Neckbeard Entitlement Factor | LUP 28

Neckbeard Entitlement Factor | LUP 28

Michael Hall from Canonical joins us to discuss his personal views on what he’s coined the new 80/20 rule for open source. Are the consumers of open source the biggest hurdle to projects becoming sustainable?

Plus Valve might looking at your DNS history, getting young users to try Linux, and your feedback!

Thanks to:

Ting


DigitalOcean

Direct Download:

MP3 Audio | OGG Audio | Video | HD Video | Torrent | YouTube

RSS Feeds:

MP3 Feed | OGG Feed | iTunes Feed | Video Feed | Torrent Feed | WebM Torrent Feed

Show Notes:

FU

There are a number of kernel-level paid cheats that relate to this Reddit thread[1] . Cheat developers have a problem in getting cheaters to actually pay them for all the obvious reasons, so they start creating DRM and anti-cheat code for their cheats. These cheats phone home to a DRM server that confirms that a cheater has actually paid to use the cheat.

VAC checked for the presence of these cheats. If they were detected VAC then checked to see which cheat DRM server was being contacted. This second check was done by looking for a partial match to those (non-web) cheat DRM servers in the DNS cache. If found, then hashes of the matching DNS entries were sent to the VAC servers. The match was double checked on our servers and then that client was marked for a future ban. Less than a tenth of one percent of clients triggered the second check. 570 cheaters are being banned as a result.

Cheat versus trust is an ongoing cat-and-mouse game. New cheats are created all the time, detected, banned, and tweaked. This specific VAC test for this specific round of cheats was effective for 13 days, which is fairly typical. It is now no longer active as the cheat providers have worked around it by manipulating the DNS cache of their customers’ client machines.

Michael Hall: A new 80/20 rule for open source Upstream Liaison

Put simply, this rule says that people will tend to appreciate it more when you give them 20% of something, and resent you if you give them 80%. It seems completely counter-intuitive, I know, but that’s what I was seeing in all of those conversations. People by and large were saying that the reason Canonical and Mozilla were being judged so harshly was because they already did most of what those people wanted, which made them resented that they didn’t do everything.

Mailsack:

Question? Comments? Contact us here!