like it that way, for all the above reasons --and a
> > > few more that have more of a philosophical nature (like understanding
> > > what losing
> > > Freedom means).
> > >
> > > So that's my two cents on Microsoft's games.
> > >
> > > Don.
> > > --
> > > GNU/Linux is the future.
> > > Join the FSF: http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=4458
> > > Get the Real Facts: http://BadVista.org
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Advocate mailing list
> > > Advocate at badvista.org
> > > http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
> >
> > It is ridiculous that one must insert a disc to play the game every time,
> > even though he has the 'license' to play it. And it is also technically
> > not necessary to have the disc in tray.
> >
> > "If they don't trust you, why should you trust them?"
> >
> > ---
> > Lam YongXian
> > Adolflam.com
> >
> > FSF member #5279
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Advocate mailing list
> > Advocate at badvista.org
> > http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
>
> --
> GNU/Linux is the future.
> Join the FSF: http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=4458
> Get the Real Facts: http://BadVista.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocate mailing list
> Advocate at badvista.org
> http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate

-- 
GNU/Linux is the future.
Join the FSF: http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=4458
Get the Real Facts: http://BadVista.org