- 7,436
- Canada
- photonrider
Fascinating discussion . . . . 👍
Even more amazing is the level of civility between you guys as you discuss this; thank you for that, as many would be following the discussion, dependent on the outcome, but unsure as to a resolution, and how you reason with one another as you play out your roles here, is vital.
As Lorne says:
If the data is legally extractable, vetted by PD, then it's part of the game - as much a part as someone saving someone else's replay.
If the data is being hacked into, that's another matter - let alone publishing it.
If someone comes up with an identical tune to the leader (possible, right?) and publishes it, is it wrong?
And then there is the question of the archer and the arrow. Better arrows = better archers?
And from there - will the perfect arrow always have the same point?
And so . . . who owns the design of that point?
Why am I whispering?
Even more amazing is the level of civility between you guys as you discuss this; thank you for that, as many would be following the discussion, dependent on the outcome, but unsure as to a resolution, and how you reason with one another as you play out your roles here, is vital.
As Lorne says:
Both sides have fair points. The problem is, it's possible to extract setup data from replays...................XsnipX
If the data is legally extractable, vetted by PD, then it's part of the game - as much a part as someone saving someone else's replay.
If the data is being hacked into, that's another matter - let alone publishing it.
If someone comes up with an identical tune to the leader (possible, right?) and publishes it, is it wrong?
And then there is the question of the archer and the arrow. Better arrows = better archers?
And from there - will the perfect arrow always have the same point?
And so . . . who owns the design of that point?
Why am I whispering?