Awaltir.5302 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > > @Awaltir.5302 said: > > > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > > @Feanor.2358 said: > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other MMOs classes have defined roles, Tanks and Healers are accepted to not need to deal high damage. People don't question your DPS when you're not on a DPS class in those games. Here however, the game was designed to not have roles and not need roles, but at the same time was designed to allow for builds that fit into defined roles. Any class can play as a healer, tank, CC, or DPS. If I build for anything other than DPS, then my DPS is obviously going to be low. DPS meters have fueled the mentality of "DPS or bust", very few classes are given a break by the DPS meter community when it comes to this. If I'm on my elementalist I'm expected to be playing as a glass cannon with massive DPS, an expectation that I will not live up to on my elementalist, I run a support build. A DPS meter won't tell anyone that though. They will see that I'm an elementalist with Tempest elite spec and assume "Fresh Air DPS who's not even coming close to the 30k DPS benchmark, time to kick". The single focus "DPS or bust" outlook of a lot of the community is a problem that is fueled and exacerbated by DPS meters. > > > > > > > > > > > > You could just tell the group you're support. This is just a communication problem, DPS eles are the norm and it is reasonable to assume you're DPS when you join as ele. Once people know you're in the tank/support role they just ignore your DPS like any other game. > > > > > > > > > > I've tried. Do you know what the result was? "Tempests are only DPS, GFTO - Kick" or "Only Druid's are support, go DPS or GTFO - Kick" This happened EVERY SINGLE TIME. Even one time I got the response of "You're a DPS because I say your a DPS - Kick" > > > > > > > > > > > @Deihnyx.6318 said: > > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > In other MMOs classes have defined roles, Tanks and Healers are accepted to not need to deal high damage. People don't question your DPS when you're not on a DPS class in those games. Here however, the game was designed to not have roles and not need roles, but at the same time was designed to allow for builds that fit into defined roles. Any class can play as a healer, tank, CC, or DPS. If I build for anything other than DPS, then my DPS is obviously going to be low. DPS meters have fueled the mentality of "DPS or bust", very few classes are given a break by the DPS meter community when it comes to this. If I'm on my elementalist I'm expected to be playing as a glass cannon with massive DPS, an expectation that I will not live up to on my elementalist, I run a support build. A DPS meter won't tell anyone that though. They will see that I'm an elementalist with Tempest elite spec and assume "Fresh Air DPS who's not even coming close to the 30k DPS benchmark, time to kick". The single focus "DPS or bust" outlook of a lot of the community is a problem that is fueled and exacerbated by DPS meters. > > > > > > > > > > > > That is not true. If you're mesmer or druid in raids, people won't expect high dps (even if you can...) > > > > > > However they will expect you to know mechanics and know when to do support/tricks (mesmer) or heal (druid) etc. > > > > > > There's a few scenario where auramancer works well too. > > > > > > There are elite classes dedicated to support or healing now. > > > > > > > > > > Thats part of the problem that's been created from DPS meters, there are more class the that can be support than just Ranger(Druid) and Mesmer(Chrono). But because X class can output 30k DPS with a glass cannon DPS build, it must always be DPS, even though it can be played as a very efficient support. This mentality only surfaced when DPS meters were approved. Yes, people were kicked because of assumptions regarding classes prior, but such incidents were far less common than the issues we see today. > > > > > > > > Like, meta didn't exist before dps meters? Like. 4 tempests were never the standard dps for pugs despite the abysmal performance of your average pug tempest? Like, we never had "mes/warrior only" dungeon parties? Get real... DPS meters didn't *create* meta. If anything, they **helped** a lot in debunking common myths like "ele is the king of dps, if you're not ele you're trash". Meta is just the current "solution" to the game. It's the mathematically optimal way of play. As such, it always exists. And players always find it, and a part of them always adopt it, because that's how they play games. Trying to pinpoint that phenomenon on a specific tool in a specific game is like trying to pinpoint the cause of gravity on apples. > > > > > > Players Created META! > > > Players Created METERS! > > > Players STANDARDIZE! > > > These are all PLAYER DRIVEN! THEY ARE ALL GARBAGE! > > > Optimal way of playing is nothing than a BIG JOKE! > > > > Definition of optimal > > > > :most desirable or satisfactory :optimum the optimal use of class time the optimal dosage of medication for a patient conditions for optimal development > > > > There will always be optimal way of doing things because if there is choice there will be one that give best result. Everything in mmo is fun when you do it with group of friends on few first time **but then it becomes a chore.** By that things there always will be optimal composition either you want it or not. Why do you think it is bad to give people the tool to verify if they joined your lfg with full implication ( ex. "we want meta builds") . > > This is your problem right here. > Not everyone sees playing a VIDEOGAME a Job or Chore. > > Thanks for whipping out the Webster Dictionary! This is perfectly fine that people take thing differently. It is also perfectly obvious that you skipped the later of statement and didn't say why they are not entitled to do so if they state in lfg that they want meta builds. Everyone is entitled to enjoy the game in which way they prefer and you want to make it unable for them for no apparent reason. What does EVERYONE have to do what people do in they lfg ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > @Feanor.2358 said: > > > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > > @Feanor.2358 said: > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other MMOs classes have defined roles, Tanks and Healers are accepted to not need to deal high damage. People don't question your DPS when you're not on a DPS class in those games. Here however, the game was designed to not have roles and not need roles, but at the same time was designed to allow for builds that fit into defined roles. Any class can play as a healer, tank, CC, or DPS. If I build for anything other than DPS, then my DPS is obviously going to be low. DPS meters have fueled the mentality of "DPS or bust", very few classes are given a break by the DPS meter community when it comes to this. If I'm on my elementalist I'm expected to be playing as a glass cannon with massive DPS, an expectation that I will not live up to on my elementalist, I run a support build. A DPS meter won't tell anyone that though. They will see that I'm an elementalist with Tempest elite spec and assume "Fresh Air DPS who's not even coming close to the 30k DPS benchmark, time to kick". The single focus "DPS or bust" outlook of a lot of the community is a problem that is fueled and exacerbated by DPS meters. > > > > > > > > > > > > You could just tell the group you're support. This is just a communication problem, DPS eles are the norm and it is reasonable to assume you're DPS when you join as ele. Once people know you're in the tank/support role they just ignore your DPS like any other game. > > > > > > > > > > I've tried. Do you know what the result was? "Tempests are only DPS, GFTO - Kick" or "Only Druid's are support, go DPS or GTFO - Kick" This happened EVERY SINGLE TIME. Even one time I got the response of "You're a DPS because I say your a DPS - Kick" > > > > > > > > > > > @Deihnyx.6318 said: > > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > In other MMOs classes have defined roles, Tanks and Healers are accepted to not need to deal high damage. People don't question your DPS when you're not on a DPS class in those games. Here however, the game was designed to not have roles and not need roles, but at the same time was designed to allow for builds that fit into defined roles. Any class can play as a healer, tank, CC, or DPS. If I build for anything other than DPS, then my DPS is obviously going to be low. DPS meters have fueled the mentality of "DPS or bust", very few classes are given a break by the DPS meter community when it comes to this. If I'm on my elementalist I'm expected to be playing as a glass cannon with massive DPS, an expectation that I will not live up to on my elementalist, I run a support build. A DPS meter won't tell anyone that though. They will see that I'm an elementalist with Tempest elite spec and assume "Fresh Air DPS who's not even coming close to the 30k DPS benchmark, time to kick". The single focus "DPS or bust" outlook of a lot of the community is a problem that is fueled and exacerbated by DPS meters. > > > > > > > > > > > > That is not true. If you're mesmer or druid in raids, people won't expect high dps (even if you can...) > > > > > > However they will expect you to know mechanics and know when to do support/tricks (mesmer) or heal (druid) etc. > > > > > > There's a few scenario where auramancer works well too. > > > > > > There are elite classes dedicated to support or healing now. > > > > > > > > > > Thats part of the problem that's been created from DPS meters, there are more class the that can be support than just Ranger(Druid) and Mesmer(Chrono). But because X class can output 30k DPS with a glass cannon DPS build, it must always be DPS, even though it can be played as a very efficient support. This mentality only surfaced when DPS meters were approved. Yes, people were kicked because of assumptions regarding classes prior, but such incidents were far less common than the issues we see today. > > > > > > > > Like, meta didn't exist before dps meters? Like. 4 tempests were never the standard dps for pugs despite the abysmal performance of your average pug tempest? Like, we never had "mes/warrior only" dungeon parties? Get real... DPS meters didn't *create* meta. If anything, they **helped** a lot in debunking common myths like "ele is the king of dps, if you're not ele you're trash". Meta is just the current "solution" to the game. It's the mathematically optimal way of play. As such, it always exists. And players always find it, and a part of them always adopt it, because that's how they play games. Trying to pinpoint that phenomenon on a specific tool in a specific game is like trying to pinpoint the cause of gravity on apples. > > > > > > Players Created META! > > > Players Created METERS! > > > Players STANDARDIZE! > > > These are all PLAYER DRIVEN! THEY ARE ALL GARBAGE! > > > Optimal way of playing is nothing than a BIG JOKE! > > > > Optimal way of playing is a mathematical fact. And you cannot dictate on others what they find fun, despite the heavy usage of capital letters. But yeah, these are all player driven. That was my point. DPS meters have nothing to do with this. > > I'm not here for Mathematical FACTs. GW2 was not advertised, Here have fun with Math. Neither your feelings nor the advertisement (or the lack thereof) change the facts. You don't have to play the meta if you don't want to. But you cannot forbid other players to play it. It's their way of play, it's their fun, it's their decision. You have no say in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eot.7569 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > @Coconut.7082 said: > > > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > > @"Nike Porphyrogenita.8137" said: > > > > The way immunizations work is you get a weaker strain of a disease in order to build up immunity to the powerful version. > > > > > > > > For many years I've been reading awful threads on this forum in order to build up my tolerance for this day. Today is the day I read this thread and was subjected to the full power of toxic cancer. > > > > > > > > I'm proud to report I'm fully immune to the genius level 500 iq ideas presented in this thread and have a clean bill of health. > > > > > > > > www.deltaconnected.com > > > > > > > > GET GOOD > > > > > > > > > Please SHOW ME WHERE exactly in the [RULES OF CONDUCT](https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/guild-wars-2-rules-of-conduct/ "RULES OF CONDUCT") specifically says anyone needs to "GET GOOD?" > > > Show me Exactly where states this is how anyone should play any Profession? > > > > > > Your so called metaphoric insult goes both ways. > > > > > > > You won't find it in the GW2 RULES OF CONDUCT because it's a bigger, divine rule. > > Somewhat like the bible of the internet. > > > > GW2 was never about the DIVINE Rule! Whatever that's suppose to me. They clearly did not go the same route as every other MMO on the Market, this what separated them from the rest of them. And now they gave in, praise meters, let the plebs burn \o/ MUAHAHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhanoa.3960 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Feanor.2358 said: > > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > @Feanor.2358 said: > > > > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > > > @Feanor.2358 said: > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other MMOs classes have defined roles, Tanks and Healers are accepted to not need to deal high damage. People don't question your DPS when you're not on a DPS class in those games. Here however, the game was designed to not have roles and not need roles, but at the same time was designed to allow for builds that fit into defined roles. Any class can play as a healer, tank, CC, or DPS. If I build for anything other than DPS, then my DPS is obviously going to be low. DPS meters have fueled the mentality of "DPS or bust", very few classes are given a break by the DPS meter community when it comes to this. If I'm on my elementalist I'm expected to be playing as a glass cannon with massive DPS, an expectation that I will not live up to on my elementalist, I run a support build. A DPS meter won't tell anyone that though. They will see that I'm an elementalist with Tempest elite spec and assume "Fresh Air DPS who's not even coming close to the 30k DPS benchmark, time to kick". The single focus "DPS or bust" outlook of a lot of the community is a problem that is fueled and exacerbated by DPS meters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You could just tell the group you're support. This is just a communication problem, DPS eles are the norm and it is reasonable to assume you're DPS when you join as ele. Once people know you're in the tank/support role they just ignore your DPS like any other game. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've tried. Do you know what the result was? "Tempests are only DPS, GFTO - Kick" or "Only Druid's are support, go DPS or GTFO - Kick" This happened EVERY SINGLE TIME. Even one time I got the response of "You're a DPS because I say your a DPS - Kick" > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Deihnyx.6318 said: > > > > > > > > @Panda.1967 said: > > > > > > > > In other MMOs classes have defined roles, Tanks and Healers are accepted to not need to deal high damage. People don't question your DPS when you're not on a DPS class in those games. Here however, the game was designed to not have roles and not need roles, but at the same time was designed to allow for builds that fit into defined roles. Any class can play as a healer, tank, CC, or DPS. If I build for anything other than DPS, then my DPS is obviously going to be low. DPS meters have fueled the mentality of "DPS or bust", very few classes are given a break by the DPS meter community when it comes to this. If I'm on my elementalist I'm expected to be playing as a glass cannon with massive DPS, an expectation that I will not live up to on my elementalist, I run a support build. A DPS meter won't tell anyone that though. They will see that I'm an elementalist with Tempest elite spec and assume "Fresh Air DPS who's not even coming close to the 30k DPS benchmark, time to kick". The single focus "DPS or bust" outlook of a lot of the community is a problem that is fueled and exacerbated by DPS meters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is not true. If you're mesmer or druid in raids, people won't expect high dps (even if you can...) > > > > > > > However they will expect you to know mechanics and know when to do support/tricks (mesmer) or heal (druid) etc. > > > > > > > There's a few scenario where auramancer works well too. > > > > > > > There are elite classes dedicated to support or healing now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thats part of the problem that's been created from DPS meters, there are more class the that can be support than just Ranger(Druid) and Mesmer(Chrono). But because X class can output 30k DPS with a glass cannon DPS build, it must always be DPS, even though it can be played as a very efficient support. This mentality only surfaced when DPS meters were approved. Yes, people were kicked because of assumptions regarding classes prior, but such incidents were far less common than the issues we see today. > > > > > > > > > > Like, meta didn't exist before dps meters? Like. 4 tempests were never the standard dps for pugs despite the abysmal performance of your average pug tempest? Like, we never had "mes/warrior only" dungeon parties? Get real... DPS meters didn't *create* meta. If anything, they **helped** a lot in debunking common myths like "ele is the king of dps, if you're not ele you're trash". Meta is just the current "solution" to the game. It's the mathematically optimal way of play. As such, it always exists. And players always find it, and a part of them always adopt it, because that's how they play games. Trying to pinpoint that phenomenon on a specific tool in a specific game is like trying to pinpoint the cause of gravity on apples. > > > > > > > > Players Created META! > > > > Players Created METERS! > > > > Players STANDARDIZE! > > > > These are all PLAYER DRIVEN! THEY ARE ALL GARBAGE! > > > > Optimal way of playing is nothing than a BIG JOKE! > > > > > > Optimal way of playing is a mathematical fact. And you cannot dictate on others what they find fun, despite the heavy usage of capital letters. But yeah, these are all player driven. That was my point. DPS meters have nothing to do with this. > > > > I'm not here for Mathematical FACTs. GW2 was not advertised, Here have fun with Math. > > Neither your feelings nor the advertisement (or the lack thereof) change the facts. You don't have to play the meta if you don't want to. But you cannot forbid other players to play it. It's their way of play, it's their fun, it's their decision. You have no say in it. If you go back to my previous statements I have already acknowledged that and also in other DPS Meter Threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennie.6750 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Paladine.6082 said: > As I sated above - even if it is generated on the server (and I am pretty sure that damage is calculated on the client and then sent to the server but I could be wrong and even if it is not, ArcDPS accesses that information in the terminal equipment of the end user and yes even if it is in RAM it is still classed as gaining access to information stored on the end user's terminal equipment) if that information is processed in a way which identifies or can be used to identify a user it requires consent - period. No matter how much you may dislike that it doesn't change the fact that it is the law. There are multiple legal basis for processing personal information: > > 1. Freely given consent > 2. Performance of a Contract (which doesn't mean what you think so don't bother trying to use "T&C" argument) > 3. Protect the vital interests of the data subject (or others) (will this person or someone else literally die or come to physical harm if this data is not processed?) > 4. Required to do so by member state law > 5. Authority invested by a higher body (again Member state law) or public interest (again not what you think so don't go there) > 6. Legitimate Interest So would the meltdown of people who are adamant on using a dps meter everywhere count as vital interest? :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Paladine.6082 said: > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennie.6750 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynn.1659 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rennie.6750 said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. This law won't even do anything to the dps meters. Does the meter show people where you leave, whats your real name and all that? No. Dps isn't personal data to begin with It's doesn't even read other players pc, it reads the data that is on your pc, it doesn't magically gain access to pc owned by someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Play.6104 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 In GW1 they had golems that were DPS meters. It was not uncommon for PUG groups to go to the golem and practice their spikes before going to their PVP/PVE content and troubleshoot any problems before they got to the content. To me it is just lazy that there isn't one built in. As far as the privacy issue, remember that wall of text you blew past when you agreed to play the game. Pretty sure you signed off on that. The comment about it being illegal to see other people's data in the game...how would you actually be able to do group content without being able to see the people you are playing with, or if they put any buffs on you, condis on the enemy because of privacy reasons? You have already agree to this, you are just getting upset about the granularity of the data that is shared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqueFyre.5678 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rennie.6750 said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennie.6750 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Cynn.1659 said: > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > This law won't even do anything to the dps meters. Does the meter show people where you leave, whats your real name and all that? No. Dps isn't personal data to begin with It's doesn't even read other players pc, it reads the data that is on your pc, it doesn't magically gain access to pc owned by someone else. But if you read correctly, personal data isn't only your name or where you live, it's anything that is related to a single person (it can be an anonymous ID). If you didn't understand, that's fine, but don't try to make arguments about things that are beyond your understanding. I honestly didn't take time to check whether all of this is accurate or not but it does make sense. Personal data is what the law say it is, not what you'd like it to be. Trust me, I'm married with a lawyer, and I have given up on trying to figure out how this works in details, but as a general rule, the law has little relation to common sense as we live in incredibly complex societies that needs very complex and broad rules in order to function properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted October 14, 2017 Author Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @"Faux Play.6104" said: > In GW1 they had golems that were DPS meters. It was not uncommon for PUG groups to go to the golem and practice their spikes before going to their PVP/PVE content and troubleshoot any problems before they got to the content. To me it is just lazy that there isn't one built in. > > As far as the privacy issue, remember that wall of text you blew past when you agreed to play the game. Pretty sure you signed off on that. The comment about it being illegal to see other people's data in the game...how would you actually be able to do group content without being able to see the people you are playing with, or if they put any buffs on you, condis on the enemy because of privacy reasons? You have already agree to this, you are just getting upset about the granularity of the data that is shared. The game itself doesn't provide visible dps meter for players. And I never agreed to existance of ArcDPS and its function of active monitoring of my account (even when I'm not using it!) and ArenaNet refuses to take responsibility for this tool. Game documents have no application for this tool and Anet should force the change how this tool behaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coulter.2315 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rennie.6750 said: > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. That is *exactly* my point, the EU has written legislation so poorly and tried to make it all encompassing that DPS meters got caught in it. You cannot vote these people out and you cannot get it repealed by voting either, you're now stuck with a badly written law which cripples DPS meters in Europe for the next several decades. The incompetence followed by the permanancy is disturbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennie.6750 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqueFyre.5678 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rennie.6750 said: > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. Here’s the definition of what constitutes personal Data as per the Privacy Policy. The definition of personal data is data relating to a living individual who can be identified from that data or from that data and other information in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller Sensitive personal data concerns the subject's race, ethnicity, politics, religion, trade union status, health, sex life or criminal record Yeah Combat Data even in conjunction with Display names and character names, doesn’t fall into any of those categories, sorry, but people need to learn the definitions of things and again Combat Data is a culmination of The Group not any individual player because Buffs/debuffs are things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennie.6750 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Coulter.2315 said: > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > That is *exactly* my point, the EU has written legislation so poorly and tried to make it all encompassing that DPS meters got caught in it. You cannot vote these people out and you cannot get it repealed by voting either, you're now stuck with a badly written law which cripples DPS meters in Europe for the next several decades. The incompetence followed by the permanancy is disturbing. You can vote them out if you want, the members of the parliament are elected. It is a democracy. Probably not a perfect one but that would be for the off-topic subsection! You don't like the decision, that's fine, but it doesn't mean nobody voted for this. I surely did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconut.7082 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > @Coconut.7082 said: > > > @Rhanoa.3960 said: > > > > @"Nike Porphyrogenita.8137" said: > > > > The way immunizations work is you get a weaker strain of a disease in order to build up immunity to the powerful version. > > > > > > > > For many years I've been reading awful threads on this forum in order to build up my tolerance for this day. Today is the day I read this thread and was subjected to the full power of toxic cancer. > > > > > > > > I'm proud to report I'm fully immune to the genius level 500 iq ideas presented in this thread and have a clean bill of health. > > > > > > > > www.deltaconnected.com > > > > > > > > GET GOOD > > > > > > > > > Please SHOW ME WHERE exactly in the [RULES OF CONDUCT](https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/guild-wars-2-rules-of-conduct/ "RULES OF CONDUCT") specifically says anyone needs to "GET GOOD?" > > > Show me Exactly where states this is how anyone should play any Profession? > > > > > > Your so called metaphoric insult goes both ways. > > > > > > > You won't find it in the GW2 RULES OF CONDUCT because it's a bigger, divine rule. > > Somewhat like the bible of the internet. > > > > GW2 was never about the DIVINE Rule! Whatever that's suppose to me. They clearly did not go the same route as every other MMO on the Market, this what separated them from the rest of them. Separate from other MMOs? Where? How? What route did every other MMO go to? Some players choose to try and be good at the game, other's don't, and that's all fine. If those mentalities reflect on our real life, which one looks better? Think about it before stating that one is a BIG JOKE ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted October 14, 2017 Author Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. > > Here’s the definition of what constitutes personal Data as per the Privacy Policy. > > The definition of personal data is data relating to a living individual who can be identified > > from that data or > from that data and other information in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller > Sensitive personal data concerns the subject's race, ethnicity, politics, religion, trade union status, health, sex life or criminal record > > Yeah Combat Data even in conjunction with Display names and character names, doesn’t fall into any of those categories, sorry, but people need to learn the definitions of things If higher law, which is e.g. EU law has different definition, whatever anet writes in their documents is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqueFyre.5678 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 .> @Kheldorn.5123 said: > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > > > > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. > > > > Here’s the definition of what constitutes personal Data as per the Privacy Policy. > > > > The definition of personal data is data relating to a living individual who can be identified > > > > from that data or > > from that data and other information in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller > > Sensitive personal data concerns the subject's race, ethnicity, politics, religion, trade union status, health, sex life or criminal record > > > > Yeah Combat Data even in conjunction with Display names and character names, doesn’t fall into any of those categories, sorry, but people need to learn the definitions of things > > If higher law, which is e.g. EU law has different definition, whatever anet writes in their documents is irrelevant. That isn’t Anets definition, it looks like you need to read Anets Privacy Policy they say exactly where the definition comes from for those players that live in the EU. It’s easy to tell when people don’t even research what they are attempting to argue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rennie.6750 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. > > Here’s the definition of what constitutes personal Data as per the Privacy Policy. > > The definition of personal data is data relating to a living individual who can be identified > > from that data or > from that data and other information in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller > Sensitive personal data concerns the subject's race, ethnicity, politics, religion, trade union status, health, sex life or criminal record > > Yeah Combat Data even in conjunction with Display names and character names, doesn’t fall into any of those categories, sorry, but people need to learn the definitions of things and again Combat Data is a culmination of The Group not any individual player because Buffs/debuffs are things. You'd be surprised, but many user agreements/terns and conditions are filled with illegal stuff. If the terms and conditions specified that if you were nasty in game you'd become ANet's slave and property, I'm sure you'd love the law to chime in. Fortunately, a contract that contains illegal elements is often invalid. You could even sue ANet and make a ton of money if they banned you while having illegal terms in their terms and conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted October 14, 2017 Author Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > .> @Kheldorn.5123 said: > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > > > > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > > > > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > > > > > > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. > > > > > > Here’s the definition of what constitutes personal Data as per the Privacy Policy. > > > > > > The definition of personal data is data relating to a living individual who can be identified > > > > > > from that data or > > > from that data and other information in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller > > > Sensitive personal data concerns the subject's race, ethnicity, politics, religion, trade union status, health, sex life or criminal record > > > > > > Yeah Combat Data even in conjunction with Display names and character names, doesn’t fall into any of those categories, sorry, but people need to learn the definitions of things > > > > If higher law, which is e.g. EU law has different definition, whatever anet writes in their documents is irrelevant. > > That isn’t Anets definition, it looks like you need to read Anets Privacy Policy they say exactly where the definition comes from for those players that live in the EU. It’s easy to tell when people don’t even research what they are attempting to argue. Thing is, this applies to Anet and GW2, but not to Arc and its developer. And Anet refuses to take any responsibility for this tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoSundown.5419 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Paladine.6082 said: > > ANY data which can be used to single out a data subject from a crowd (whether that be a Unique ID, a Social Security Number, a name, a pseudonym, an IP address, a MAC address - literally -anything- used for identification purposes) is classed as personal data. The username is absolutely an identifier - not only is it an identifier it is a direct identifier. It doesn't need to identify someone's user account, it only needs to single out the user and a username does exactly that. It is without question that a username is legally classified as personal data. So, displaying one's username at all, anywhere in the game or forums, is a violation of privacy laws? If so, that would mean that the friends' list is in violation, as is the follower's list as is any other display of one's username without one's consent. Those would be direct violations of law (they show the username directly), rather than what would seem to be an indirect violation (damage data which _might_ be used to identify someone's character, when the player has a username). It seems unlikely that whatever lawyer or firm ANet uses would be unaware of how the law works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted October 14, 2017 Author Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @IndigoSundown.5419 said: > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > ANY data which can be used to single out a data subject from a crowd (whether that be a Unique ID, a Social Security Number, a name, a pseudonym, an IP address, a MAC address - literally -anything- used for identification purposes) is classed as personal data. The username is absolutely an identifier - not only is it an identifier it is a direct identifier. It doesn't need to identify someone's user account, it only needs to single out the user and a username does exactly that. It is without question that a username is legally classified as personal data. > > So, displaying one's username at all, anywhere in the game or forums, is a violation of privacy laws? If so, that would mean that the friends' list is in violation, as is the follower's list as is any display of one's username without one's consent. Those would be direct violations of law (they show the username directly, rather than what would seem to be an indirect violation (damage data which _might_ be used to identify someone's character, when the player has a username). > > It seems unlikely that whatever lawyer or firm ANet uses would be unaware of how the law works. You choose to write on forums, you can't choose not to be mentioned in someones dps meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haishao.6851 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Rennie.6750 said: > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. The combat data get linked to your public display name. It's not private data in anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaqueFyre.5678 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 > @Kheldorn.5123 said: > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > .> @Kheldorn.5123 said: > > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > > @BlaqueFyre.5678 said: > > > > > > > @Rennie.6750 said: > > > > > > > > @Coulter.2315 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @Paladine.6082 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I work in privacy for a living at a very high level (I helped draft the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in the EU and am actually in Brussels next week for more discussions at the European Parliament) and have been advocating stronger digital privacy for a very long time - so I found your post interesting. I think the arguments you raised are completely valid (and as a condi warrior in full ascended I am not concerned about my DPS being "poor") and that this type of activity is an infringement of a player's privacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can also tell you as a fact that gamer privacy is a focus with legislators in Europe and that technically under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC this type of activity would already fall foul of European law as this makes it unlawful to gain access to any information on an end user's terminal equipment without consent - given the data for DPS meters is generated on the end user's terminal equipment it is pretty clear cut. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also Article 10 of the upcoming ePrivacy Regulation in Europe has a requirement for software to have privacy built in (by design) and for it to be the default setting - so arguably the developer of ArcDPS would be required to ensure that a: users of the software are not able to see other users' DPS without consent; and b: privacy settings are enabled by default. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every day the EU proves to me it needs to go. What exactly gives you the right to tell DPS meter devs how they must design their programs? Which political party ran on a campaign to ban DPS meters and was voted into office? Does Junker play GW2 and do terrible DPS? If none of these can be answered could you explain how you could be so bad at writing legislation that DPS meters would be caught up in a digital privacy bill? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well done EU.. Coming down on the side of stiffling creativity and endeavour once more (colour me shocked *cough*).. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It wasn't specifically designed for dps meters, it's just that the law tries to encompasses all aspects of data collection, and dps meters are one of them. It has to be broad so that some genius doesn't come up with an idea that would invalidate the entire thing. Call it an unfortunate or happy accident depending on which side you're on on that topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Overall, if this comes to fruition and if what he said is correct, this is a very, very much needed law, and ANet will have to change some fundamental aspects of the game or leave the EU market entirely. > > > > > > > > > > > > Combat data isn’t personal information though since combat Data doesn’t identify any person as per the EUs definition, especially when in group Settings Combat Data isn’t solely from the person in question but is culminated from the group as a whole. The only thing that can be considered personal data would be the display names or Character names, but even then the players already consented to those identifiers to be displayed in game, when they hit the multiple I accept/agree buttons to even install or play the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > Based on the EUs definition and it’s privacy act then the game would have to hide all Character and Display names otherwise it is breaking the law in the EU, see how idiotic that is? > > > > > > > > > > Separately they're not, but when you link combat data to a user ID then it becomes personal data. I know it's not an easy topic but he's made it very clear in all his/her posts. > > > > > > > > Here’s the definition of what constitutes personal Data as per the Privacy Policy. > > > > > > > > The definition of personal data is data relating to a living individual who can be identified > > > > > > > > from that data or > > > > from that data and other information in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller > > > > Sensitive personal data concerns the subject's race, ethnicity, politics, religion, trade union status, health, sex life or criminal record > > > > > > > > Yeah Combat Data even in conjunction with Display names and character names, doesn’t fall into any of those categories, sorry, but people need to learn the definitions of things > > > > > > If higher law, which is e.g. EU law has different definition, whatever anet writes in their documents is irrelevant. > > > > That isn’t Anets definition, it looks like you need to read Anets Privacy Policy they say exactly where the definition comes from for those players that live in the EU. It’s easy to tell when people don’t even research what they are attempting to argue. > > Thing is, this applies to Anet and GW2, but not to Arc and its developer. And Anet refuses to take any responsibility for this tool. The data is data and the data doesn’t follow the Definition set forth of what constitutes personal data, you know what you keep toting but don’t even know the definition of Personal Data as set forth for European members, and Anet owns that data and says that that Combat data can be displayed through meters. Again maybe read up on the Privacy Policy and the TOS all of which you agreed to but clearly failed to read at installation of the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts