I would like to set the record straight about the word "EXPLOIT"
-
bruh.. the endeavors are bop
why are people getting banned for this?
you can't even upset the economy maybe stack your own account to show off?
like what would be even reasonings for both using this particular bug and why is it justified for someone to get banned for this? like have y'all even actually looked at the endeavors?
I forgot the stuff existed until i read about the bug bans lol
Edited by eternalshockcable on August 7, 2023 10:22PMDear Community/Followers,
I want to address recent concerns regarding allegations of inappropriate direct messages and supposed cheating. First and foremost, I want to clarify that I do not admit to any wrongdoing. However, I understand that my actions may have been perceived in a way that caused concern.
As many of you know, I am a disabled veteran who served in Iraq, and I am permanently and totally mentally disabled. My PTSD, which was formally diagnosed in 2013 after being reclassified in the DSM-5, has affected me in ways that are difficult to fully explain. While this is not an excuse, it has, at times, clouded my judgment and impacted my behavior. This condition is something I have lived with for a long time, and it is a daily challenge.
As an influencer, streamer, and game reviewer with over 300 reviews, 800 followers on Twitch, and 1,600 followers on TikTok, I understand the responsibility that comes with my platform. Our role as influencers is to set a positive example, and I want to make it clear that I do not condone actions that go against the Terms of Service (TOS) or End User License Agreements (EULA) of any platform or community. Even though societal norms have evolved, and what was once deemed acceptable behavior in the past is no longer appropriate, I am committed to adapting and ensuring that my actions reflect the values we strive for today.
I want to go forward with a commitment to better representing the disabled members of our community. I recognize that I may never fully "fit in" or be "normal," but I am dedicated to improving and learning from these experiences. It is crucial that we have more flexibility and better support services for disabled veterans like myself, so we can remain active members of our communities without being unfairly limited by our disabilities. These services would help ensure that we can make better decisions and avoid situations like this in the future.
Thank you for your understanding, and I am grateful for the continued support of this community as I work to become a better version of myself.
Sincerely,
theshockcable1 -
LittlePinkDot✭✭✭✭✭Dagoth_Rac wrote: »If you take a $1000 out of your ATM and the ATM resets your balance to what is was before you took out the $1000, that is not a free $1000. And it is especially not a free $1000 if you furtively look around before taking another $1000 out and another $1000, etc. That is not a "moral" question. It is not an ethical question of whether you want to give the money back or not. It is theft and illegal activity and banks absolutely have taken people to court over it. By your definition, a human could never "exploit", only a computer system. But exploitation has existed well before computers and been a crime well before computers. You seem to be using a very explicit and limited denotation of "exploit" and ignoring the broader connotations.
Plus, dictionary definitions mean nothing. Every dictionary can have a slightly different definition. A word can mean multiple things based on context, sometimes even opposite things ("cleave" can mean both "join together" or "split apart"). Dictionaries give very brief descriptions, with no intention of getting into the real world depth of a word. It has no bearing whatsoever on the law in the real world or the in-game terms of service. Google "The Appeal to Definition Fallacy".
If a drug company sells a drug for an ailment and it turns out the drug is addictive and nobody was aware of that fact, it's still the drug companies fault if somebody gets addicted and dies.
Same could be said for small parts that kids can choke on and there was no warning on the product.
Its always the inventors liability for what they put out on the market.0 -
Kappachi✭✭✭✭eternalshockcable wrote: »I have not used a bug but I don't condone development banning players for the use of an in game bug.
Please stop calling it an "exploit". You're using the word completely wrong.
I know its common in online gaming , for people to use this term EXPLOITING in branding player actions that use a "bug" as being morally wrong.
That though, isn't an exploit.
This is the actual definition of "EXPLOIT":
A program or system designed to take advantage of a particular error or security vulnerability in computers or networks.
A program or system. This word refers to third party software.
Not crappy code, that a player uses, that the development provides to you in which you happen to notice something is messing up.
So if your code comes across the player's computer WRONG, this isn't illegal for them to use to how they see fit. You could say its "ethically" wrong.
Argue principal or just state you don't want users to do (x) for what ever (x) is that is determined morally wrong.
But stating its someone's duty to go out their way to report these " bugs" to you is absurd.
Then going as to ban people for using bugs, nope that's wrong too.
I wonder how many players have been banned for the usage of bugs and not knowing that they are in fact not " exploiting"?
I guess I'm too much a nerd to know what's actually what.
Yes, morally you could say its wrong to use "bugged" programming to one's advantage.
Legally its not. When you use this word "exploit" you're not even talking about bugged code, you're talking two different things.
I just wish, you would use the right wording.
Anyways, its not "exploiting".
Regards,
theshockcable
In the field of gaming, exploit is the use of an in-game bug to gain an advantage over others. The term is 100% correct to use and anyone exploiting a game deserves to be banned.7 -
kargen27✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Players are not being banned because there was a bug. They are being banned for exploiting that bug.
A lot of players did get banned and unbanned because they simply encountered the bug. ZOS even said in their post that they know it's the case some people didn't even know a bug had occured.
That being said, the OP is wrong that a bug cannot be exploited. Exploit is the correct term for such behavior. And the players that remained banned after they unbanned all the innocent players caught up in the autobans were people with egregious levels of extra seals, indicating that they did exploit the bug. As you correctly described, such behavior is against the TOS.
No they had their accounts suspended and investigated to see if a ban was warranted. My post wasn't clear and that is my fault. I meant permanent banned when I said banned.and then the parrot said, "must be the water mines green too."2 -
no its not correct and is only used by people that have no idea what they are talking about. Simple. End of discussion. LOLDear Community/Followers,
I want to address recent concerns regarding allegations of inappropriate direct messages and supposed cheating. First and foremost, I want to clarify that I do not admit to any wrongdoing. However, I understand that my actions may have been perceived in a way that caused concern.
As many of you know, I am a disabled veteran who served in Iraq, and I am permanently and totally mentally disabled. My PTSD, which was formally diagnosed in 2013 after being reclassified in the DSM-5, has affected me in ways that are difficult to fully explain. While this is not an excuse, it has, at times, clouded my judgment and impacted my behavior. This condition is something I have lived with for a long time, and it is a daily challenge.
As an influencer, streamer, and game reviewer with over 300 reviews, 800 followers on Twitch, and 1,600 followers on TikTok, I understand the responsibility that comes with my platform. Our role as influencers is to set a positive example, and I want to make it clear that I do not condone actions that go against the Terms of Service (TOS) or End User License Agreements (EULA) of any platform or community. Even though societal norms have evolved, and what was once deemed acceptable behavior in the past is no longer appropriate, I am committed to adapting and ensuring that my actions reflect the values we strive for today.
I want to go forward with a commitment to better representing the disabled members of our community. I recognize that I may never fully "fit in" or be "normal," but I am dedicated to improving and learning from these experiences. It is crucial that we have more flexibility and better support services for disabled veterans like myself, so we can remain active members of our communities without being unfairly limited by our disabilities. These services would help ensure that we can make better decisions and avoid situations like this in the future.
Thank you for your understanding, and I am grateful for the continued support of this community as I work to become a better version of myself.
Sincerely,
theshockcable3 -
vsrs_au✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
No, the moderators don't make the rules, they enforce the rules that are created by other people.In addition to what others have stated about your incorrect understanding of the word "exploit" I would also add that you seem to be misunderstanding or misusing the word "illegal".
Who do you think gets to define what is "illegal" within the confines of this game?
In response to your question:
The moderators and the in-game guards.PC(Steam) / EU / play from Melbourne, Australia / avg ping 3900 -
SeaGtGruff✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭eternalshockcable wrote: »bruh.. the endeavors are bop why are people getting banned for this?
you can't even upset the economy maybe stack your own account to show off?
Bruh, that doesn't matter. Even if it had nothing to do with any sort of in-game currency or item-- say, if the bug were just some glitch that allowed players to achieve a "deathless speed run" in a trial within seconds of porting in, without even having to kill any mobs or bosses, and all the players got out of it were a title-- deliberately taking advantage of the bug would still be an exploit and would still be a bannable offense.I've fought mudcrabs more fearsome than me!4 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭One of the very real definitions of the word exploit is "make full use of and derive benefit from".
So when a player finds a bug that they can benefit from and repeatedly take advantage of that they are by definition exploiting it. The bug is not an exploit in itself but players do make it one. That means it is an exploit.
So we have been using the term exploit correctly.Sauce_B055 wrote: »
Not nerd enough to know the difference between a verb and a noun, apparently.eternalshockcable wrote: »I guess I'm too much a nerd to know what's actually what.exploit
verb
make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand.
"the company was exploiting a legal loophole"
I'd say "exploiting a bug" fits the definition just fine.exploit
noun
a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.
"if someone you don't know tweets you a link, it's either spam, an exploit, or probably both"
Oh, I missed this post before I typed mine. @Sauce_B055 set the record straight.
Edited by Amottica on August 8, 2023 3:30AM3 -
zaria✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
If I take out money from an ATM and the bank don't subtract it from my account I have done nothing wrong.Dagoth_Rac wrote: »If you take a $1000 out of your ATM and the ATM resets your balance to what is was before you took out the $1000, that is not a free $1000. And it is especially not a free $1000 if you furtively look around before taking another $1000 out and another $1000, etc. That is not a "moral" question. It is not an ethical question of whether you want to give the money back or not. It is theft and illegal activity and banks absolutely have taken people to court over it. By your definition, a human could never "exploit", only a computer system. But exploitation has existed well before computers and been a crime well before computers. You seem to be using a very explicit and limited denotation of "exploit" and ignoring the broader connotations.
Plus, dictionary definitions mean nothing. Every dictionary can have a slightly different definition. A word can mean multiple things based on context, sometimes even opposite things ("cleave" can mean both "join together" or "split apart"). Dictionaries give very brief descriptions, with no intention of getting into the real world depth of a word. It has no bearing whatsoever on the law in the real world or the in-game terms of service. Google "The Appeal to Definition Fallacy".
Yes the bank will demand to get its money back.
Now redrawing multiple times if you notice you balance don't go down, then empty and close the account and switch bank and the bank will sue you. I say its a bit questionable if its theft but you definitely have to pay back the money.
Exploit is common used for taking advantage of an situation unfairly.
Grinding just make you go in circles.
Asking ZoS for nerfs is as stupid as asking for close air support from the death star.0 -
Michae✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Are you guys really arguing semantics? Words can have different meanings and TOS can use a word they defined for making the rest of the text easier to read, so that they don't have to repeat the whole definition every time. In this instance they defined using in game bug deliberately to gain advantage in game (currency in this instance) as an exploit. They could have called it gblargh and it would be fine (although unintuitive) as long as they would define what they mean.
Honestly, it's the wyvern/dragon debate all over again."I bear the cruel weight of certainty. Total, absolute, relentless certainty. People rarely comprehend the luxury of doubt... the freedom that comes with indecision. I envy you."
―Sotha Sil
@Michae PC/EU5 -
Marcus684✭✭✭✭✭
✭Are you guys really arguing semantics? Words can have different meanings and TOS can use a word they defined for making the rest of the text easier to read, so that they don't have to repeat the whole definition every time. In this instance they defined using in game bug deliberately to gain advantage in game (currency in this instance) as an exploit. They could have called it gblargh and it would be fine (although unintuitive) as long as they would define what they mean.
Honestly, it's the wyvern/dragon debate all over again.
It's pretty much just one person trying to redefine the term to suit themself, plus 1 or 2 other exploiters that are hitting 'Agree". Everyone else knows what it means and understands what the consequences are for doing it.6 -
Dr_Con✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
you really set yourself up with a straw man argument by listing the code-only definition smhEdited by Dr_Con on August 8, 2023 2:34PM5 -
Alinhbo_Tyaka✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭eternalshockcable wrote: »bruh.. the endeavors are bop why are people getting banned for this?
you can't even upset the economy maybe stack your own account to show off?
like what would be even reasonings for both using this particular bug and why is it justified for someone to get banned for this? like have y'all even actually looked at the endeavors?
I forgot the stuff existed until i read about the bug bans lol
Because ZOS doesn't really want players to use Endeavors. They were added to meet Microsoft's requirement that anything available in paid for gambling crates be available via in game mechanisms. ZOS much rather have you going to the Crown Store to purchase crates. The bug allows players knowingly or unknowingly increase their ability to buy Crown crate items for a little game time thereby decreasing sales of FOMO driven crates.1 -
ElvenOverlord✭✭✭✭eternalshockcable wrote: »no its not correct and is only used by people that have no idea what they are talking about. Simple. End of discussion. LOL
You’re wrong and your straw-man has been proven wrong multiple times in this post and have failed to provide any counterarguments other than “I’m right lol bye”
Edited by ElvenOverlord on August 8, 2023 4:05PM4 -
ElvenOverlord✭✭✭✭Are you guys really arguing semantics? Words can have different meanings and TOS can use a word they defined for making the rest of the text easier to read, so that they don't have to repeat the whole definition every time. In this instance they defined using in game bug deliberately to gain advantage in game (currency in this instance) as an exploit. They could have called it gblargh and it would be fine (although unintuitive) as long as they would define what they mean.
Honestly, it's the wyvern/dragon debate all over again.
It's pretty much just one person trying to redefine the term to suit themself, plus 1 or 2 other exploiters that are hitting 'Agree". Everyone else knows what it means and understands what the consequences are for doing it.
Exactly.2
