These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Petition to Ban Isobox/Vec, bots and other similar program

First post
Author
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#141 - 2014-01-01 14:09:12 UTC
Not this again. People using multi boxing gain no advantage not gained by a fleet of actual players. In fact, they are worse off because they get less control. They pay for more accounts and each account is controlled by that player... What exactly is the problem?

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#142 - 2014-01-01 14:10:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Robert Caldera wrote:
so what?
So isboxer does not automate anything — it only replicates. It therefore doesn't fall afoul of the parts of the EULA that prohibit automation.

Quote:
Does user control them all specifically? No. Yes
Are they performing actions? Yes
They are performing the actions the user feeds into them. Since they're not automated, if the user does not feed any input into them, nothing happens.

Quote:
What is output?
Commands to the client that makes it do stuff.

Quote:
wrong. Automation has nothing to do with luck of output at any time, interesting point is when output is generated and in which manner.
What's wrong about it? The point of automation is that it creates output without requiring exact user input every step of the way — the output is created on its own, autonomously, automatically. That autonomy — user inputs A, the client reacts to A, and to the automatically generated B, C, D and E as well — is what's not allowed.

Replication just creates a 1:1 mapping between input and output across a line of parallel recipients. Since it's 1:1 — user does A, client reacts to A — it's allowed.

Quote:
you claimed there is input replication API.
…and there is. That's the whole point of messaging APIs. In this case, we want to replicate input, so we broadcast the messages intercepted using the input API.

Oh, and automation has pretty much everything to do with generation of actions.
Dave Stark
#143 - 2014-01-01 14:10:53 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
Rosira wrote:
Same Whine, different game. Seems they are the same in any game that has the option to multibox

another one.
its not about multiboxing, I multibox by myself a lot.
its about automated multiboxing.


we're talking about mutliboxing, not botting.

so, it is about multiboxing, and it's not about botting.
Rosira
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#144 - 2014-01-01 14:17:05 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
Rosira wrote:
Same Whine, different game. Seems they are the same in any game that has the option to multibox

another one.
its not about multiboxing, I multibox by myself a lot.
its about automated multiboxing.


Having used a similar program in the past for another game and knowing someone who used Iso extensively when they had the multibox fever nothing is automated. Buttons are pressed and commands are passed to the linked accounts, no press = no action.
Least Eve has no sharp corners to get hung up on and break /follow.
celebro
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP
Goonswarm Federation
#145 - 2014-01-01 14:21:40 UTC
Called for what it is: OP an others has an issue with a program making Multi -boxing easier. This has nothing do with botting or automation which is actually against EULA.


Question is does it really make multiboxing that much easier? Setting it all up is not easy, if not we would all be doing it.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#146 - 2014-01-01 14:23:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Tippia wrote:
So isboxer does not automate anything — it only replicates.

yet again, automation is not neccessarily generation of something. I linked you wikipedia go and read it.
X bots running behind and imitating you are no less bots.

Tippia wrote:
It therefore doesn't fall afoul of the parts of the EULA that prohibit automation.

EULA prohibit everything of 3rd party software which interacts with Eve, EULA dont explicitely exclude input broadcast from that rule.

Tippia wrote:
They are performing the actions the user feeds into them.

they are generating input where no user input has been done.
they are imitating your controlled client in automated manner.

Tippia wrote:

Since they're not automated, if the user does not feed any input into them, nothing happens.

User does not feed any input into isboxed clients yet things happen, isboxer feeds input to these clients, copied from the one specific main client human controls.

Tippia wrote:
Commands to the client that makes it do stuff.

no, wrong. Doing nothing is output as well. Ask these ratters who whine about afk cloakers, those are sitting afk in system, yet frighten people by their sole presence.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#147 - 2014-01-01 14:25:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Tippia wrote:
What's wrong about it? The point of automation is that it creates output without matching input

and here again, automation is not neccesarily an AI producing some actions by itself. Read linked wikipedia, you will find many answers.


Tippia wrote:
…and there is. That's the whole point of messaging APIs. In this case, we want to replicate input, so we broadcast the messages intercepted using the input API.

there is none. Whats there is a basic set of tools which allow you to do things. If you want input broadcast you need to implement it by yourself, what isbox makers did for example. There is no such specific API as you claimed.
Its same as you would call a manufactorer of screwdrivers as aeronautics company, just because screwdrivers are involved in building space vessels.

Tippia wrote:
Oh, and automation has pretty much everything to do with generation of actions.

here again, no.
Read wikipedia.
Automation is not just AI, it includes a whole lot of other aspects beyond that like efficiency improvement or reducing of workload for human - exactly what isboxer does, take away the effort of clicking all 50 clients by yourself.
celebro
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP
Goonswarm Federation
#148 - 2014-01-01 14:32:34 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:

here again, no.
Read wikipedia.
Automation is not just AI, it includes a whole lot of other aspects beyond that like efficiency improvement or reducing of workload for human.


Grey area that CCP and most players don't see it that way, it's a really minor issue that is not worth wasting resource to police. Play your game, if you see isboxer as such a great advantage, use it, sign up 50+ accounts and have fun skilling then all up.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#149 - 2014-01-01 14:33:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Robert Caldera wrote:
yet again, automation is not neccessarily generation of something.
It is for the purpose of what's being discussed here.

Quote:
EULA prohibit everything of 3rd party software which interacts with Eve
Nope. It prohibits 3rd party software from modifying the content or gameplay; from accessing the game servers; from reading or manipulating client-server data. There is plenty of 3rd party software that interacts with EVE without breaking the EULA in any way — in fact, 3rd party software that interacts with the client is required for it to even work properly.

Quote:
they are generating input where no user input has been done.
No, you're talking about bots there. I'm talking about multiboxing software. The latter does not generate any input where no user input has been done.

Quote:
User does not feed any input into isboxed clients
Incorrect. The user feeds the same input into all isboxed clients. After all, that's the point of multiboxing software: to replicate input across clients, which is something very different from generating input that the user does not input him/herself.

Quote:
no, wrong. Doing nothing is output as well.
Not for the purpose of what's being discussed here, no. Even if it were, “doing nothing” is not being generated by multiboxing software without the user's input (or non-input in this case). Again, automation would create NOP regardless of any input form the user; replication only replicates the NOPs of the user.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#150 - 2014-01-01 14:35:24 UTC
celebro wrote:

Grey area that CCP and most players don't see it that way, it's a really minor issue that is not worth wasting resource to police. Play your game, if you see isboxer as such a great advantage, use it, sign up 50+ accounts and have fun skilling then all up.


no.
for same reason I never did bot ratting.
Sid Crash
#151 - 2014-01-01 14:43:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Sid Crash
If gathering stuff requires less effort or activity that means people will be willing to sell it for less, prices go down. This affects all miners but hurts the "normal" miners the most because their effort vs income is going down. Whether or not it's allowed is arbitrary and obviously CCP's choice. Doesn't change the fact that it does hurt "normal" miners.
Milan Nantucket
Doomheim
#152 - 2014-01-01 14:43:39 UTC
Solution is rather easy... goto a system that doesn't have so many miners if mining is your thing. There has been a glacial ice thing in my system for a week and a few roid belts that are untouched. Feel free to locate me and come visit.
Cheng Musana
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#153 - 2014-01-01 14:48:36 UTC
Ive heard that icebelts in null and lowsec are barely farmed. So why dont you move over there and get as much ice as you want? Instead you complain that every 1 in highsec is like a vulture waiting for the icebelts to respawn.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#154 - 2014-01-01 14:49:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Tippia wrote:
It is for the purpose of what's being discussed here.

what kind of ******** piece of response is this cr*p?
Exactly, its for the purpose of topic being discussed here and I clearly explained why input broadcast is automation.
I've given you sources for my claims you refuse to understand or are simply too stupid for it.
Go back and read what automation means. Its not just AI doing something on its own.

Tippia wrote:
Nope. It prohibits 3rd party software from modifying the content or gameplay; from accessing the game servers; from reading or manipulating client-server data.

not really true. Read below a relevant extract from EULA


CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct

Your continued access to the System and license to play the Game is subject to proper conduct. Without limiting CCP's rights to control the Game environment, and the conduct of the players within that environment, CCP prohibits the following practices that CCP has determined detract from the overall user experience of the users playing the Game.

You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.



Tippia wrote:
No, you're talking about bots there. I'm talking about multiboxing software. The latter does not generate any input where no user input has been done.

no, you dont need any software for multiboxing. Start up x clients and go.
What you need software for is automated multiboxing like isbox.

Tippia wrote:
Incorrect. The user feeds the same input into all isboxed clients. After all, that's the point of multiboxing software: to replicate input across clients, which is something very different from generating input that the user does not input.

no, he does not. Isbox does feed input into clients, not user.
Here again, go back and read my sources I linked for you. Automation is not just AI. Its everything which allows you to perform tasks with reduced workload compared to regular use. It as well falls under the "accelerated rate" clause from quoted EULA parts since isboxer saves you time and effiort clicking same inputs into 50 different clients in a very efficient manner, its the purpose why you use it and which is clearly a sort of automation, obvious for everyone with a sliver of common sense.

Tippia wrote:
Not for the purpose of what's being discussed here, no. Even if it were, “doing nothing” is not being generated by multiboxing software without the user's input (or non-input in this case). Again, automation would create NOP regardless of any input form the user; replication only replicates the NOPs of the user.

this doesnt even make sense at all, what??
RAIN Arthie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#155 - 2014-01-01 14:53:44 UTC
Quick everyone to the protest positions and fire! Burn Jita!
celebro
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP
Goonswarm Federation
#156 - 2014-01-01 14:54:20 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
celebro wrote:

Grey area that CCP and most players don't see it that way, it's a really minor issue that is not worth wasting resource to police. Play your game, if you see isboxer as such a great advantage, use it, sign up 50+ accounts and have fun skilling then all up.


no.
for same reason I never did bot ratting.


Is this a moral decision of some kind? Because botting is not allowed, Isboxer is allowed.


Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#157 - 2014-01-01 15:02:55 UTC
celebro wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
celebro wrote:

Grey area that CCP and most players don't see it that way, it's a really minor issue that is not worth wasting resource to police. Play your game, if you see isboxer as such a great advantage, use it, sign up 50+ accounts and have fun skilling then all up.


no.
for same reason I never did bot ratting.


Is this a moral decision of some kind? Because botting is not allowed, Isboxer is allowed.




because both represent a clear violation of EULA and can get you banned.
Dave Stark
#158 - 2014-01-01 15:04:36 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
celebro wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
celebro wrote:

Grey area that CCP and most players don't see it that way, it's a really minor issue that is not worth wasting resource to police. Play your game, if you see isboxer as such a great advantage, use it, sign up 50+ accounts and have fun skilling then all up.


no.
for same reason I never did bot ratting.


Is this a moral decision of some kind? Because botting is not allowed, Isboxer is allowed.




because both represent a clear violation of EULA and can get you banned.


wrong.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#159 - 2014-01-01 15:08:20 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
celebro wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
celebro wrote:

Grey area that CCP and most players don't see it that way, it's a really minor issue that is not worth wasting resource to police. Play your game, if you see isboxer as such a great advantage, use it, sign up 50+ accounts and have fun skilling then all up.


no.
for same reason I never did bot ratting.


Is this a moral decision of some kind? Because botting is not allowed, Isboxer is allowed.




because both represent a clear violation of EULA and can get you banned.


wrong.


for what I read in EULA and what isbox in fact is, it is not wrong but very true.
a GM in german subforum even confirmed this stance of CCP toward isbox, however I wont do the work and dig there again.
Magna Mortem
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#160 - 2014-01-01 15:10:31 UTC
Saw a nice piece of text. ISBoxer creates input.

Wrong.

Duplicating information which is already provided in a system does not equal inputting information into the system.