5 ms·

>dmitry forgot about an easter egg Ah yes, classic "insert an unauthorized coin wallet soliciting money from badge owners" easter egg. Timeless prank, how coul

by viccis 2y ago

>dmitry forgot about an easter egg Ah yes, classic "insert an unauthorized coin wallet soliciting money from badge owners" easter egg. Timeless prank, how could anyone be mad at such a normal and anodyne "easter egg"? lmao DEFCON's "brand" isn't in any danger. edit: And now he's pulling the classic hacker move of (checks notes) enforcing strict software IP ownership rights? Guy's a class act all around. Hope everyone learned an important lesson about Dmitry and Entropic with this mess.

josephg 2y ago
He wasn’t employed by anyone, and didn’t get paid by anyone for his work. (Defcon is wrong about this in their statement, and admitted as such in the comment thread). When I write code that nobody is paying for, you better believe I’ll write it how I damn well please. If you aren’t paying, you aren’t the customer. And you don’t get to control the output of my work. The wallet address soliciting donations is for the hardware company, not on his own behalf. But even if it was on his own behalf, would you still be mad? Since when is it a crime to be proud of the code you’ve written, for free, to bring joy to an hacker conference? That deserves mad credit in my book.
- viccis 2y ago
  I don't really care whether money changed hands. Secretly putting an ad into software that you know will be distributed to many people is the oldest scumbag move in the scumbag book. All sympathy ended there, and that was weeks before he trespassed.
  - josephg 2y ago
    Eh. When I was young, I played a demo of Doom that came with a magazine. When you finish the demo level, the game show an ad that said if I ponied up money, I could play the whole game. I fail to see the problem. And in this case it wasn’t an ad. It was a page saying you could donate to the hardware company if you want, who were out of pocket $100k for making the hardware. That’s an incredibly tame prank by Defcon standards.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    Characterizing it as an "ad" feels a bit dishonest, as if it was an ad for some random product completely unrelated to the conference or the badges themselves. It was a shout-out to the company that made the badges! And that after DEFCON promised to give that company credit on the badge case, and then reneged on that promise. Even if Entropic shat the bed so badly that DEFCON's takeover of badge production was actually warranted (I'm super skeptical of this claim), the badges still consisted nearly entirely of Entropic's & Dmitry's work. DEFCON's removal of credit from the badge case was deeply unethical.
- bawolff 2y ago
  > When I write code that nobody is paying for, you better believe I’ll write it how I damn well please. You're under no obligation to write code. You are under an obligation not to sneak an advert into someone else's conference via essentially fraudulent means. Just because nobody is paying you, doesn't mean you have carte blanche to do whatever you want. I dont think this is a controversial opinion. If someone created a piece of open source software but hid a trojan or cryptominer in it people would find it objectionable. You could quibble about where the line is, but i think everyone agrees that just because something is free does not give you the absolute right to do whatever you want.
  - josephg 2y ago
    Its not an ad. It was a request for donations to a company that put themselves out to the tune of $100k to make the badges happen. And then had credit and publicity stripped from them during defcon - even though that was part of the deal! Apparently they aren't even mentioned in the program, and their company logo was taken off the cases for the badges. We aren't talking about client work here. We're talking about defcon, where cheekily thumbing your nose at authority through code is the heart and soul of the conference. This single, hidden page asking for donations on behalf of the hardware company is a total nothingburger. Getting up in arms about it for being unprofessional is ridiculous.
    - squigz 2y ago
      > We're talking about defcon, where cheekily thumbing your nose at authority through code is the heart and soul of the conference. This single, hidden page asking for donations on behalf of the hardware company is a total nothingburger. Getting up in arms about it for being unprofessional is ridiculous. People in this thread do seem to be very upset about a hacker doing hacker things. For a bit more irony, we're on Hacker News...
      - josephg 2y ago
        Wannabe corporate programmer news.
  - 2y ago
Dylan16807 2y ago
> edit: And now he's pulling the classic hacker move of (checks notes) enforcing strict software IP ownership rights? Guy's a class act all around. Hope everyone learned an important lesson about Dmitry and Entropic with this mess. Doing it as counterplay to a lack of credit is a great hack.
Aeolun 2y ago
It’s not like it’s blocking the badge from functioning unless you pay. It doesn’t even pop up unless you specifically go looking for it. It seems perfectly in line with the ‘shareware’ and ‘buy me a cup of coffee’ spirit that characterized the early years.
- bawolff 2y ago
  Generally you dont make secret shareware out of software you make for other people. Just imagine what would happen if you created a shareware scene in the software of some company you work for. You would get fired (and possibly sued) so fast it would make your head spin.
  - Rebelgecko 2y ago
    My understanding is that Dmitry was a volunteer. IMO that makes the "shareware" more reasonable than if he were an employee writing the code on the clock(and it doesn't seem like he was soliciting money for himself)

by viccis 2y ago

josephg 2y ago

He wasn’t employed by anyone, and didn’t get paid by anyone for his work. (Defcon is wrong about this in their statement, and admitted as such in the comment thread). When I write code that nobody is paying for, you better believe I’ll write it how I damn well please. If you aren’t paying, you aren’t the customer. And you don’t get to control the output of my work. The wallet address soliciting donations is for the hardware company, not on his own behalf. But even if it was on his own behalf, would you still be mad? Since when is it a crime to be proud of the code you’ve written, for free, to bring joy to an hacker conference? That deserves mad credit in my book.

viccis 2y ago
I don't really care whether money changed hands. Secretly putting an ad into software that you know will be distributed to many people is the oldest scumbag move in the scumbag book. All sympathy ended there, and that was weeks before he trespassed.
- josephg 2y ago
  Eh. When I was young, I played a demo of Doom that came with a magazine. When you finish the demo level, the game show an ad that said if I ponied up money, I could play the whole game. I fail to see the problem. And in this case it wasn’t an ad. It was a page saying you could donate to the hardware company if you want, who were out of pocket $100k for making the hardware. That’s an incredibly tame prank by Defcon standards.
- kelnos 2y ago
  Characterizing it as an "ad" feels a bit dishonest, as if it was an ad for some random product completely unrelated to the conference or the badges themselves. It was a shout-out to the company that made the badges! And that after DEFCON promised to give that company credit on the badge case, and then reneged on that promise. Even if Entropic shat the bed so badly that DEFCON's takeover of badge production was actually warranted (I'm super skeptical of this claim), the badges still consisted nearly entirely of Entropic's & Dmitry's work. DEFCON's removal of credit from the badge case was deeply unethical.
bawolff 2y ago
> When I write code that nobody is paying for, you better believe I’ll write it how I damn well please. You're under no obligation to write code. You are under an obligation not to sneak an advert into someone else's conference via essentially fraudulent means. Just because nobody is paying you, doesn't mean you have carte blanche to do whatever you want. I dont think this is a controversial opinion. If someone created a piece of open source software but hid a trojan or cryptominer in it people would find it objectionable. You could quibble about where the line is, but i think everyone agrees that just because something is free does not give you the absolute right to do whatever you want.
- josephg 2y ago
  Its not an ad. It was a request for donations to a company that put themselves out to the tune of $100k to make the badges happen. And then had credit and publicity stripped from them during defcon - even though that was part of the deal! Apparently they aren't even mentioned in the program, and their company logo was taken off the cases for the badges. We aren't talking about client work here. We're talking about defcon, where cheekily thumbing your nose at authority through code is the heart and soul of the conference. This single, hidden page asking for donations on behalf of the hardware company is a total nothingburger. Getting up in arms about it for being unprofessional is ridiculous.
  - squigz 2y ago
    > We're talking about defcon, where cheekily thumbing your nose at authority through code is the heart and soul of the conference. This single, hidden page asking for donations on behalf of the hardware company is a total nothingburger. Getting up in arms about it for being unprofessional is ridiculous. People in this thread do seem to be very upset about a hacker doing hacker things. For a bit more irony, we're on Hacker News...
    - josephg 2y ago
      Wannabe corporate programmer news.
- 2y ago

Dylan16807 2y ago

> edit: And now he's pulling the classic hacker move of (checks notes) enforcing strict software IP ownership rights? Guy's a class act all around. Hope everyone learned an important lesson about Dmitry and Entropic with this mess. Doing it as counterplay to a lack of credit is a great hack.

Aeolun 2y ago

It’s not like it’s blocking the badge from functioning unless you pay. It doesn’t even pop up unless you specifically go looking for it. It seems perfectly in line with the ‘shareware’ and ‘buy me a cup of coffee’ spirit that characterized the early years.

bawolff 2y ago
Generally you dont make secret shareware out of software you make for other people. Just imagine what would happen if you created a shareware scene in the software of some company you work for. You would get fired (and possibly sued) so fast it would make your head spin.
- Rebelgecko 2y ago
  My understanding is that Dmitry was a volunteer. IMO that makes the "shareware" more reasonable than if he were an employee writing the code on the clock(and it doesn't seem like he was soliciting money for himself)