Krid

If they're near a redstone current they'll cycle up to full speed. Or do you mean they aren't exploding while on an HV line? They'll explode as soon as they try to draw power, if that's the case.

I'm trying to set-up an advanced pumping station system, but there seems to be absolutely no documentation on the static capacity or throughput rates for the different kinds of waterproof pipe. The wikis for technic, tekkit, and buildcraft list nothing about capacity other than gold having more than the others, and teleport pipe capacity isn't mentioned at all. Can anybody tell me what the max flow rate is for the waterproof pipes in buckets/tick? Wooden pipes, stone/cobble/iron pipes, gold pipes, and teleport pipes?

I keep seeing people talking about a RM Furnace dupe bug, but as near as I can tell nobody seems to know what it is and they're all just parroting that one exists. If there is a RM Furnace dupe bug, then what are the conditions under which it can be reproduced? Knowing how it is done lets us take steps to stop it.

The lease/rent argument is invalid as those carry the expectation that the car will go back at some point. It's also invalid because Minecraft is purchased, not leased or rented - please see the white-on-orange "BUY NOW" button on http://minecraft.net/ for further details. For the record, when I bought my copy of minecraft the only term of service was that I would get all updates free forever. One of the most basic rules of any transaction is that the terms of the transaction can't be changed once money has exchanged hands unless there is a specific agreement allowing the terms to be changed. There was no such term, ergo Mojang can't hold any such terms against me. As they agreed to provide me with free updates forever the normal route for getting around such problems - making people agree to the terms to receive updates - is equally invalid.

They are separate, though. Your code is not Mojang code, and Mojang code is not your code. Perhaps a physical example would be clearer. Minecraft is like a car not designed for a radio, and a mod is like a car radio. The car functions on its own, but the car radio must be installed in a car to work. All the radio does is extend the functionality of the car; on its own it does nothing. Because the car isn't designed to have a radio you have to modify it in order to install one. You have every right to do that. Minecraft functions on its own, but the mod must be installed in Minecraft to work. All the mod does is extend the functionality of Minecraft; on its own it does nothing. Because Minecraft isn't designed to have mods you have to modify it in order to install one. You have every right to do that. The third paragraph was correct.

Ah, ok. That is true. I was focusing on what somebody said earlier about mods being technically illegal right now. My mistake!

Nope. Legal action doesn't work against somebody for something you intentionally helped them do. You can't help somebody create and distribute a mod then turn around and sue them for it, and you can't help somebody violate your licenses or terms of service and then punish them for that violation. If nothing else, every mod distributed through the official forums and abiding by its rules would have immunity at least up until the point where Mojang closed those forums. Even then they couldn't do anything to people who had distributed mods before they closed the forums, since you can't retroactively remove consent.

Because they'd only be allowed to distribute the changes they made, not the files those changes were made to. You can't use the changes without the files, so it'd be a total waste of effort. Also, it's not hypocrisy if they get mad at Technic for redistributing their stuff. Mojang's cool with people sharing mods, but not Minecraft itself. Mod authors get the same standard. It's silly and bad for the Minecraft community if they get upset, but not hypocritical. Now, if a mod author got pissed at somebody for making mods of their mods, like CompactSolars or LogisticPipes? That would be hypocritical. Mod makers do have rights. That doesn't include the right to be a dick, but we have to respect the rights they do have.

That's actually irrelevant, since it's not the meaning of 'enabling' I was using. They have forums set up to help people make and distribute mods. That's enabling. Maybe I should have said "Facilitating" instead...

They can only act under copyright law if their copyrights are being violated, meaning that something they made is being distributed. Anything else would be a violation of the license, which is a contract dispute. No, not really. The rules of the official minecraft modding forum require that mods make changes to minecraft.jar, and also that they not use an installer. If you grant somebody permission to do something then you implicitly give permission for them to do things which are required to do that as well. Mods and the distribution thereof are officially permitted, but only if they change Mojang code without an installer. This essentially requires that they distribute modified Mojang files, and since they have been granted explicit permission to create and distribute mods that gives implicit permission to distribute the modified files. This is an exception to the posted license. In fact, lets take a look at the context: If I am reading this correctly then the license states that the reason for forbidding redistribution is to prevent piracy. This is consistent with Mojang acting to facilitate modding and implicitly permitting the distribution of altered files as needed to do so. Also? If Mojang decided to start using copyright against mods then mods could switch to diff files. Mojang's copyright doesn't extend to diffs. Not make. Mojang can't do anything about people making mods. The only thing they could do anything about is distribution. Even then, it's only a copyright issue if the file being distributed actually contains things directly made by Mojang.

Yes, they do. Meaning that people can't distribute altered versions without the permission of the one who created the original. The changes they make, however, are owned solely by themselves, and the data required to modify the original into a new form is not itself an altered version of the original. Copyrights are about Rights to Copy. Hence the name. What people do with their own legitimate copy is not restricted by copyright. Mojang can't use copyright against people who distribute mods unless the distributed mods actually contain something Mojang created. Generally a license can be used to prohibit unauthorized modifications of a work or to prevent the modifications themselves from being distributed, but the Minecraft site explicitly prohibits distributing modified files. I am fairly certain that the intent here is to prevent dissemination of Minecraft or derivatives thereof to people who don't own their own copy. Statements made by Notch and other Mojang staff lend strong support to this reading, and with contracts intent is considered when deciding how to rule on something the contract doesn't make clear. Beyond that? The official Minecraft forums have an entire section devoted to the development and distribution of mods. ( http://www.minecraftforum.net/forum/56-mapping-and-modding/ ) This means that mods are officially regarded as acceptable. In fact, the rules of the modding forum, as posted by an administrator appointed by Mojang, state "Must modify the minecraft.jar file". TL;DR: Mods are legal and copyright their authors.

No, it prohibits distribution of Minecraft files and altered versions thereof. Any mod distributed in such a way that doesn't include any Minecraft files is perfectly legal. Diff patches, as they only include information required to change the original file into a new file, fall under fair use. The license mentions distribution of modified files, but not minimal excerpts taken from those files. That doesn't mean it's permitted, just that a court would have to decide if that's actually violating the license or not. License violations and copyright violations are not the same things, however. Bukkit plugins don't even alter the original files. Those are completely legal, even if bucket itself were not.

Not quite. If there's lag then you can withdraw more items than you should be able, but the tablet remembers how much EMC you owe and all tablets share the same 'memory'. You need to pay all that EMC back before you can use any tablet again. So while you technically can duplicate items with tablets, it's nowhere near as exploitable as you'd think.

Minecraft's pegging the CPU core it's on, isn't it. Not much you can do about that since MC doesn't have multiprocessing support. Disabling chunk loading blocks might help a bit, though.

I didn't find anything about in when I searched the forum. Has it been reported already? If it has? Well, I'm of the opinion that anything capable of breaking a map or server via expected usage is a critical severity bug. Disabling interactions between the two as a temporary solution doesn't seem like a difficult patch.