3 ms·

No, I think you are misunderstanding. There really isn't an "ethics" of what exploits are allowed or disallowed. Speed running communities generally don't care

No, I think you are misunderstanding. There really isn't an "ethics" of what exploits are allowed or disallowed. Speed running communities generally don't care what exploits you use, as long as you are up-front and honest about it. The idea is to have apples-to-apples comparisons. You did a 100% run with no exploits? Cool, let's compare that to other people who also ran that category. Your friend did an any% run with save file manipulation? Also cool, let's compare that to others in the category. If you modified your save file mid run, but tell everyone else that your run should be compared against other runs that did not modify save files, that's clearly dishonest. The problem isn't the part about what exploit was used; it's the part where he lied to the community about which category it should be classified. Also, the core aspect of speed running is speed: the amount of time it takes you to complete the game. If you are modifying save files outside the game after you start a run, you need to record that time.

szvsw 2y ago
> Speed running communities generally don't care what exploits you use, as long as you are up-front and honest about it. That is, precisely, a set of ethics! > There really isn't an "ethics" of what exploits are allowed or disallowed. It sounds like there is: disclosed exploits are allowed, while non-disclosed exploits are disallowed. This is very clearly a set of ethics. It is different than that of industry, where generally speaking trade-secrets and non-disclosure of methodology is often considered critical to business success, short of establishing protected IP; in academia, disclosure is putatively the norm but there is plenty of partial disclosure of methodology rather than complete… etc. > The problem isn't the part about what exploit was used; it's the part where he lied to the community about which category it should be classified. That puts it very precisely, and also highlights his unethical behavior in the context of speedrunning’s norms around ethical representation of achievements.
- dahart 2y ago
  Whether someone was honest or lied in competition isn’t a unique set of ethics anywhere. Yes they use ethics, and those ethics are shared with society’s notion of ethics. You’re failing to make a case that speed running has their own norms.
- cbarrick 2y ago
  I see. Maybe we're getting too hung up on a prescribed meaning of the word "ethics" rather than the larger meaning of what we're actually saying to each other. Your original comment talks about the distinction between "legitimate" and "illegitimate" exploits, and the juxtaposition of ethics and exploits. My point is that this framing is a misunderstanding of speed running norms - there isn't actually a distinction between "legitimate" and "illegitimate" exploits. And this undermines the poignancy of the juxtaposition. I even refute your assertion that speed running is fundamentally about exploiting - some of the most fun categories or glitchless. I assumed you meant the original comment in the scope of behaviors that could be triggered by the game's code. So it seemed to me that there was a misunderstanding: "illegitimate exploits" simply isn't a thing in this scope, given honesty around the recording. But now I see you make the distinction "disclosed exploits are allowed, while non-disclosed exploits are disallowed". Yes, lying is a exploit, in a larger sense. It wasn't clear to me that this was the intended original meaning. So sure, in this scope it is valid to talk about illegitimate exploits. Frankly, I'm still not sure this actually was your original intended meaning, and it feels like I got strawmanned into an argument about the semantics of the words "ethics" and "legitimacy", when my original intent was to add clarity around the culture of speed running. Any further debate about the philosophy of language is getting too far off topic. Oh, and your edit about "children" is rude.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    > Maybe we're getting too hung up on a prescribed meaning of the word "ethics" rather than the larger meaning of what we're actually saying to each other. Huh, this reminds me of speedrunners and speedrunning being called “cheaters” and “cheating” by new-to-speedrunning viewers on speedrun streams. (Really, they’re just interested in the glitchless categories.) It seems to be a fairly common first reaction and this thread helps put that in perspective. > Oh, and your edit about "children" is rude. That’s presumably not how they meant it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43060190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43060190
    - cbarrick 2y ago
      > That’s presumably not how they meant it. Hah, I have made a misunderstanding again! I guess the philosophy of language _is_ on topic for this thread :P

szvsw 2y ago

> Speed running communities generally don't care what exploits you use, as long as you are up-front and honest about it. That is, precisely, a set of ethics! > There really isn't an "ethics" of what exploits are allowed or disallowed. It sounds like there is: disclosed exploits are allowed, while non-disclosed exploits are disallowed. This is very clearly a set of ethics. It is different than that of industry, where generally speaking trade-secrets and non-disclosure of methodology is often considered critical to business success, short of establishing protected IP; in academia, disclosure is putatively the norm but there is plenty of partial disclosure of methodology rather than complete… etc. > The problem isn't the part about what exploit was used; it's the part where he lied to the community about which category it should be classified. That puts it very precisely, and also highlights his unethical behavior in the context of speedrunning’s norms around ethical representation of achievements.

dahart 2y ago
Whether someone was honest or lied in competition isn’t a unique set of ethics anywhere. Yes they use ethics, and those ethics are shared with society’s notion of ethics. You’re failing to make a case that speed running has their own norms.
cbarrick 2y ago
I see. Maybe we're getting too hung up on a prescribed meaning of the word "ethics" rather than the larger meaning of what we're actually saying to each other. Your original comment talks about the distinction between "legitimate" and "illegitimate" exploits, and the juxtaposition of ethics and exploits. My point is that this framing is a misunderstanding of speed running norms - there isn't actually a distinction between "legitimate" and "illegitimate" exploits. And this undermines the poignancy of the juxtaposition. I even refute your assertion that speed running is fundamentally about exploiting - some of the most fun categories or glitchless. I assumed you meant the original comment in the scope of behaviors that could be triggered by the game's code. So it seemed to me that there was a misunderstanding: "illegitimate exploits" simply isn't a thing in this scope, given honesty around the recording. But now I see you make the distinction "disclosed exploits are allowed, while non-disclosed exploits are disallowed". Yes, lying is a exploit, in a larger sense. It wasn't clear to me that this was the intended original meaning. So sure, in this scope it is valid to talk about illegitimate exploits. Frankly, I'm still not sure this actually was your original intended meaning, and it feels like I got strawmanned into an argument about the semantics of the words "ethics" and "legitimacy", when my original intent was to add clarity around the culture of speed running. Any further debate about the philosophy of language is getting too far off topic. Oh, and your edit about "children" is rude.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  > Maybe we're getting too hung up on a prescribed meaning of the word "ethics" rather than the larger meaning of what we're actually saying to each other. Huh, this reminds me of speedrunners and speedrunning being called “cheaters” and “cheating” by new-to-speedrunning viewers on speedrun streams. (Really, they’re just interested in the glitchless categories.) It seems to be a fairly common first reaction and this thread helps put that in perspective. > Oh, and your edit about "children" is rude. That’s presumably not how they meant it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43060190 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43060190
  - cbarrick 2y ago
    > That’s presumably not how they meant it. Hah, I have made a misunderstanding again! I guess the philosophy of language _is_ on topic for this thread :P