Any good guides for GINA?

[kylok]

GINA is a new program. Programs with similar functionality were allegedly (for now) written with a different framework, as implied by dekova

[dekova]

Originally Posted by Mblake81 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Dunno, I would check to see when GINA first released. hmm. (didn't see a specific release date on first look through)

but,

Saying log readers couldn't exist before .net is like saying cars couldn't exist before the fuel injected engine was invented.

[Vexenu]

The problem is that it is impossible to prove a negative of this sort. I could show you ten thousand screenshots and forum posts from the classic era that provide no evidence of GINA-like programs, and yet that would not be enough to provide that it did not exist.

In fact, there is NO WAY to prove it did not exist, because you can always get someone to come out of the woodwork (as we see here) and claim that it did, while providing zero evidence (note that I am not accusing dekova of lying, just pointing out that he cannot provide any evidence for his claim, which makes it essentially inadmissible, otherwise everyone's baseless claims must be given equal weight).

It's a fact that EQ was a game that was neckbearded by the hardcore from the beginning. People literally ruined their lives over the game. It was called Evercrack for a reason. People took the game very seriously and anything that gave players an advantage would have been widely used and discussed. I therefore posit that there would have been a strong demand for a GINA-like program at the time, if such a program existed, and that if did exist then evidence of it would be preserved in the same internet archives that have enabled the research that has allowed P1999 to reach its current state of classic accuracy. Further, if the production of GINA-like software is as relatively easy as dekova claims, it is very likely that multiple versions would have been produced by independent programmers, which only increases the likelihood that such programs would have been widely discussed and shared. Which means we should have ample evidence for them.

But we find no evidence for anything like GINA in the internet archives. Therefore we must reasonably conclude no such GINA-like program existed back in the day.

[Mblake81]

Originally Posted by kylok [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

GINA is a new program. Programs with similar functionality were allegedly (for now) written with a different framework, as implied by dekova

What were the names of these programs?

Where they ever on websites for others to download. Was this EQ secret shared?

Were these self written and used only for personal use, if so and this was known in era, was it ever addressed by the original devs?

This is what I am curious about.

Originally Posted by dekova [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Saying log readers couldn't exist before .net is like saying cars couldn't exist before the fuel injected engine was invented.

Fair enough, we are talking about GINA though.

Which programs were used beforehand, any links to those?

[Niedar]

Originally Posted by Vexenu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The problem is that it is impossible to prove a negative of this sort. I could show you ten thousand screenshots and forum posts from the classic era that provide no evidence of GINA-like programs, and yet that would not be enough to provide that it did not exist.

In fact, there is NO WAY to prove it did not exist, because you can always get someone to come out of the woodwork (as we see here) and claim that it did, while providing zero evidence (note that I am not accusing dekova of lying, just pointing out that he cannot provide any evidence for his claim, which makes it essentially inadmissible, otherwise everyone's baseless claims must be given equal weight).

It's a fact that EQ was a game that was neckbearded by the hardcore from the beginning. People literally ruined their lives over the game. It was called Evercrack for a reason. People took the game very seriously and anything that gave players an advantage would have been widely used and discussed. I therefore posit that there would have been a strong demand for a GINA-like program at the time, if such a program existed, and that if did exist then evidence of it would be preserved in the same internet archives that have enabled the research that has allowed P1999 to reach its current state of classic accuracy. Further, if the production of GINA-like software is as relatively easy as dekova claims, it is very likely that multiple versions would have been produced by independent programmers, which only increases the likelihood that such programs would have been widely discussed and shared. Which means we should have ample evidence for them.

But we find no evidence for anything like GINA in the internet archives. Therefore we must reasonably conclude no such GINA-like program existed back in the day.

Sure you could prove it did not exist or if it did that it was not allowed in classic. One method is to prove the mechanics by which it works did not exist in 1999. If you could prove logs did not exists from the game client in 1999 it would be proof that GINA like programs did not exists because parsing logs is how they operate.

You could also find evidence that the developers actively took measure to prevent a program such as GINA from working and or being used by banning players for using it.

A third way would be to prove that graphical user interfaces did not exists in 1999 but good luck proving that one.

[kylok]

If you're attempting to compel me to research this you won't - I don't care. Here's a similar example however, regarding something I do/did care about. I came upon the mechanic described here Bind Wound in Combat before this thread was made. I reported it as an exploit, was told by management to find evidence that the mechanic behaved differently than it currently does on the server. I could not find such evidence. Does it seem like it's counter to the intended use? Yes. Does it provide an advantage to a player who knows this over one who doesn't? Absolutely! Could I prove it? No. So it's still in game.

[dekova]

Originally Posted by kylok [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you're attempting to compel me to research this you won't - I don't care. Here's a similar example however, regarding something I do/did care about. I came upon the mechanic described here Bind Wound in Combat before this thread was made. I reported it as an exploit, was told by management to find evidence that the mechanic behaved differently than it currently does on the server. I could not find such evidence. Does it seem like it's counter to the intended use? Yes. Does it provide an advantage to a player who knows this over one who doesn't? Absolutely! Could I prove it? No. So it's still in game.

Actually, I think bind wounds in combat has been disabled on green.

[Izmael]

Can we just ban GINA and move on?

[dekova]

Originally Posted by Mblake81 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What were the names of these programs?

Where they ever on websites for others to download. Was this EQ secret shared?

Were these self written and used only for personal use, if so and this was known in era, was it ever addressed by the original devs?

This is what I am curious about.



Fair enough, we are talking about GINA though.

Which programs were used beforehand, any links to those?

Yeah, the stuff I coded was way too janky to share and/or sell, even if I ever wanted to. I think the text strings it looked for were mostly hardcoded; I don't know that I even had an understanding of regex then.

The thing is, there is really nothing hard about programming a log reader. Displaying data may be a bit harder, but even in 1999 you could have done it all - soup to nuts - in something as simple as microsoft excel or access. Saying that I was some kind of prodigy because - out of the million or so EQ players - I was the only one with the insight or talent to do this is flattering but very likely inaccurate.

[kylok]

Originally Posted by dekova [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, I think bind wounds in combat has been disabled on green.

Just tested on beta, still works exactly as it did when I reported it.