Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
PPK

Split from: We are now hiring

38 posts in this topic

You know what web archive is ? If not you should use google. It is where is possible to see archived CzDC website from 28 february and few other times after. Not all of them contains CzDC binary and source files but when they do then they don't contains anything about OpenSSL in license :whistling:

True it is possible to see the website (or to be more precise some pages of it) from 28th February, through archive.org but even if you initially select that record not all of the archived data is from that exact date (since archive.org attempts to show you a copy that is most complete). Also there is no record of the B2 version (CzDC-0699[b2]-src.7z) of the source in the archive.

And the source you linked to that you claim is forgery just happens to be a B2 source, so you can not use web archive which has no record of CzDC-0699[b2]-src.7z from anything close to 28th February to prove that the source you linked to is counterfeit made by BM.

Edit: also renaming a file does not change the actual data in the file... so a file name being different does not prove anything regarding the file itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good day.

I don't understand you people trying to proof something completely irrelevant to eachother. What I'm trying to say is that all of you are more or less great developers and contributors. Just think what you could approach by working together instead of working against eachother. Think about changing your tactics to something better like solution to my ever question: Why after several years of foundation of CTM exploitation does every single DC client still miss1) CTM antiflood to prevent innocent users from being exploited either ways2)? CTM exploitation is way far from growing old. So pick your thoughts together and start building better clients. :stuart: :angry:

Thank you.

1) I don't mean blocking all CTM requests to port 80 and 2501, but limiting and blocking amount of incoming CTM requests, flood detection, on any port.

2) A. Old exploitable hub softwares. B. I see more and more hub owners learning to turn off IP check in CTM requests for example in PtokaX 0.4.1.1, redirecting all possible users to that hub and running external bots for sending CTM requests from localhost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always change things - and that's why you always ignore when someone writes something and try to tell seomthing different.

You looked on yourself ? Because that is exactly what you do. You said that you don't copy/pasted country flags from CZDC++, i'm showed line from your own changelog where you wrote that you have that from CZDC++. You wrote that CZDC++ have tabs always on bottom, everyone can check that you are wrong. When you wanted to have openssl exception for CZDC+ you upload source with that exception to your own website. You totally ignore one line in license is not correct way to give that exception, because from that is not visible where it apply (remember that CzDC source contains code under other licenses than GNU GPL), you don't even noticed that CzDC can't allow openssl simply because use DC++ code that don't have that exception and adding OpenSSL exception to CzDC will result in GNU GPL violation. You reduce any feature that you copy/pasted from CZDC++ to one or two lines of code, it is easy to check that you are wrong in search for alternates reporting and more wrong in Pause/Resume search button.

Edit: also renaming a file does not change the actual data in the file... so a file name being different does not prove anything regarding the file itself.

I understand your point and you are right. I'm trying to show that something is wrong with that. When Big Muscle wanted to show CzDC source with OpenSSL exception in license he don't simply point to any website where it is. He instead upload it to his own website. Linus Torvalds said "Only wimps use tape backup: real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)".Big Muscle shown that CzDC is mirrored, so mirror with CzDC source with OpenSSL exception in license must exist. But when he used that source first time and said that google can find other sites where it is then i'm tried that and google failed and don't found any sites :stuart:

2) A. Old exploitable hub softwares. B. I see more and more hub owners learning to turn off IP check in CTM requests for example in PtokaX 0.4.1.1, redirecting all possible users to that hub and running external bots for sending CTM requests from localhost.

As Big Muscle said PtokaX is easy to crash, so it should be easy to crash these hubs. But really if they use PtokaX for this in hard way (external bots ? why when there is many easier ways). Worse is that if they want to do that you can't do anything. If hub software don't have option to disable ip check then they hexedit it's binary to remove that (PtokaX have many hexedited versions :angry: ). And if they don't hexedit it then they will simply compile their own version from source (closed source is not option for multi-platform software).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Big Muscle said PtokaX is easy to crash, so it should be easy to crash these hubs. But really if they use PtokaX for this in hard way (external bots ? why when there is many easier ways). Worse is that if they want to do that you can't do anything. If hub software don't have option to disable ip check then they hexedit it's binary to remove that (PtokaX have many hexedited versions :stuart: ). And if they don't hexedit it then they will simply compile their own version from source (closed source is not option for multi-platform software).

I don't complain about hub softwares, but about NMDC clients individual users run on their computers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't complain about hub softwares, but about NMDC clients individual users run on their computers.

Ok, but then you need to start with DC++ and request improvement. I seen hub sending $ConnectToMe PPK hub-address-to-attack.no-ip.com:411| and DC++ that address in command where must be only IP resolved and helped with attack :angry: Another DC++ thing is (i'm not sure if it was not fixed in some 0.7xx) that DC++ allow unlimited connections to same ip and port.. again that helping in attacks :stuart:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You looked on yourself ? Because that is exactly what you do.

Ah, this is what we did in maternity school. Interesting that you still do it now. "I wasn't me, buuu, it was him, buuuu". Just say what of your parts I ignored?

When you wanted to have openssl exception for CZDC+ you upload source with that exception to your own website. You totally ignore one line in license is not correct way to give that exception, because from that is not visible where it apply (remember that CzDC source contains code under other licenses than GNU GPL), you don't even noticed that CzDC can't allow openssl simply because use DC++ code that don't have that exception and adding OpenSSL exception to CzDC will result in GNU GPL violation.

Yeah, yeah. I manually modified that site. Interesting that you again ignored and didn't answer the question why there is so many sites which have your binary with another license? Yes, of couse, all of them modified it... interesting that all modified it with same license and with same date. You say, that you aren't responsible for it. So don't be! It's just evidence that such version exists - and it was downloaded from your website.

You reduce any feature that you copy/pasted from CZDC++ to one or two lines of code, it is easy to check that you are wrong in search for alternates reporting and more wrong in Pause/Resume search button.

Yes, you are right that I reduce features to one or two lines. Why? Because the rest is just not important => e.g. search for alternates - ONE function line = LogManager::get...etc.. + the rest is only ONE string in StringDefs.h + ONE added constant into SettingManager and added checkbox into Settings dialog. This checkbox code is again only a copy of another checkboxes + changed constants names in it. So you say that you own copyright that for checkbox in settings? Or you own copyright for one string in StringDefs.h? Or that you own copyright for "if(BOOLSETTING(xxx))" ? You're funny. Similar applies to Pause button - a few functional lines which is just pure adding an item to vector + iterating over this vector. Common methods, so you can't hold copyright for that. I should also mention that I had to modify this code so it works correctly with my TreeListView structure. And you use this my patch in your client too, so don't complain. Back to MagnetDialog - you said you have added size and adding file to queue.. so explain why adding to queue is in RevConnect too - although code is comment, but it's there? Or again, you just want to hold copyright for simple QueueManager::getInstance()->add (where part of this method was copied from RevConnect), or you want to hold copyright for changing "0" (or whatever was there before) to "size"? You're funny again.

I understand that you want to find something which I STOLE you. But I advise you to select some normal code which can be copyrighted, and not features which consists of few lines and the majority of them is just copy of another DC++ code with changed variables, constants, maximally added new string or constant.... oh, I nearly forgot - you are able to develop only simple lines and not complex code.

But when he used that source first time and said that google can find other sites where it is then i'm tried that and google failed and don't found any sites :stuart:

Where I said that google can find it now? I said here that it's on web and on DC - not that it can be found via google. And one more thing - when YOU aren't able to find anything, it doesn't mean it's not there. Don't be naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand you people trying to proof something completely irrelevant to eachother. What I'm trying to say is that all of you are more or less great developers and contributors. Just think what you could approach by working together instead of working against eachother. Think about changing your tactics to something better like solution to my ever question

Even funnies is how everything started. Reading logs from old Frizhub (PPK knows what there), I can find there facts like "PPK says he doesn't want to segmented downloading in CZDC but says it is done very well in StrongDC", "PPK says my TypedTreeListView is very good so he's telling me that he will use it in CzDC" and many other things. Then I removed support of old NMDC filelists and what happens? PPK wants to ban StrongDC++ in hubs, he tells my client is ****, he complains that StrongDC segmented downloading is stupid (said in one Czech hub), he removes copyright statement in my TypedTreeListView and he violates copyright by this, he complains that I'm stealing his code and using it against license. And many other things.

A making something better? I already did, e.g. encryption in NMDC hubs (made by Flow84 idea in his FlowLib client). And what happens? PPK starts complaining that I stole his idea (in that nighthawk forum) and I made it incompatible with his code (although there never was any encryption in his code).

It's funny how he can change behaviour/thinking only due to removed compatibility with old NMDC lists. :stuart:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even funnies is how everything started.

About time, I was waiting for one of you to bring that up :stuart:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About time, I was waiting for one of you to bring that up :stuart:

What did I tell you Crise. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About time, I was waiting for one of you to bring that up :stuart:

I don't want to discuss to beginning, I just want to show how PPK isn't able to stand for his opinion and change it due to such banality.

Also PPK should study the law before playing with the copyright - there's explicit statement that the person who makes a complain should provide evidence that the complain is right. But PPK isn't able to do it - he lost arguments so he at least tries to say that GPL exception statement is invalid (although it's not - FSF mail has higher priority than some PPK's fantasy). It's interesting that GPL exception was OK when he was using it in his client. He also says that I falsified his license - but again he is the person who makes a complain, so he must provide evidence that such version never existed. So no evidence (list of changelog entries is not evidence) => his complain has no sense.

Anyway, I'm taking master exams on Monday. If I pass we can start discussing the wxWidgets port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar applies to Pause button - a few functional lines which is just pure adding an item to vector + iterating over this vector. Common methods, so you can't hold copyright for that.

If you want to play it with that way then your whole TypedTreeListView using common methods and nothing else :stuart: So you can't hold copyright for that, you want to apply it that way over my code then you should do that for your own code too :P

Back to MagnetDialog - you said you have added size and adding file to queue.. so explain why adding to queue is in RevConnect too - although code is comment, but it's there?

It is too easy to check MagnetDialog in CZDC++ and ReverseConnect to see that they are very different.

But I advise you to select some normal code which can be copyrighted

Your own changelog state more things that you copy/pasted but you ignored that. Your way with something that can't be copyrighted is wrong.

and not features which consists of few lines and the majority of them is just copy of another DC++ code with changed variables, constants, maximally added new string or constant

For you is everything few lines, you are not able to check things properly. You think that everything (maybe PtokaX too? ;) ) is developed by copy/paste, but you are wrong.

.... oh, I nearly forgot - you are able to develop only simple lines and not complex code.

And that is another evidence that you are totally wrong. CzDC don't use WTL, do you think that whole wtl (1.5 MB of code) can be replaced with few simple lines ? When i join PtokaX project it was coded with using borland components, borland AnsiString, core can't work without gui because gui was settings. Do you think that this was possible to replace that with few simple lines to be possible to run that without gui as windows service ? Or it is possible to replace all that used borland and winapi things with few simple lines to be possible to compile and run PtokaX on non-windows platforms ? Maybe you think that but then.. you must be really different :P

I said here that it's on web and on DC - not that it can be found via google.

Your DMCA Counter-Notification that you sent to sourceforge contains link to your site with CzDC source and OpenSSL allowing license and after that link is that other copies with same license "can be found via google". Or maybe you don't remember that too ? :w00t:

he removes copyright statement in my TypedTreeListView and he violates copyright by this

Applying your own logic over your code as you doing it with my code -> Code with common methods that can't be copyrighted with you :P

made by Flow84 idea in his FlowLib client)

From FlowLib changelog

Supports a modified version of $ConnectToMe and $MyINFO. (Special thanks to PPK who came up with the idea from the begining)

It is not flows idea as you always saying :P

he lost arguments so he at least tries to say that GPL exception statement is invalid (although it's not - FSF mail has higher priority than some PPK's fantasy).

If you don't noticed it is GNU GPL, not FSF GPL.

GNU statement is absolutely clear and you can't discuss it. When you contact them they will point you to important sentence in their GNU GPL faq. That faq is available online and important part is http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs with important sentence "In either case, you should put this text in each file to which you are granting this permission." :angry:

But i will give you two choices, both are bad for you but one make you happy because in that one statement is valid. First choice is that this exception statement is invalid and you can't use my code. Second choice is that this exception statement is valid -> it is license violation -> you have nothing allowing you to use that code at all :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he complains that StrongDC segmented downloading is stupid

I don't think that i'm said that StrongDC segmented downloading is stupid, because there was never any StrongDC segmented downloading.

You like to saying that something that you don't created is yours. You stated first time when you was on dc dev public that you created segmented downloading and you like to saying that again and again. You don't created segmented downloading, you copy/pasted it from ReverseConnect and when DC++ gets segmented downloading then you replaced ReverseConnect one with that from DC++. I'm sure you don't replaced it only for fun, but because old one was really bad or stupid as you wrote that i'm said ? :stuart:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loool, you're funny. Yes, I didn't make segmented downloading, I copied it from RevConnect (ReverseConnect before) - and I improved TTH verification in it. Then I copied it from DC++ and replaced old code? Why? Because I wanted - the same reason why I removed that old NMDC filelist - I just wanted to be updated with DC++ code. What does it mean? The you lie again - StrongDC++ has segmented downloading (although I copied it (and improved it) from another client).

Also, if you want to argue whether my code is common or you made complex copyrighted code, everyone can check for example here:

Pause function: http://www.home.karneval.cz/01027053/tmp/PPK_large_complex_code.txt // comparing StrongDC++ SVN from 25th November 2004 (the first StrongDC++ with this function) and CzDC (the oldest code I have is from the beginning of 2005) and both clients have different way of readding paused item. You changed your code to my way in 0.666K - so how it could be possible that I stole this function from you?

TypedTreeListViewCtrl: http://www.home.karneval.cz/01027053/tmp/BM_small_code.txt // + it contains many changes in SearchFrame

You quibble between GNU GPL and FSF GPL? You're funny - you probably should study website of license you use. Communication has been made with Karl Berry [licensing@fsf.org] (www.gnu.org directs to this mail - you will find it if you read GNU website correctly) half year ago and the current form of exception statement is valid according to him. To your links, there's nothing that it MUST be done in such way. You should read it properly and you will see word EXAMPLE (czech: PŘÍKLADY).

Below are two example license notices that you can use to do that

Now I'm stopping the discussion, because you weren't still able to provide any evidence of which code in my screenshots you hold copyright. So the discussion has no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0