'Art project' video game attacks Apple Mac machines

[JeffDM]

I don't get the argument. Getting worried about a virtual enemy being killed is a stretch. Blaming games and other entertainment media for instigating real crime just doesn't fly, just because maybe it might influence one person in a million, that's not a rational reason to complain. People have scapegoated violent games in the past, but how far are you really going to go when a causal link hasn't been found?

[digitalclips]

Just wait for the alarmist headlines ...

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by Drow_Swordsman

Though I feel sorry for anyone who accidentally downloads this unknowing of its design, the questions it poses as a whole are pretty interesting, in my opinion. I like the concept, I just would never download it.

more to the point what idiot would actually play the game if it says right at the front "killing aliens means i'm deleting random files off your computer' (or however it says it).

[cameronj]

Originally Posted by camroidv27

I disagree with you, but I don't want you dead, and I think your differing opinion adds value to a discussion.

That's quite interesting from someone who just said "Second: I suggest you ban yourself"

Sounds like you don't really value differing opinions as much as you think you do.

[cameronj]

Originally Posted by camroidv27

As someone who works with death every day... I really don't find this funny.

Interesting - you seem to be really focused on not having a sense of humor. You must be a real joy at cocktail parties.

[anantksundaram]

Just make a backup copy of your files before downloading/playing?

[brucep]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Just make a backup copy of your files before downloading/playing?

why play at all.

[Quadra 610]

It's both clever and incredibly stupid.

The game actually tells you what it's going to do.

And some people are actualy going to take the time to back up their files just to try it out.

LOL

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by brucep

why play at all.

I don't know. I don't play computer games. But I'd guess, so that some kid can creep out mom/dad?

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by richardk32

Interesting question. Depending on the time period, it is one that was raised against DaVinci, Nabokov, Solzhenitsyn, Lenny Bruce, John Lennon, and many others. The question may be better phrased "when can a crime successfully masquerade as art?"

i don't know about masquerade but fairly famous photographer Andres Serrano was once sued over an 'obscene' display due to one of his photos.

take a look:


kind of pretty isn't it. all soft and glowing. Well the Catholic Church didn't think so when they found out that it was created by dropping a white plastic crucifix in a beaker of Serrano's urine.

Serrano was never successfully charged with violating the obscenity laws because one of the conditions is that the item must lack any 'artistic, literary, political or social value' and he argued that the photo and the medium reflected that the figure the world holds up on his cross and deifies was also a man of human flesh in all the base and vulgar aspects of that life. thus artistic and perhaps also social value and therefore not obscene.

now my issue with this video game kid is that he doesn't seem to respect the value of what folks have on their computers. were this some stand alone display that wasn't harming anyone's private property it would be different. But the risk of actually destroying something of value, even perhaps an entire system folder by taking out the wrong file, that's just not cool in my book.

[MacTripper]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Just make a backup copy of your files before downloading/playing?

Nope, it also deletes anything it has user level permission to do so.


Running as Root, kiss OS X goodbye.

If your running as Admin...heehee Kiss you apps goodbye!

Running in your main user, kiss your files goodbye.

It will delete Library files, the Downloads folder, support files and anything else it has permissions to do so.


It doesn't need a Admin Password to run thankfully, I wouldn't have run it if it did.


I ran it in Guest, changed the permissions to Read Only for everything in Guest Home except LoseLose and about 4000 dupe files on the Guest folder level (seems to run best this way with the most kills) and let it rip.

I got 146 kills before dying and did a file check, yep 146 files were gone.

The app wants to phone home with the username and the kill results when you finally die, then the app deletes itself.


When it tries to delete permission locked files, the program hangs and requires a force quit. That might be OS X stepping in too.

It could have been deleting the program data files and causing it to hang too.

When you kill a alien, it sort of tells you what file it deletes. It burrows down in sub folders in your user Library and deletes a file there too. So backing up and restoring your files won't necessarily work in restoring your machine to pre-game state.


Guess the best way is to enable Root User and run the game in that, see how long OS X holds up.


I guess I'll be restoring from my clone tonight just in case.


Oh, you want to disconnect anything else, including Time Machine before playing.

[Cubert]

So, is this computer version of the movie "Untraceable"?

[Cubert]

You should be able to specify the folders of files that can be counted and deleted (a la peer-to-peer programs).

This is like Russian Roulette.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Nope, it also deletes anything it has user level permission to do so.
....... etc etc......
Oh, you want to disconnect anything else, including Time Machine before playing.

You, sir, are one bold gentleman!

[newbee]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I don't get the argument. Getting worried about a virtual enemy being killed is a stretch. Blaming games and other entertainment media for instigating real crime just doesn't fly, just because maybe it might influence one person in a million, that's not a rational reason to complain. People have scapegoated violent games in the past, but how far are you really going to go when a causal link hasn't been found?

IMHO, I think the real problem with violent games lies in their realistic imagery. It's quite well known that your body has the ability to adapt itself to a steady exposure to many things. An example would be painkillers, i.e. if 1 aspirin is effectively used for a headache and is used frequently ... soon 1 is not enough.

Our brain reacts to imagery the same way, i.e. the first exposure to graphic violence is quite unsettling but if we are exposed daily our mind starts to accept it as normal and just because it happens on a screen rather than in real life matters little. It's the reason why visualization techniques work.

I honestly think we do ourselves a disservice by allowing and encouraging media producers to keep "upping the ante" in their use of violence. ... just my 2 cents worth.

[MacTripper]

Originally Posted by Quadra 610

It's both clever and incredibly stupid.

The game actually tells you what it's going to do.

And some people are actually going to take the time to back up their files just to try it out.

LOL

Like I said before, this is a bad mistake to make. Because most Mac users use the setup default user which is Admin, so applications and support files will be targeted.

Even in General User the User Library is targeted along with the other folders that come default.

Of course who knows what it places on the drive...


This is a glaring security issue obviously, as Apple is just gambling that new users won't download and run a program like this that wipes their drive.

It won't be long before someone hacks it and removes the "this will delete files" warning and passes it around.

[jpklock]

Companies that sell 'protection' software say that a program that explicitly warns you that it's going to delete your files, using only the normal user permissions, is a security risk.

This, and more... News at 11.

[nli10]

The game itself is a month old - it's not news. The news is that it's now officially considered a threat.

No one here has mentioned that loosing at the game causes it to delete ITSELF, meaning that unless you get the game to crash it's a one play art thing.

And it is possible to beat it without dying or shooting, or by shooting your way to the end.

[brucep]

Originally Posted by nli10

The game itself is a month old - it's not news. The news is that it's now officially considered a threat.

No one here has mentioned that loosing at the game causes it to delete ITSELF, meaning that unless you get the game to crash it's a one play art thing.

And it is possible to beat it without dying or shooting, or by shooting your way to the end.

why doe's this game attack my mac ??
ans why is this ok ??

oh wait thats right
it's >> im a windows user for a day >> day .

[PXT]

Originally Posted by MacTripper

[...]


But way off topic. What's Apple going to do about these trojans?

I suggest a non-sudo application installation password in addition to the admin level password.

It's good to see someone asking the question. Too many people, including a lot of tech types, believe there is nothing you can do to control software that is installed, when actually there is a great deal.

This should be the next big topic for operating system design.

[PXT]

For me, this software reinforces my favorite rant:

Apps should not run with the full permissions as the user running the app.

[adamthecarny]

Originally Posted by Marvin

My previous post satisfies those requirements.

I take it you are someone who thinks that art has no definition other than the definition you impose on it. By that standard everything is art and I suggest that by that definition, nothing is.

I take it YOU are someone who thinks that art has no definition other than the definition YOU impose on it. Your ability to appreciate the artist's meaning (or your decision that it is worthy of being called art) holds as little in the argument of what is art as anyone else's opinion, because (unfortunately for some) there is no badge, club or even protected title that suggests some minimum qualification is required to produce something that makes people think, feel or maybe see something from a different point of view. By that definition, and because of that element of our society, I say anything can be art so long as someone wants to call it art.

Surely the value of art is not that it is art, but that it has the ability to reflect a thought, a feeling, an idea or a skill. That it showcases something; physical, literal, satirical or metaphorical. And surely there isnt a minimum number of people that have to "get it" before that thought, feeling, idea or skill is validated as art. Otherwise, who makes the distinction of what is art and what is not?

You pine for days when an artist was someone that could "sculpt a statute or paint a chapel somewhere" or otherwise create something tangible and saleable. You can have your boring economical classicism and still allow the rest of the world to enjoy the romantics - how is it hurting you that this guy calls himself an artist? Where is the confusion or watering down of talent that comes from this guy calling himself an artist? It is an elitist hypothetical and a logical fallacy. Surely if I wanted my cliff face to be scultped into a grandiose temple, or I wanted the ceiling of my chapel adorned, or I wanted a backing track to my latest commercial, or I wanted a logo for my startup, I wouldnt just call the local "artist"?

Originally Posted by Marvin

I don't care for an opinion that degrades the standards and quality of the creative industry.

And I totally agree. Luckily for me though, I don't let a bad album muddy my opinion of the latest bestselling book. Or let my opinion of Hirst's paintings influence the way I feel about Carravagio. Art for arts sake lives happily with art for gentry's sake, and in my opinion they bolster each other.

Originally Posted by Marvin

I find it an insult to know very hard working and talented artists who have studied and learned their craft for years and someone makes programs that deletes files and that they are even discussed for a second in any capacity other than ridicule.

So in your view publicity is the payoff for an artist? Interesting. Surely someone that has studied and learned their craft for years will be unaffected by an artist who makes a computer game that gets some publicity and spreads an important (to some) message.

Adam.

p.s. When discussing a piece of art that pushes an anti-killing agenga, it would have been a masterstroke to play the "we should kill the artist" card; but I think you crashed and burned when you suggested benefit to society was key to the argument, rather than sticking with the irony.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by newbee

IMHO, I think the real problem with violent games lies in their realistic imagery. It's quite well known that your body has the ability to adapt itself to a steady exposure to many things. An example would be painkillers, i.e. if 1 aspirin is effectively used for a headache and is used frequently ... soon 1 is not enough.

Our brain reacts to imagery the same way, i.e. the first exposure to graphic violence is quite unsettling but if we are exposed daily our mind starts to accept it as normal and just because it happens on a screen rather than in real life matters little. It's the reason why visualization techniques work.

I honestly think we do ourselves a disservice by allowing and encouraging media producers to keep "upping the ante" in their use of violence. ... just my 2 cents worth.

Color me skeptical, people have been making that argument for decades and it's not been a proven causal relationship. I think it's a hard argument to justify when game violence have been getting more realistic (same with movie violence for that matter), and yet, real-world violent crimes have been declining at the same time. I just don't see where it's worth trying to ban and censor games, because that's what it's really going to take to put a stop this pretend violence.

[nli10]

Originally Posted by brucep

why doe's this game attack my mac ??
ans why is this ok ??

oh wait thats right
it's >> im a windows user for a day >> day .

It doesn't attack your mac unless you fire a shot - that's kinda the whole point.

I agree it's a danger to have on your machine with kids & idiot friends around, but I decided not to download it so it's not a danger to me.

I wish all software threats came with two warning screens and no way to propagate, it'd be a lot easier!

[brucep]

Originally Posted by nli10

It doesn't attack your mac unless you fire a shot - that's kinda the whole point.

I agree it's a danger to have on your machine with kids & idiot friends around, but I decided not to download it so it's not a danger to me.

I wish all software threats came with two warning screens and no way to propagate, it'd be a lot easier!

thank you for responding
what bugs my butt is that we can easily go from an open threat to the same threat hidden or embedded someplace
if i had a bazooka i would shoot these people

[nli10]

Originally Posted by brucep

thank you for responding
what bugs my butt is that we can easily go from an open threat to the same threat hidden or embedded someplace
if i had a bazooka i would shoot these people

Yeah this is the problem. Use the code in a bejewelled style game and link it's high scores & Downloads page to Facebook feeds and you have an unstoppable force...

I agree that it needs more protection to stop random programs from deleting files.

I thought the game itself was a great way to promote pacifism in gaming though

[Cubert]

[QUOTE=Cubert;1514561]You should be able to specify the folders of files that can be counted and deleted (a la peer-to-peer programs).


It sure would be a fun way to delete your Trash.

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by Gazoobee

IMO you are mixing up your definitions here. Art is about meaning.

You say you wish they did something more meaningful, but then you kind of imply that it's the "talent" they show (or don't show), that's the core of it all, which is really code for "craft." Craftsmanship /= "Art".

I would say art is about significant meaning in the same way beauty is about significant beauty. Many men will have wives with facial hair and consider them beautiful but they would not be considered beautiful by a majority. There has to be a limit when using global and not personal definitions. I don't want that to come across to mean that only the majority defines art, merely that it has to be sufficiently justified.

Originally Posted by camroidv27

I am someone who thinks that art is defined by the creator or by the viewer.

Originally Posted by adamthecarny

By that definition, and because of that element of our society, I say anything can be art so long as someone wants to call it art.

So you are of the opinion that when someone produces a piece of child pornography and calls it art no matter how obscene, you would unconditionally agree with them? Everyone draws a line somewhere, yours is just further to one side but having a line at all is contrary to what you said. Also, I don't understand how anything can be art yet you object so strongly to a forum post - if an artist can define anything as art, surely I can say anything I want for it to be a valid critique.

Originally Posted by camroidv27

That is no excuse for wanting to shoot them! That was my main problem, your wishes of death of another person purely for having different views.

As someone else pointed out, you took the comment too seriously - I clearly worded it to compare it to the 'artistic' endeavor of deleting files vs the benefit of realizing your dependence on them. If I'd said that those people wouldn't be given publicity instead, then it wouldn't have related at all to the principle behind the game.

Originally Posted by camroidv27

Now, if it was intended as such, I don't know for sure, but I do know that I view it as art, and though I don't think I'll see it in any museum ever, I can appreciate the message.

Sure, I can appreciate the message too but as someone pointed out, the message is simplistic and a global definition of art rather than personal must have significant meaning. If he had accompanied the game with an eloquent message such as:

"Always endeavor to conquer yourself rather than fortune, and change your desires rather than the order of the world, and in general, accustom yourself to the persuasion that, except our own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in our power; so that when we have done our best in things external to us, all wherein we fail of success is to be considered, as regards us, absolutely impossible: and this single principle seemed to me sufficient to prevent me from desiring for the future anything which I could not obtain, and thus render me contented; for since our will naturally seeks those objects alone which the understanding represents as in some way possible of attainment, it is plain, that if we consider all external goods as equally beyond our power, we shall no more regret the absence of such goods as seem due to our birth when deprived of them without any fault of ours, than our not possessing the kingdoms of China or Mexico, and thus making, so to speak, a virtue of necessity, we shall no more desire health in disease, or freedom in imprisonment, than we now do bodies incorruptible as diamonds, or the wings of birds to fly with.

But I confess, there is need of prolonged discipline and frequently repeated meditation to accustom the mind to view all objects in this light; and I believe that in this chiefly consisted the secret of the power of such philosophers as in former times were enabled to rise superior to the influence of fortune, and, amid suffering and poverty, enjoy a happiness which their gods might have envied.

For, occupied incessantly with the consideration of the limits prescribed to their power by nature, they became so entirely convinced that nothing was at their disposal except their own thoughts, that this conviction was of itself sufficient to prevent their entertaining their desire of other objects; and over their thoughts they acquired a sway so absolute, that they had some ground on this account for esteeming themselves more rich and more powerful, more free and more happy, than other men who, whatever be the favors heaped on them by nature and fortune, if destitute of this philosophy, can never command the realization of all their desires."

Rene Descartes, 1637

If someone presents a simplistic comment on human behavior and it's left to the public to give it any weight then the piece is not art nor is the producer an artist, only the viewer.

Originally Posted by Robodude

It's not as if he's passing this [rape tunnel] off as art...

I would put them in the same category. Modern art is all like this from the unmade beds, empty sheds, feces, empty rooms. It's devoid of significant meaning for the purpose of having the viewer impose their own onto it. It's no more art than a blank canvas.

Originally Posted by adamthecarny

So in your view publicity is the payoff for an artist?

Nope, publicity is the payoff for a class of artists including modern artists and the subject of the thread and I'm saying it's not deserved because it justifies the status as art. It's used as a self-fulfilling definition i.e I define it as art, it causes people to discuss it at great length, it becomes art simply because of the discussion. It's weak and it degrades the industry in that it makes people lazy.

When our society looks back through history, we see so much passion and talent because an artist had no choice but to do better work to make an impact. Steve Jobs has said as much about Apple - for Apple to win, Microsoft doesn't have to lose; Apple just has to do a better job, the innovation alone distinguishes between the leader and the follower (mindshare). I would not be surprised to see a future society look back at us and hang their heads in disappointment at the lazy, get-rich/famous-quick, inward-looking mentality we promoted. There are still the few who do more to make our lives better but they are the ones who deserve recognition, not because they need it but because they are owed it.