Posted March 23, 200520 yr good one: "But, it seems others would rather have VALVe patch it quickly, and have been releasing it freely without giving us credit. So, here it is: " Don't u know that this will make them patch faster? This will speed up the release of de_port and other goodies. By realeasing this publically, your potentially appeasing a lot of valve's customer's who want prompter patchs. The other funny thing is when u broad relase shit like this u actually end up getting a bunch of script kiddies banned, from servers, because tey only got one cd-key. What's funny is that ultimately this act will accomplish 3 things at best: -speed up the next patch -reduce the number of script kiddie hackers -fuck off, im tired of typing.
March 23, 200520 yr good one: "But, it seems others would rather have VALVe patch it quickly, and have been releasing it freely without giving us credit. So, here it is: " Don't u know that this will make them patch faster? This will speed up the release of de_port and other goodies. By realeasing this publically, your potentially appeasing a lot of valve's customer's who want prompter patchs. The other funny thing is when u broad relase shit like this u actually end up getting a bunch of script kiddies banned, from servers, because tey only got one cd-key. What's funny is that ultimately this act will accomplish 3 things at best: -speed up the next patch -reduce the number of script kiddie hackers -fuck off, im tired of typing. They kept it semi-private. Then released it because no one else was, and they were takeing the credit for finding the exploit. Noob.
March 23, 200520 yr It's released because Valve is already well aware of this bug and how it is done. So wether we release it or not, it will be fixed. It would be quite pointless to keep this to ourselves and then release the info after its already been fixed, wouldn't do much good for the community then.
March 23, 200520 yr OldManPeterson']It's released because Valve is already well aware of this bug and how it is done. So wether we release it or not' date=' it will be fixed. It would be quite pointless to keep this to ourselves and then release the info after its already been fixed, wouldn't do much good for the community then.[/quote'] exactly.
March 23, 200520 yr Author well, i guess it's the lesser of 2 evils then. Still kind of weak, Valve's policies control myg0t now too.
March 23, 200520 yr well, i guess it's the lesser of 2 evils then. Still kind of weak, Valve's policies control myg0t now too. what.
March 23, 200520 yr well, i guess it's the lesser of 2 evils then. Still kind of weak, Valve's policies control myg0t now too. How does this show they control myg0t? If they controled myg0t like they control their own forums, this would never be made public. If they controled myg0t we wouldn't still have a web site. Sounds like your just pissed that we released this info and made it public. Sorry but your reverse psychology won't work here.
March 23, 200520 yr OldManPeterson']Sorry but your reverse psychology won't work here. You mean bullshit. Plain old bullshit. He's too dumb to try reverse psychology.
March 23, 200520 yr Author "until now we were trying to keep it semi-private by releasing it only on IRC. But, it seems others would rather have VALVe patch it quickly, and have been releasing it freely" "If they controled myg0t like they control their own forums, this would never be made public. " However, this was made public. You wont get far denying the anticedent my friend. Your statement is that if x (valve controlled myg0t), then y (the hack remains private.) Because we know the outcome of the statement of the if-than clause, that is if we go from a general causal argument to a particular causal argument, so too must the logic, meaning that : if you cite wanting to get it out to beat the patch, you have to base it on the fact that the patch will be coming out. The basis for your conclusion becomes: to maximize raging, we need to avoid valve, because valve will release a patch at it's discretion. AT IT'S DISCRETION. By openingly saying that you give valve the upper hand by basically giving them the exploit (You'd have to be a fool to presume they don't monitor this web site). You didn't know when Valve would patch it, so you speculated soon, (IMHO because of the tone of your post, out of contempt for people not respecting the work of others). Im not saying your wrong, im just trying to show you how your argument could be better.
March 23, 200520 yr "until now we were trying to keep it semi-private by releasing it only on IRC. But, it seems others would rather have VALVe patch it quickly, and have been releasing it freely" "If they controled myg0t like they control their own forums, this would never be made public. " However, this was made public. You wont get far denying the anticedent my friend. Your statement is that if x (valve controlled myg0t), then y (the hack remains private.) Because we know the outcome of the statement of the if-than clause, that is if we go from a general causal argument to a particular causal argument, so too must the logic, meaning that : if you cite wanting to get it out to beat the patch, you have to base it on the fact that the patch will be coming out. The basis for your conclusion becomes: to maximize raging, we need to avoid valve, because valve will release a patch at it's discretion. AT IT'S DISCRETION. By openingly saying that you give valve the upper hand by basically giving them the exploit (You'd have to be a fool to presume they don't monitor this web site). You didn't know when Valve would patch it, so you speculated soon, (IMHO because of the tone of your post, out of contempt for people not respecting the work of others). Im not saying your wrong, im just trying to show you how your argument could be better. FYI he was right, and Valve pushed up their patching to fix the bug, so releasing it allowed a large amount of people to quickly exploit the SERVERSIDE BUG THAT VALVE ALREADY KNEW ABOUT before it was fixed.
March 24, 200520 yr Hey guy, leave the Valve rep alone... he's undercover! Yes, he is starting to sound like one.. isn't he? :rolleyes:
March 24, 200520 yr Your statement is that if x (valve controlled myg0t), then y (the hack remains private.) Because we know the outcome of the statement of the if-than clause, that is if we go from a general causal argument to a particular causal argument, so too must the logic, meaning that : THIS IS NOT AN ALGEMEBRA FORUMS TAKE YOUR BIG WORDS ELSEWHERE K
