Posted - 2008.04.20 04:36:00 - [2]

 

agreed, anti-bacon's will get my vote.

Posted - 2008.04.20 04:40:00 - [4]

 

I will not be happy until BACON sizzles.

Posted - 2008.04.20 05:01:00 - [6]

 

While the software might give you small leverage it's the local channel that's the underlying problem.
I don't really like having to scroll the local channel all the time either.

Posted - 2008.04.20 05:12:00 - [8]

 

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

Posted - 2008.04.20 05:14:00 - [10]

 

Originally by: Jade Constantine

---

I don't like the idea of the BACON program really - it strikes me as being too "macro-y" ie making basic precautions and spacial awareness automatic. If it was my choice I'd warn people off this. However, it will probably be rendered obsolete when local chat is removed/restricted in some way. But its fair to say I'm "anti-Bacon" - since its dumbing down an aspect of the game and making it even easier to avoid non-consensual pvp in 0.0 and lowsec (+ concord wars).

---

Translated: Im anti-bacon.

WOOO JADE CONSTANTINE FOR CSM!

Posted - 2008.04.20 05:34:00 - [12]

 

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 05:36:32
Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 05:34:54
Macro
It is safe to assume you all misunderstand the word.


Regards,

Eronysis

Posted - 2008.04.20 05:45:00 - [14]

 

I do by no means think bacon is cool.

It's a very big workaround, but it would do the same task as reading directly from the memory, which is bad.

So i hope that CCP will change their EULA/TOS accordingly.

Posted - 2008.04.20 06:55:00 - [16]

 

This reminds me of the time when all channels used to notify everyone in them by text as to who was coming and going. But that still wasn't anywhere near as invasive as this. Or are people just expected to cross their fingers and hope that their target doesn't have their speakers on, now?

The only reason I could support this being allowed is if CCP can identify those characters using it and assess their behaviour a little more closely for other more suspicious activity. But even if that were possible, I imagine that those types would catch on pretty quickly so its usefulness in that regard would be limited at best.

It's a clear nerf to the risk factor outside of high-sec Empire, and as such I see it as a precedent that's just too dangerous to ought to be allowed. The game is already more "dumb" than it should be without making it worse with tools like this.

/Ben

Posted - 2008.04.20 07:11:00 - [18]

 

BACON is essentially a audio version of the client hack that made local portraits into standings indicators. No thanks.

Posted - 2008.04.20 07:15:00 - [20]

 

I will vote for whomever ends the Bacon menace.

Posted - 2008.04.20 07:18:00 - [22]

 

really? I disagree, but last I checked, neither of us define said spirit so until a dev says otherwise, its kosher

unlike most bacon

yeah I was waiting to break out that one

Posted - 2008.04.20 07:24:00 - [24]

 

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 07:33:04

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

If case you have as much trouble following links as reading a description or actually using a product before judging it.
I give you another preexisting tool...
Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

Posted - 2008.04.20 07:39:00 - [26]

 

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Edited by: Eronysis on 20/04/2008 07:33:04

Originally by: Eronysis

---

Originally by: motomysz

---

I agree. Anti-BACON candidate gets my vote.

---

Ironic

---

If case you have as much trouble following links as reading a description or actually using a product before judging it.
I give you another preexisting tool...
Beetracker

What is being passed off here is large alliances keeping the advantage of having such tools private and quasi secret. BACON brings them to the masses, in an OPEN SOURCE format. Tools of this nature are being used against thousands of players BY people posting BAN BACON messages in this very thread and in others. Period.

---

I had no idea this is possible - thanks for bringing this to the surface.
I hope the csm candidates can convince ccp to remove the root of the whole problem, not just your programm.

Posted - 2008.04.20 08:17:00 - [28]

 

Originally by: Serenity Steele

---

IMO, it should be implemented for all, or not implemented at all. Whether "implemented for all" is a good case, is up for debate

---

Open Source and the GPL license are the purest form of implemented for all. And we've already proven to be responsive to CCP's concerns: See here.

Posted - 2008.04.20 08:21:00 - [30]

 

Morning! I've just woken up and unfortunately bacon isn't sizzling for me.

If not every player has this then it's an unfair advantage to those that have. The root of the issue as far as I see is local anyway. CCP don't like it being used as an intelligence tool.

However the cat is out of the bag now. The program is in circulation and you can bet there'll be a few who have it running and consequently some who don't. So how do we make it ineffective and level the board again?

CCP have stated they want to get rid of local. I would tend to agree, this would mean probably constellation chat would be used. I would want players to have other tools though to be aware of their surroundings. Such as better scanners/UI to match and non-ship based tools such as spy satellites or perimeter beacons.