><snip>
>>>Like I said, the discussion of souce code and copy protection is about (a) what do you want to protect, (b) for how long, and (c) from who?
>>
>>You said:
No, it is not. Inclining that it's better to use a product like Konxise.
>>I say: Someone is either hacking or not hacking at all. The hacker for sure will use tools to hack and the non-hacker will not hack, so the native 'encryption' is enough protection.
>
>
>Like I said, the discussion of souce code and copy protection is about (a) what do you want to protect, (b) for how long, and (c) from who?
Okay, it appears we are now in a LOOP. There is one thing that bothers me here. You seem to think that I don't understand you or don't want to understand you. You seem to think that I don't have a point here. However, I think that I do have a point here.
You are implicitly telling all readers: Hey, buy that external product!
I am telling readers: Don't underestimate the efficiency of the native 'encryption' and don't overestimate the efficiency of those external products.
To focus on your (c) of your abc: In my view there are only two kinds of users..
1) Those who hack. Nothing really will stop them from succeeding.
2) Those who don't hack. The external products are not more efficient here.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
