xylo
Offline
Holland
The Silph Scope wrote:
Xylo wrote:

Music is actually only a small part of demoscene, so to say demoscene was open since it's beginning would be a bit exaggerating.

You know, software can be open too wink
fsf.org
opensource.org

He's stating that Demoscene was 'open' since it's beginning because tracked songs are open source anyway. It's wrong to state 'Demoscene' was open source because tracked songs are. Music is only a small part of the demoscene.

xylo
Offline
Holland
akira^8GB wrote:
ant1 wrote:

demos were not generally distributed with source code for a long time, maybe in the Spirit Of Competition.

As said before, if you were IN the demoscene, you COULD get access to loads if not most of the stuff.

Yes, but commercially releasing code on Github and stuff is different from just asking on a demoparty. smile

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden

In my experience, I agree with Akira that at least C64 people open whatever they want opened smile. For some purposes (figuring out a specific effect/trick) a disassembly is only slightly less readable than a source file. Reverse engineering is simply assumed more often than not, but (rightfully) proud people will happily explain their tricks to you in forums/diskmags/person.

4mat
Offline

problem is if we open source everything we can't send "fuckingz to lamers" anymore.  what do we fill the scrolltexts with?

(A JOKE)

iLKke
Offline
Psydney, Australia

Linde has a point there.
Having the skills to peek into machine code or SID registers is considered a manifest of one's commitment, and is negligible compared to the effort needed to master a platform. Also it's much more fun big_smile

Damn you, open source!!! Y U RUIN EVERYTHING?

nitro2k01
Offline
Sweeeeeeden
4mat wrote:

problem is if we open source everything we can't send "fuckingz to lamers" anymore.  what do we fill the scrolltexts with?

(A JOKE)

Haha, was just about to ask if this was the end of "fuck da rippaz".