Talk:Standard (warez)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on September 26, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

— JIP | Talk 05:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone add any information on who exactly sets these standards? What shadowy organisations are involved? -NeoThe1 08:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter 'who' but only that 'it is'. Rules help the scene to flow. I for 1 am in favour of it
Why does it matter? Why would you ask a question that no one would EVER answer? It wasn't one person anyway, it was a consensus based on a balance between quality and size. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sp4i6 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
To me it's incredibly interesting to find out how centralised or decentralised the governing system is.NeoThe1 01:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
It's "the federation of releasing groups" and very loose as for who actually writes down the rules from revision to revision and organizes communication. What's important is that almost all major release groups sign, and the standards are golden. So it's not like there's a pyramid of syndicated crime or any sort of hierarchy, but more like independant countries and the the kyoto treaty. If there's any sort of nefarious influencing going on, it probably has more to do with top sites and enforcing these rules. By that I mean that many feel that the current nuke system is arbitrary and often not strong enough to encourage quality over speed. It's more efficient for a group to not test and to release as quickly as possible in order to get credit than it is to test first. So risking being nuked is deemed more less important than risking losing the race to release something first.--Trypsin 23:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Strange how a culture built on breaking the rules make up rules for itself. A scene rule you should add is that whenever there's an "I" in uppercase text it has to be lowercase. WTF is that about? 81.232.158.237 10:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

It probably has something to do with how "Iil and 1" appear on screen, lowercase i is easiest to read as i. 84.251.14.145 22:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
That's silly. For example, how could "i" in for "DEViANCE" be mistaken for a "1" even if it was called "DEVIANCE"? 81.232.158.237 12:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
You see, the warez scene dates all the way back to the 80s when such long namings and different charsets were limited in computers. It stays, you know. Many groups still even participate (which is quite obsolete nowadays) in the demoscene or supply their releases with cracktros, the most popular probably being Fairlight, and who even recently have won many times at the Assembly demo party, and such. --nlitement [talk] 23:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I rather think it's because and uppercase "i" can look the same as a lowecase "L" -> IlIlIl vs. iLiLiL
some of this rules are really silly. I looks like l? it depends on typeface. you should always use verdana ;)
and how about 0 and O? it also looks the same in some cases

"Nonetheless the introduction of MPEG-4 playback capabilities in standalone DVD players was a result of the huge amount of TDX compliant movie material available on the internet." ← This is extremely hard to prove. There is really no manufacturer would ever say anything like this. I'm sure many people think this, but there is no way to prove it.--Tatsh 17:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Just add "probably" somewhere to make it valid. 81.232.158.237 12:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The warez scene are defined by groups of people who have been involved in its activities for several years and have established connections to large groups. These people form a committee, which creates drafts for approval of the large groups.
You've got to be kidding me... this is encyclopedic? These "groups" could be just groups of friends in the neighborhood, for all I can tell. I suggest a "Essay-entry" or "Story" template. There aren't citations either. -76.4.49.201 23:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

These rules are perfectly genuine, but, in my opinion, due to the secretive nature of their authors, signatories, distribution and enforcement, any articles on the subject will always fail to meet Wikipedia's verifiable-content requirements. I recommend that they be mentioned in abstract terms (i.e., acknowledging their existence), but that explicit details be not recorded. 202.36.179.65 03:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Packaging ?

What is the purpose of chopping up a release into 50 MB pieces ? I understand the logic in the old floppy days, but why today ?

--Xerces8 12:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

- it's for easier distribution of the files over topsites, speed, racers, error correction (easier to replace 50mb then 4.7GB), tradition (which actually makes up most of the 0day/dox rules), amongst many other reasons - these things are out of the scope of this wikipedia article

(2007-08-01)


Fortunately it does seem to be on it's way out, but things do tend to lag... It's already the case that archiving to cd is more expensive than archiving to dvd, but it will probably be another two years before the cd sized chunk goes the way of the dodo (likely because the average computer in China still lacks a dvd burner).

- [by: ptr] Why do these groups strictly use MP3? Vorbis is proven to be more efficient, isn't it?

  • It's an often-asked question. So far, the benefits provided by ogg vorbis and other codecs over well-encoded MP3 are not strong enough to warrant the effort involved in changing. Processing MP3 features like ID3 tags is a major component of zipscripts, and thousands of sites would need to be upgraded to support a different codec. In fact, I don't think project-zs even supports ID3v2 yet. This limitation is not such a problem with other sections like DiVX and music videos, and so they are able to adopt new codecs relatively easily. 202.89.153.139 12:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the scene is a bit characteristic for trying to do things as 'perfect' as possible. (Because there are so many, and fairly strict rules.) I'm a bit of a perfectionist (wich is not always nice to be) and would say; first technology (the best codec), and after technology comes luxury (not having to rewrite some(/a lot?) software/websites.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.126.42.203 (talk) 13:28:18, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

There is no limit of 101 disks in the old style naming format, because it continues from r99 to s00, s01 and so on.--65.9.110.130 (talk) 21:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

It would really be appreciated if people STOP deleting information such as images and info on this page. No one can get caught or ratted out with a wiki, get over yourselves, you are not that important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sp4i6 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removal of the tag

it does have references but their just not linked —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.1.188 (talk) 00:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)