It's not entirely unrelated in that speed runs help preserve a community around the game.

A very different community both in kind and demographics. It introduces a new community to the game rather than preserving what once existed.

Exactly. And in the worst case the disk itself might disintegrate due to rotational forces, transferring some of those forces to random parts of the interior of the disc drive. Physical and higher sustained speeds and increased temperatures due to many read attempts make that more likely (but still very uncommon). This isn't entirely theoretical, I have a dead drive to prove it, although not from speed running.

Are you also confused about kids playing outside making up arbitrary rules for their games? The point to have fun by challenging yourself in a competition with others. That means allowing things that make the competition more fun/challenging and disallowing those things that trivialize it. Sometimes that's a subjective thing.

Ultimately glitch-assisted speed runs are not a pre-defined category. Whatever the community agrees goes. The point is to have an interesting skill-based competition whether that skill is reaction time and precise inputs or finding exploits.

But the AI actions are already associated with a "real" pre-existing account in TFA, that didn't stop anything.

But it would leave more of a trail - do we have any idea who Jia Tan actually was?

If everyone used a gpg-style web of trust based on key signing parties, it would become trivial to use a stolen or entirely fictious identity as well - there's zero chance those parties would actually check identities in ways that cannot easily be defeated by a determined and resourceful attacker.

You can be if you want to but social skills should not be a requirement to lead an open source project. If you create something and share it that doesn't oblige you to even respond to anyone.

Of course, a hobbyist putting his code out there is under no obligation whatsoever. But we aren't talking about small time hobbyists here. These are professionals who are either paid as part of their job or else contribute their spare time to maintain important projects that are part of a large ecosystem that is relied on. There's a community and it necessarily has behavioral standards as part of the shared goal of maintaining group cohesion.

SQLite isn't closed source, please let's not muddy terms. You're talking about the cathedral development model vs. a bazaar.

edited, sorry for the typo

My solution is to look at PRs and other requests whenever I actually have time and feel like it, prioritizing contributions from people I trust and those that have put in the effort in making my job easier. That might mean things don't get merged for a long time and some people might get upset but that's not my problem.

It is a bad thing. The good response to bad actors abusing good faith is to make sure there are consequences that disincentivize that behavior in the future. Sliding further towards a low trust society means the bad actors winning in the same way that terrorists win when we subject everyone to restrictions as a result.

You don't slide into a low trust society though.

Quite the opposite. You just add a Wall with a Gate. Inside those walls, you suddenly have a high trust society again.

The issue that is currently breaking reality was that we thought that everywhere could be a "high trust" space. This was proven countless times to be wrong.

Tearing down all walls - as it happened with the assault on friction (thanks hyperscaling) - did not lead to the "high trust" spilling out, but the "low trust" spilling in, essentially.

It's a question where you build that wall. If you build it around the home of your immediate family and keep almost everyone else out then you can hardly be said to have a high trust society. The goal should be to put only those bad actors behind a wall, preferably a physical one.

Yeah, gated communities like that are usually a clear sign that something bad is happening with the given society - or in a minor cases with the community, if it needs to gate itself from a society that is not failing.

Sure, but that's a completely different discussion.

Plus that even with such a small scale of the "inside", the thing fails gracefully. It is arguably a failure mode, yes, but it is one that leaves a functioning system (albeit one that stays below its potential).

This is not true for the inversion of the scenario. That does _not_ fail safe but just leaves rubble behind.