Hacking Discussion Team Xecuter Switch SX

[Wierd_w]

Again, inferior product, and power to choose.

I can choose to not be an early adopter, to bypass the initial ban-wave that the TX CFW will almost assuredly cause, install the Atmosphere CFW after they have examined how Ninty detected the CFW, and they have fixed it, and have the better outcome.

All I have to be is patient.

 

[linuxares]

please provide proof that its inferior or more dangerous
or did you pull that from somewhere dark?

TX is closed source, hench we can't see what code it have in store. Atmosphere is opensource and if you don't trust the binaries that are premade, you can make them yourself.

 

[Wierd_w]

TX is closed source, hench we can't see what code it have in store. Atmosphere is opensource and if you don't trust the binaries that are premade, you can make them yourself.

Also, in the end of the day, more people contribute to the codebase, and more features will be available. You just have to not be an early adopter.

 

[jakkal]

TX is closed source, hench we can't see what code it have in store. Atmosphere is opensource and if you don't trust the binaries that are premade, you can make them yourself.

but how does that prove that its inferior or dangerous

are we speaking the same language here?

 

[Wierd_w]

but how does that prove that its inferior or dangerous

are we speaking the same language here?

More dangerous:
TX CFW will be the first to "market". It will also have piracy out of the gate. Nintendo will respond with vengeance. The banwave will cause much crying from the early adopters who could not wait.

Less dangerous:
Amtosphere will be second to market. Likely after the afore mentioned ban-wave. The developers will have had time to examine the means Nintendo used to detect the TX CFW, and correct for/spoof around it so Ninty cannot detect atmosphere.

Need I give more?

 

[ShadowOne333]

Again, inferior product, and power to choose.

I can choose to not be an early adopter, to bypass the initial ban-wave that the TX CFW will almost assuredly cause, install the Atmosphere CFW after they have examined how Ninty detected the CFW, and they have fixed it, and have the better outcome.

All I have to be is patient.

Open source CFW is not free of bans, if that were the case no one using Luma would have been banned last year.
TX is not new to homebrew they've been around for more than 10 years, but you make it out to be as if the guys (can I assume their gender?) that make the open source alternatives know EVERYTHING about how Nintendo works, including servers and how the manage them, and that's not true.

Nintendo can very easily pull out a new strategy/method that developers haven't seen before or haven't detected, and rest assured both closed and opened source CFW will fall victim to this.

 

[linuxares]

but how does that prove that its inferior or dangerous

are we speaking the same language here?

English? Yes. It's dangerous since we can't see the code without reverse engineer it. That's why it's more dangerous than Atmosphere. We that was here during the "Brickway" learned to be very skeptic of releases from pirate device companies after that.

 

[sarkwalvein]

More dangerous:
TX CFW will be the first to "market". It will also have piracy out of the gate. Nintendo will respond with vengeance. The banwave will cause much crying from the early adopters who could not wait.

Less dangerous:
Amtosphere will be second to market. Likely after the afore mentioned ban-wave. The developers will have had time to examine the means Nintendo used to detect the TX CFW, and correct for/spoof around it so Ninty cannot detect atmosphere.

Need I give more?

Lol.
You risk a ban no matter what, and sure, the more mature the product becomes, the more stealthy and ban-proof it may be.
That also counts for Atmosphere or TX CFW V1.0 vs Atmosphere or TX CFW V9.99.
The statements are void without actual data.

 

[Wierd_w]

Open source CFW is not free of bans, if that were the case no one using Luma would have been banned last year.
TX is not new to homebrew they've been around for more than 10 years, but you make it out to be as if the guys (can I assume their gender?) that make the open source alternatives know EVERYTHING about how Nintendo works, including servers and how the manage them, and that's not true.

Nintendo can very easily pull out a new strategy/method that developers haven't seen before or haven't detected, and rest assured both closed and opened source CFW will fall victim to this.

I did not say *SAFE*.
I said "Less dangerous."

CFW is never *SAFE*. One can be "Less dangerous" than another, however.

 

[jakkal]

More dangerous:
TX CFW will be the first to "market". It will also have piracy out of the gate. Nintendo will respond with vengeance. The banwave will cause much crying from the early adopters who could not wait.

Less dangerous:
Amtosphere will be second to market. Likely after the afore mentioned ban-wave. The developers will have had time to examine the means Nintendo used to detect the TX CFW, and correct for/spoof around it so Ninty cannot detect atmosphere.

Need I give more?

how are you sure that nintendo cannot detect atmosphere?
and how are you sure that the tx solution will be detectable?

stop trying to act smart

 

[sarkwalvein]

English? Yes. It's dangerous since we can't see the code without reverse engineer it. That's why it's more dangerous than Atmosphere. We that was here during the "Brickway" learned to be very skeptic of releases from pirate device companies after that.

Almost no end user can "see" what the code does, even if it is open source.
Also, the closed source product is not necessarily more dangerous.
Having the code being open let's you analyse it and check for unfair play and bugs. But for this you also need knowledge and time, or a committee that you trust to check and approve the open code, I don't think you will be getting a trustable open committee to check the CFW code any time soon.

 

[Foxi4]

You're right on the money. Sure, piracy is a problem. Sure, we don't all agree with it, purely from a morality and principle stance.
However, and I'm speaking as someone who's had their games pirated. It's not going to go away. It's never likely to be stopped. And Shhhhhh... It's not as big a problem as they make it out to be.

The reality is that the people who pirate the games are the ones who were never likely to pay money for it in the first place.
You're not losing sales, because they wouldn't have paid anyway. Worst case, you're just gaining a larger player base, for me, I don't actually mind that.
If people enjoy it enough to pirate it and continue playing it, then I'm happy. It means I've done something right. And at the end of the day, paying, legitimate customers almost always vastly outnumber the pirates.

I never understood the concept of a lost sale. A transaction that hasn't been made cannot be accounted for as lost revenue. In the world of goods that's a loss in inventory, in the world of software there is no inventory, a new copy just magically comes into existence, how do you quantify that as a loss? If anything, we should punish distributors of illegitimate copies, not the people who download them - if it's free and out there, it's free and out there, I'm sorry that your DRM failed, but that's life. You're right, it's not going away, but most people grow out of it. Nowadays I buy all of my games even though I'm still fully capable of pirating them just because I want them on my shelf and I want to support the devs, but not everyone has that kind of disposable income. In fact, I'd argue that many times games become big *because* they get pirated and, as such, distributed to a larger target than would be possible otherwise. Those pirates become customers if your product is good, I'm a prime example.

 

[LightOffPro]

I did not say *SAFE*.
I said "Less dangerous."

CFW is never *SAFE*. One can be "Less dangerous" than another, however.

A concept of TX's SX being less or more dangerous doesn't exist.
Atmosphere isn't 20% dangerous and TX's CFW 50% dangerous, it doesn't work like that.
They are both exactly the same. Both CFW's that break Nintendo's Terms of Service. Both are X% dangerous.

 

[Wierd_w]

Jakkal:

Nintendo already appears quite intent on verifying legitimacy of a console, by using collected telemetry data on application use, which gets sent to nintendo.
Unless the TX CFW completely disables connecting to nintendo servers in every way, the data the CFW sends (OR DOES NOT SEND!) can be quite telling.

Consistent behaviors that are not the expected behaviors is a tell-tale indicator that the system is not running on the software that they provided. They can cite this as the evidence they need to ban your console.

How do you think nintendo WONT detect the TX CFW?

LightOffPro:

Only partially correct. TX CFW will hit first. Ninty will detect it however ninty detects it. Atmosphere will come later. Its developers dont want to be detected, so they will fix the hole ninty used to find the CFW. Thus, TX firmware has a means of detection that atmosphere would not, and thus is more dangerous to use after both hit market.

It is not "50% less dangerous." It is "One less detection method" less dangerous.

 

[ShadowOne333]

I did not say *SAFE*.
I said "Less dangerous."

CFW is never *SAFE*. One can be "Less dangerous" than another, however.

How are you so sure one is less dangerous or safer than the other?
None of the two dev teams have released anything yet to make that kind of claim, and Atmosphere isn't even operational yet.
Who's not to say that some buggy code in either CFW can brick your console?
They are all released by humans, and therefore open to mistake, no matter if open or close source.
You can't make the assumption that Atmosphere will be brick-free and perfect just because it has a bigger support base.

 

[sarkwalvein]

A concept of TX's SX being less or more dangerous doesn't exist.
Atmosphere isn't 20% dangerous and TX's CFW 50% dangerous, it doesn't work like that.
They are both exactly the same. Both CFW's that break Nintendo's Terms of Service. Both are X% dangerous.

I think one can expect unfair play, like the famous Gateway (may they rest in hell) bricking code.
I understand the reasoning behind this lack of trust.
But as I said, those tricks not only come from commercial products... Do you remember DarkFader?
And such tricks can also be hidden in open code that you can't understand.

 

[jakkal]

Jakkal:

Nintendo already appears quite intent on verifying legitimacy of a console, by using collected telemetry data on application use, which gets sent to nintendo.
Unless the TX CFW completely disables connecting to nintendo servers in every way, the data the CFW sends (OR DOES NOT SEND!) can be quite telling.

Consistent behaviors that are not the expected behaviors is a tell-tale indicator that the system is not running on the software that they provided. They can cite this as the evidence they need to ban your console.

How do you think nintendo WONT detect the TX CFW?

first of all
i give zero shits about nintendos online
sencond, youre the who made a baseless claim about cfw danger levels

 

[lilpataya]

Jakkal:

Nintendo already appears quite intent on verifying legitimacy of a console, by using collected telemetry data on application use, which gets sent to nintendo.
Unless the TX CFW completely disables connecting to nintendo servers in every way, the data the CFW sends (OR DOES NOT SEND!) can be quite telling.

Consistent behaviors that are not the expected behaviors is a tell-tale indicator that the system is not running on the software that they provided. They can cite this as the evidence they need to ban your console.

How do you think nintendo WONT detect the TX CFW?

Just block the nintendo servers lmao it ain't hard if you have cfw access

 

[210modz]

99% of the electronics you buy has firmware that is not open source. Your argument is invalid.

 

[Wierd_w]

99% of the electronics you buy has firmware that is not open source. Your argument is invalid.

You might not be so sure of yourself, if you knew how many devices run on embedded linux.