Jamus would like you to pay a monthly subscription fee

[Drew]

[=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=]
PsiNet Motd (10/22/2009)

PsiNet has just crossed its 6th birthday. Thank you all for your
support over this long journey.

PsiNet has always been close my heart. A great deal of time and
effort and attention has gone into making PsiNet what it is today, and
I'd like to create even more and greater advances in the future.

But while I've always strove to make sure that it's free for you- it's
not free for me. The strain of running 24/7 causes hardware to fail.
I'm now using salvaged parts that aren't really up to the task.
My time fixing problems- doing the mostly invisible work that keeps
PsiNet running smoothly- is valuable to me.

And while a number of you have been incredibly generous and
supportive in the past- that support has largely dried up this year.

So I have set up a number of new buttons on the website, at:

http://psinet.dynalias.net

While I continue to welcome your donations whenever you feel you can
make them, it is important that I can rely on incoming money for the
regular expenses of running this service. It is not my intention
to make this a for-pay service; and we're not there, yet.

757 unique computers have connected to PsiNet in the last month.
2875 characters.

558 unique computers have connected to PsiNet in the last week.
2083 characters.

361 unique computers have connected to PsiNet in the last day.
891 characters.

And when the server rebooted, 81 of you spammed PSINET LINK until it
came back.

You can subscribe for $3.99 or $6.99 per month, automatically, from
your PayPal account or a credit card.

[=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=]



Still optional, unfortunately for Jamus I think he probably could have gone to mandatory fees years ago but with Lich the way it is now if he did it I think that would probably be the nail in PSInet coffin.

[Smythe]

Ya gotta admit as pissy an moany as Jamus is, shoulda been done long ago. Now, don' matter.

- Smythe

[Stanley Burrell]

Ah'gree dat issa 'bout time 'e got it started'swell.

[WRoss]

What he was stating on OOC was that he does not want to have monthly subscriptions, he simply wants his donations to equal what he spends for psinet to run. I guess if you include labor, he is still in the hole.

Anyways, I am beta testing the new psinet and it is amazing. I just wish I understood how to program better. Being able to copy paste GS scripts into sagescript and run 6 at once is really fun though.

[SpiffyJr]

What he was stating on OOC was that he does not want to have monthly subscriptions, he simply wants his donations to equal what he spends for psinet to run. I guess if you include labor, he is still in the hole.

Anyways, I am beta testing the new psinet and it is amazing. I just wish I understood how to program better. Being able to copy paste GS scripts into sagescript and run 6 at once is really fun though.

Something Lich has had forever. I just don't understand why he isn't more open with the Lich community (i.e., chat server, sharing of magic, etc). It would benefit the entire GS community for him to do so.

[Bobmuhthol]

JSE existed before Lich and it could run multiple Wizard scripts simultaneously, so Jamus actually won there.

[SpiffyJr]

Yes, but Lich is opensource so it wins there. I'm not debating Jamus' programming ability I just dislike his attitude towards combining both systems.

[phantasm]

Why do I see some member of the lich crowd in "EVERY" psinet thread begging for him to give them his source code.

You have an open source project called LICH, why don't you go add some code to that and improve it to a point were people will use it over psinet or something.

Endlessly begging for Jamus to give you his code is starting to make you all look bad to me.


Someone already spent a ton of time creating lich, and was then nice enough to open source it.

Not to mention all the scripts available for free.

Does open-source mean 2 guys that code, and 75 that copy-paste all their hard work.

Fuck...

Get off your open-source pedestal and look around at all the lazy bums surrounding you.

Quit posting this shit in every psinet thread.

[BigWorm]

Why do I see some member of the lich crowd in "EVERY" psinet thread begging for him to give them his source code.

You have an open source project called LICH, why don't you go add some code to that and improve it to a point were people will use it over psinet or something.

Endlessly begging for Jamus to give you his code is starting to make you all look bad to me.


Someone already spent a ton of time creating lich, and was then nice enough to open source it.

Not to mention all the scripts available for free.

Does open-source mean 2 guys that code, and 75 that copy-paste all their hard work.

Fuck...

Get off your open-source pedestal and look around at all the lazy bums surrounding you.

Quit posting this shit in every psinet thread.

Where in this thread did anyone beg him to open source Psinet? The closest thing I saw was a wish that he would work with Lich community when it would be mutually beneficial.

[phantasm]

Yes, but Lich is opensource so it wins there.


This right here.

[radamanthys]

Jamus worked hard on Psinet. Psinet is his.

I wouldn't share the source to my chat room if I had to include people who publicly hate me.

[BigWorm]

This right here.

Saying that you prefer an open source option is vastly different than begging him to open up his source.

[SpiffyJr]

Saying that you prefer an open source option is vastly different than begging him to open up his source.

He's obviously a moron.

[SpiffyJr]

Jamus worked hard on Psinet. Psinet is his.

I wouldn't share the source to my chat room if I had to include people who publicly hate me.

We don't want his source code. We just want him to allow us (Lich users) to connect to it.

[SpiffyJr]

You have an open source project called LICH, why don't you go add some code to that and improve it to a point were people will use it over psinet or something.

Since you insist on being a dick I'll throw in that I have people every week asking me to help them migrate from Psinet to Lich.

[Drew]

It would be nice if there was an open-chat standard that every gemstone client could use (psinet/lich/ultraFE/whatever).

[Alorn15]

It would be nice if there was an open-chat standard that every gemstone client could use (psinet/lich/ultraFE/whatever).

^^^^^^^^^ This.

[Sam]

wouldn't it be easiest to just register an IRC channel, or even run an IRC server on the lich server with multiple channels, and use some already written ruby code to access it? Then people who don't play can bullshit with people in game as well, kinda like these forums.

[SpiffyJr]

Yep, it's been suggested a few times that we should use an IRC channel but that still leaves a barrier between Lich and Psinet users that should be overcome.

[Alorn15]

Jamus? Are you there? IRC? Whaddaya think?

[Tisket]

I love lich a LOT (since Casis got it running on my pc anyway). I've still got psinet mostly because I've got some scripts that use some of it's features but I don't think that will be for much longer. But when I do uninstall it I'll still be grateful to Jamus for creating something that was so useful for such a long time. Seriously, thanks dude.

Just wanted to say it.

[pabstblueribbon]

Just spitballing..

but has anyone thought about doing a peer-to-peer setup for lnet? Each instance of lnet running a 'listening' port to offload most of it to the user?

It doesn't completely decentralize it, since you'd need to have a server (the repo) or something to contain recently connected computers to search for..

Im sure alot of people wouldnt want their IP broadcasted though..

Just a thought.

[Buckwheet]

If a program outside of lich was able to run the chat, like a server client that did p2p that would be okay.

I know I would leave that running on a whole host of windows servers.

[BigWorm]

Just spitballing..

but has anyone thought about doing a peer-to-peer setup for lnet? Each instance of lnet running a 'listening' port to offload most of it to the user?

It doesn't completely decentralize it, since you'd need to have a server (the repo) or something to contain recently connected computers to search for..

Im sure alot of people wouldnt want their IP broadcasted though..

Just a thought.

Actually from some things I've heard Tillmen say he something almost exactly like that planned.

[JamusPsi]

To save us all the hassle of having to do a forum search to find my positions on these issues, I'll reiterate them here.

An IRC backend for the client was considered. However, I'd have to either: reformat the other communications to work through irc commands (which might invite tampering), have the client connect to two different servers (one for chat, one for other messages), or have the server mirror chat commands through the IRC server. The last might defeat the point of it, and the first is a great deal of work for little gain. It is low-priority but something I might do someday.

PsiNet is not open-source because I want to maintain control over the server. I am hardly a tyrant- to my knowledge there is not a single active player who is banned, presently- but I also don't want to give up what controls I have. I also enjoy the very limited income I receive from the project.

I strongly suspect that what would almost immediately happen, were it open-source, is that its most popular features would be integrated into Lich, or a second Jamus-free system would be set up in parallel to mine.

Allowing non-Sage clients to connect to the server would open up a potential security hole- it becomes much more difficult for me to ensure that a client identifying themselves as one person is indeed that person. That makes it nearly impossible for me to effectively moderate the server (how do you ban someone that can be anyone), and theoretically possible for one user to impersonate another- particularly because the PsiNet keys system is going to be retired.

Because of these concerns, PsiNet will not become open source.

It is also difficult for me to justify sharing my own work with a project whose apparent primary goal is to replace my own. It is interesting that I frequently hear that lich is superior in every way, and in the next breath complaints that I don't contribute my own work to it. I also suppose that this kind of competition is probably the best possible thing for the small modding community as a whole.

Nonetheless, as a gesture of good will, I have offered the data I use to track buffs to the lich community. I will attach that file here, though it is also available- and has been- in the psinet library for quite some time. Without checking, I believe the query is ?spells, or ?spells.xml.

I am not particularly concerned about the declarations of PsiNet's doom. It appears to me that a fair proportion of lich users simultaneously use PsiNet, which they are welcome to do. PsiNet's user base is in fact growing, even now- at least identified by unique and active installations, or by the proportion of Gemstone players who also use PsiNet. Because of this I suspect that the motivation behind these declarations is less a measurement of PsiNet's success, than a calculation of where those users would go were Lich actually replacing it.

Lich has its niche, and it serves that niche very well. Our audiences overlap, but not entirely. My goal is to unite those audiences so that, as you all say, everyone can be on the same system. The difference is that you want that eventual system to be Lich- can you blame me for supporting my own, instead?

[JamusPsi]

First, I forgot the file I meant to attach, and would gladly atach it but its size exceeds the forum allowance. So instead, http://psinet.dynalias.net/spells.xml

Second, another option occurred to me- I would be willing to add a feature to PsiNet allowing its users to connect to lich channels as well, if the goal is to unite the chat systems.

[Drew]

Second, another option occurred to me- I would be willing to add a feature to PsiNet allowing its users to connect to lich channels as well, if the goal is to unite the chat systems.

This would be great. :hug2:

[SpiffyJr]

This would be great. :hug2:

Yep. That would be <3. We don't want to replace Psinet with Lich but rather share the data between the two systems. If we could do cross-locates, cross-chat, and gain cross-system spell information we would be golden.

[phantasm]

Love it.

[BigWorm]

To save us all the hassle of having to do a forum search to find my positions on these issues, I'll reiterate them here.

First of all, thank you for responding to this thread. I am aware that you have posted your opinions on some of these issues before but this is probably the most forthcoming I've seen you be about your opinions on the PC.


An IRC backend for the client was considered. However, I'd have to either: reformat the other communications to work through irc commands (which might invite tampering), have the client connect to two different servers (one for chat, one for other messages), or have the server mirror chat commands through the IRC server. The last might defeat the point of it, and the first is a great deal of work for little gain. It is low-priority but something I might do someday.

Definitely agree that these are all valid technical points against an IRC solution. Personally, if the chat was available on IRC, I'd rather connect to it with the chat client I'm already running all the time, though I know that's not what everyone wants.


PsiNet is not open-source because I want to maintain control over the server. I am hardly a tyrant- to my knowledge there is not a single active player who is banned, presently- but I also don't want to give up what controls I have. I also enjoy the very limited income I receive from the project.

I don't remember seeing anyone credible ask you to relinquish control of your server. I haven't been a Psinet user for a long time, but I rarely see anyone complaining about your moderation or banning practices. If they did, I would tell them to either get the hell off your server or stop complaining about how you run it. Also, I don't really see nearly as much value in you releasing the source code for the server as there would be if you opened up the client-side code. I have no use in running a server and I doubt many other users would either. And I have absolutely no problem with you making any amount of money off of running the server; there is nothing that open sourcing the client (or server) code would do to prevent you from doing whatever you want on your server.


I strongly suspect that what would almost immediately happen, were it open-source, is that its most popular features would be integrated into Lich, or a second Jamus-free system would be set up in parallel to mine.

I am not up to date on Psinet's features, but the main ones that I remember and that I hear about from other people have equivalents in Lich, though the details may not be exactly the same (inventory sorting comes to mind). More to the point, you make it sound like the existence of other similar projects such as Lich is a negative for you and Psinet. I cannot disagree more and think that the existence of Lich is at worst neutral and more likely has a positive effect on Psinet's development. Whether you choose to use them as a resource or not, Lich developers and users are solving similar problems to many that you face and making information available for anyone to use.


Allowing non-Sage clients to connect to the server would open up a potential security hole- it becomes much more difficult for me to ensure that a client identifying themselves as one person is indeed that person. That makes it nearly impossible for me to effectively moderate the server (how do you ban someone that can be anyone), and theoretically possible for one user to impersonate another- particularly because the PsiNet keys system is going to be retired.

This argument makes absolutely no sense to me. If you are replacing your authentication mechanism, why not base it on an already existing secure solution that is well tested, straightforward to implement, and relatively easily maintained like public keys? In Java this is available in the built in security libraries. I'm almost sure C# has an equivalent library available but I don't code in MS land so I can't say for sure.


Because of these concerns, PsiNet will not become open source.

While I agree that there are totally valid reasons for you not to open source your client, I don't think that any of the ones you gave are. From the reasons you provided, it seems like you are afraid that open sourcing your code would cost you all of your control of the project. I don't think that would be true at all. While anyone could read the code and modify it, no one could force you to include any changes you didn't want in your code. You would still be the gatekeeper and could include as much or as little of any contributors code as you wanted. I know you are not asking for any development help, but there are definitely some talented coders that would contribute their work to your project and expect nothing in return. I know this is true because there are some of those people working on Lich right now.


It is also difficult for me to justify sharing my own work with a project whose apparent primary goal is to replace my own. It is interesting that I frequently hear that lich is superior in every way, and in the next breath complaints that I don't contribute my own work to it. I also suppose that this kind of competition is probably the best possible thing for the small modding community as a whole.



I am not particularly concerned about the declarations of PsiNet's doom. It appears to me that a fair proportion of lich users simultaneously use PsiNet, which they are welcome to do. PsiNet's user base is in fact growing, even now- at least identified by unique and active installations, or by the proportion of Gemstone players who also use PsiNet. Because of this I suspect that the motivation behind these declarations is less a measurement of PsiNet's success, than a calculation of where those users would go were Lich actually replacing it.

Lich has its niche, and it serves that niche very well. Our audiences overlap, but not entirely. My goal is to unite those audiences so that, as you all say, everyone can be on the same system. The difference is that you want that eventual system to be Lich- can you blame me for supporting my own, instead?

I honestly don't understand why you feel so threatened by the existence of the Lich or similar projects. No one is actively trying to eliminate Psinet by implementing similar functionality in Lich. You make it sound like Lich and Psinet are competing for users in a winner take all competition. I think your point about Lich and Psinet serving different niches is important here. The lich has always been about scripting first, which is much different that Psinet is about. Also, as a linux user, I don't even have the option to use Psinet. This isn't LotR; there doesn't have to be one GemStone mod to rule them all. Different strokes for different folks and all.


Nonetheless, as a gesture of good will, I have offered the data I use to track buffs to the lich community. I will attach that file here, though it is also available- and has been- in the psinet library for quite some time. Without checking, I believe the query is ?spells, or ?spells.xml.

Thank you for sharing this information. I don't know how useful it will be but it is appreciated. I think this is the info that is mirror as psinet-spells.txt or something in the repo but I'm not sure about that.

[BigWorm]

First, I forgot the file I meant to attach, and would gladly atach it but its size exceeds the forum allowance. So instead, http://psinet.dynalias.net/spells.xml

Second, another option occurred to me- I would be willing to add a feature to PsiNet allowing its users to connect to lich channels as well, if the goal is to unite the chat systems.

I think part of the reason for wanting to connect to the Psinet server is the problems that have been occurring with the lichnet servers. From what I hear users say, the Psinet chat server is one of the biggest benefits to the program. Since authentication should be handled on the server side, it seemed like we should be able to create a chat client if you explained your authentication mechanism. I am unsure of why you feel your security would be compromised if people knew how you did it; if someone could break the system by knowing how it works then it is inherently insecure to begin with, whether or not it is a secret.

[phantasm]

psinet server does more than chat, you can also locate, check skills, and share spell durations.

Chat has a weak link with the character object.

The last few require a strong link with the ideal object of a linked character.

How is possible to create an open authentication protocol that also guarantee the object it access is valid?

How can psinet server be positive that all clients are sending valid character information without this subtle security that it now has.

EDIT: these are actually fun problems to solve, Jamus should open-source so we can all work on them together.

[Kamkor]

Why do I see some member of the lich crowd in "EVERY" psinet thread begging for him to give them his source code.

You have an open source project called LICH, why don't you go add some code to that and improve it to a point were people will use it over psinet or something.

Endlessly begging for Jamus to give you his code is starting to make you all look bad to me.


Someone already spent a ton of time creating lich, and was then nice enough to open source it.

Not to mention all the scripts available for free.

Does open-source mean 2 guys that code, and 75 that copy-paste all their hard work.

Fuck...

Get off your open-source pedestal and look around at all the lazy bums surrounding you.

Quit posting this shit in every psinet thread.


EDIT: these are actually fun problems to solve, Jamus should open-source so we can all work on them together.

wait what?

[Sam]

I think part of the reason for wanting to connect to the Psinet server is the problems that have been occurring with the lichnet servers. From what I hear users say, the Psinet chat server is one of the biggest benefits to the program. Since authentication should be handled on the server side, it seemed like we should be able to create a chat client if you explained your authentication mechanism. I am unsure of why you feel your security would be compromised if people knew how you did it; if someone could break the system by knowing how it works then it is inherently insecure to begin with, whether or not it is a secret.


I must admit that I've had a lot of problems with the lichnet servers over the past 4 months.. I still love lich, and if i gave a shit about talking to the community somewhere besides these forums it might bother me, and i could probably find a fix myself, but yeah.. lichnet is always dying for me (maybe due to my 2% effort to resolve it..)

[phantasm]

wait what?

Had a change of heart, thanks for noticing.