Here we go again I guess.
[pokemon not competitive]Oh really? Tell that to all the people that got all-expense paid trips to play at the nationals. And tell that to the winners of that who got flown out to Hawaii and Japan and shit for the worldwide tournaments and got real-world prizes. Yeah. Totally not competitive.
To go much further you are going to have to define what competition is, I am not sure simply hosting a tournament counts towards that and going mathematical I am not sold on pokemon representing a useful competition. We already had this thread though, you can see it
http://gbatemp.net/threads/pokémon-casual-childrens-game-or-competitive-strategy.355943/ .
Besides, like others have said only a small percentage of people will use this and because of that you won't have a to deal with them a lot.
Assuming I am not in a controlled environment (like a tournament, though even there it possibly just takes some planning) the very last thing I am going to bet on is a sense of fair play in the general public where the cost of cheating (if it can even be called that*) is minimal and the detection of cheaters is likely to be almost zero (at best if someone buffs "for no reason" then you might say something, someone else might call it defensive play though).
*is, is not, I really do not care for this particular reply, depending upon your viewpoint it is not "proper" cheating though so some might deem it acceptable (a sense of fairness seems to be one of the most bendable things I tend to encounter in people).
Anyway I am trying to decide how much Gamefreak hosed up the programming/security, I also wonder how they might claw it back. On the one hand yeah it is the whole unlocked door thing but on the other there are a great many precedents that say if you transmit in plain text with absolutely no attempt at security* then there is a lot of precedent to say you do not care.
*though they are mathematically related hashing/tamper detection and encryption/read prevention are not the same. I have not completely gone through the source code yet and nothing was mentioned in the OP but it looks like there was not even at attempt at scrambling/obfuscation; even if you were unable to do big boy crypto a random cipher would probably have stopped most of these hacks (indeed I imagine they probably already did such a thing to prevent replay/injection attacks).
And yes, we do blame the creator because he purposely and knowingly sought out to cheat, with no ulterior motive other than to get famous for enabling it.
And I guess you posted that because of your deep and abiding love of jazz tap music -- guessing motivations is hard and shots in the dark are even worse.