I think that modding should be allowed, it only adds to the game and to the type of experience the player wants to have. The players can decide for themselves what mods or content they choose to have, and it makes the game more playable and replayable. I don't see Notch as having a problem with that, as essentially, whatever mod comes out, they all require the main Minecraft program which comes from him. Mod's are only going to make him more money in this regard, as mods will make more people will want to buy his program, myself being one of them.
Having said that though, and looking at it from Notch's view point, do you then go on making your program so that it can accomodate these mods, which means more work. And what about rights and legalaties of creative ideas? Do you put something in your own program and claim it as your own, even though some mod seems to have made that idea first, or do you have to pay of every mod maker to fix your programing because they got to it first, even though the idea was already in his head and not expressed or finished and put out in time? Mods are fixing problems, but just maybe Notch was in the process of fixing it already, just slated for future updates. Does he now have to recognize these modders in some way legally? I think this is where his concern might be. I'm for modders but is it going to cost him and us the game in the end fighting over who did what first?
I think Notch should just impliment his program to what he originally sought to do despite what modders have made, and that modders should conform to his program, not the other way around. Modders can add mods, make the game as playable to the buyers wishes, and even ask for money, why not, no one being forced to buy a mod. If you don't like a mod don't get it. I do like alot of the mods though.
I think Notch should just impliment his program to what he originally sought to do despite what modders have made, and that modders should conform to his program, not the other way around. Modders can add mods, make the game as playable to the buyers wishes, and even ask for money, why not, no one being forced to buy a mod. If you don't like a mod don't get it. I do like alot of the mods though.
I don't think anyone has ever asked that Notch create the code to accommodate the game mods. That's just silly.
Even in bigger games, such as Garry's Mod and World of Warcraft, mods/add-ons are all created to conform to the existing code.
This ties in to people blaming Notch for client muck-ups during updates:
That's not his job.
There's countless people making mods for Minecraft, and I'm willing to bet some people don't post about all of their mods. For Notch to keep track of every single one and edit code to ensure the smooth functioning of a players mod is a ridiculous notion. It is up to the users, and the mod creators, to look after the stability of their personal game client and performance when messing with the inner workings.
Back up your files and saves.
Keep an eye on mod/client updates, and compatibility issues.
If a mod is bugging up, or is causing problems in areas that would otherwise be normal gameplay, consult the MOD creator. Not Notch and the rest of the team.
If by chance it has been completely ruled out that a mod of yours is causing the issue, THEN you should contact Notch, as it could be a legitimate issue on his end.
I think Notch should just impliment his program to what he originally sought to do despite what modders have made, and that modders should conform to his program, not the other way around. Modders can add mods, make the game as playable to the buyers wishes, and even ask for money, why not, no one being forced to buy a mod. If you don't like a mod don't get it. I do like alot of the mods though.
I don't think anyone has ever asked that Notch create the code to accommodate the game mods. That's just silly.
Even in bigger games, such as Garry's Mod and World of Warcraft, mods/add-ons are all created to conform to the existing code.
This ties in to people blaming Notch for client muck-ups during updates:
That's not his job.
You do realize that games like Civilization 4 & 5 did create code to accommodate game mods. Obviously those dev's are silly, eh?
I think Notch should just impliment his program to what he originally sought to do despite what modders have made, and that modders should conform to his program, not the other way around. Modders can add mods, make the game as playable to the buyers wishes, and even ask for money, why not, no one being forced to buy a mod. If you don't like a mod don't get it. I do like alot of the mods though.
I don't think anyone has ever asked that Notch create the code to accommodate the game mods. That's just silly.
Even in bigger games, such as Garry's Mod and World of Warcraft, mods/add-ons are all created to conform to the existing code.
This ties in to people blaming Notch for client muck-ups during updates:
That's not his job.
You do realize that games like Civilization 4 & 5 did create code to accommodate game mods. Obviously those dev's are silly, eh?
Well for one, I've never played any of the Civilization games- however that point is irrelevant.
There's a difference between a highly staffed team, and Minecraft. Notch only recently added more people to his staff, and they're all just now settling into an office.
Providing support for every mod out there, and then doing maintenance with each update (in ALPHA, mind you) is, to put it simply, SILLY.
I'm not saying that sort of thing is out of the question entirely- what I'm saying is at this current stage, it would be rather irresponsible and would only increase the work load.
It's not so much that Notch is against client-side modding. It's the distribution of such mods that is a shady area. Everyone's free to mod their client as they see fit, but the mods we see posted everyday include a fair amount of the game's code which is violates what is stated on his copyright page.
The one major rule:
Do not distribute anything I've made. This includes the client and the server software for the game.
This also includes modified versions of anything I've made.
Quote from Keral »
The bad
currently:
Mods that CHANGE/ALTER the hard code of the game(word to be note of is CHANGE/ALTER)
Programs that inject codes in the game("Do you know where that codes might have been!?")
Reason
- I guess its the fact it alters HARD CODE of the game itself
- Also this is the only game that mods exist(well from the games i played) in a STILL developing game
- People kept raging about broken clients every update and blaming Notch for it
- Code injections is like drugs, mods are addicting but can kill you(your client)
-Donations... I really dont mind but its like "support my program for this program" in comparison "leeching money off a game, by asking some support about something for that game that isn't official and could be game breaking"
Not to mention the fact that the current state of client-side mods allows for a "troll" to insert anything he wants. Most people would never know if they added a mod that acted as a trojan and then Notch would end up getting the flak for it.
Notch said he plans on adding mod support in the future, he said so on his twitter today.
Indeed, he's just not been certain as to what extent and how to implement it yet. However, a good mod loader and API for Minecraft would do wonders to protect both Notch and the player base.
I don't think the argument that mods are giving an unfair advantage in, say, multiplayer, is remotely valid. They don't, beyond visual stuff. In multiplayer, mods are useless. And sometimes gamebreaking, if they attempt to do anything beyond beautify.
When I first bought the game, I set up a smp server, before I even knew about admin software etc.
People joined and gathered they'r materials and built.
Then a person joins, and we ask him if he needs any tools to get started, he say's "nah, i'll just dig out some diamond, I always find it fast"
I look for his name to see how he finds diamond so fast, only to see that he has spawned diamond blocks in my cobblestone wall of my first building.
This is done using client side code injection via a wrapper, wich is atleast some of what notch is trying to point out that he doesn't agree with.
And to say this doesnt give any advantage....
Actually, Minecraft currently does not enforce the player's inventory at all. This is not so much a concern of legit mods as security in general. If Notch doesn't implement any server side security cheaters will take advantage of this no matter what.
Well for one, I've never played any of the Civilization games- however that point is irrelevant.
...
Whaaat?! Of course it's relevant! It invalidates all of your opinions, because you are obviously are heartless criminal that hates their life and hates having any ounce of happiness in their brains. You're basically a mad, insane, raving, crazy, vacuous psychopath. :wink.gif:
I don't really know what to say. My opinion is this: everyone has a different idea of fun, each somewhat unique. There isn't an "almighty standard" for what people like in a game, or, to rephrase, for what people want in a game. It doesn't matter what Notch intended for this game to be like, because it's none of his business what we do or what we don't do with all his hard work, regardless of legalities. He has a right to do whatever he wants to stop it, but it's still none if his business. He can take measures to crush every ounce of creativity out of our souls, but that won't necessarily do anything. He really can't stop us from doing stupid stuff and blaming it on him. Heck, maybe we should all just blame everything on him, out of spite for all the money he's making. :tongue.gif:
I, for one, take no pleasure in waiting for trees to grow. So I took care of that with a mod. I don't care about the hard work put into harvesting resources, so I use INVedit to take care of all of my needs. I don't happen to like biomes as they are right now, so I use mods and make them a little bigger and change them up a bit. I like to explore my worlds, so I use HoverBoats for that. That's how I make Minecraft fun for me.
Now this isn't meant as a slam against Notch. I love him for making Minecraft, and I think he deserves money for what he did. He struck gold! And I think that's cool. Keep workin' on Minecraft, and feel free to charge me, 'cause I can't and probably won't do anything about it. :biggrin.gif:
Notch can't go and be upset with the makers of these mods. They're adding actual, fun content to the game. Not useless crap no one wants like Useless Books, Useless Paper. Etc etc. Making Minecarts fun? Making a.. Oh, I don't know, Something people have been asking for forever, A BRIDGE? These are things Notch should of considered. How can he say he feels like he'll never make a bridge for the game?
How can Notch, Creator of the game, Go and limit the creativity of the game, which focuses on your creativity and ability to make whatever whimsicals you have? Limiting a building games creativity is like giving a man a fortune and telling him he can't spend any of it.
Notch can't go and be upset with the makers of these mods. They're adding actual, fun content to the game. Not useless crap no one wants like Useless Books, Useless Paper. Etc etc. Making Minecarts fun? Making a.. Oh, I don't know, Something people have been asking for forever, A BRIDGE? These are things Notch should of considered. How can he say he feels like he'll never make a bridge for the game?
How can Notch, Creator of the game, Go and limit the creativity of the game, which focuses on your creativity and ability to make whatever whimsicals you have? Limiting a building games creativity is like giving a man a fortune and telling him he can't spend any of it.
It's quite easy to say you frown upon them when those mods distribute sections of code from the original game. Now if they were distributed as diffs that we had to edit ourselves, or through a patcher, instead of the usual distribution of the modified file then it'd probably be a different story all together.
Notch can't go and be upset with the makers of these mods. They're adding actual, fun content to the game. Not useless crap no one wants like Useless Books, Useless Paper. Etc etc. Making Minecarts fun? Making a.. Oh, I don't know, Something people have been asking for forever, A BRIDGE? These are things Notch should of considered. How can he say he feels like he'll never make a bridge for the game?
How can Notch, Creator of the game, Go and limit the creativity of the game, which focuses on your creativity and ability to make whatever whimsicals you have? Limiting a building games creativity is like giving a man a fortune and telling him he can't spend any of it.
It's quite easy to say you frown upon them when those mods distribute sections of code from the original game. Now if they were distributed as diffs that we had to edit ourselves, or through a patcher, instead of the usual distribution of the modified file then it'd probably be a different story all together.
Frowning is fine. The whole Cease and Desist orders are ********. The very notion of handing them out for mods is ridiculous. they're editing the game, adding stuff, and offering them as OPTIONAL downloads. Nowhere does Notch lose money. Hell, if the mods are amazing enough, it draws people to the game. I'm not understanding how you can frown on community involvement. What does Notch plan to do with Minecraft, keep it same old same old? The damn game thrives o ncreation, it needs new, innovative features, and the community has provided them. double so if the mods only work in singleplayer.
I think it necessary to make a careful distinction between the morality of writing code with the intent of defrauding or otherwise depriving a developer of their due income as a result of circumventing account verification code and the "morality" of playing a game in a way other than that which it was intended by the original developer.
The first case, I argue, is the most important application of the notion of morality. It is the equivalent of piracy, and there is a moral quandary associated with that type of "modding." I'd go so far as to argue that this kind of modding is, in fact, hacking and Notch should not be expected to tolerate such activity.
The second case, on the other hand, is a matter of personal preference insofar that the modifications you've made are in compliance with applicable copyright statutes (i.e. you haven't stolen the game nor do your hacks allow for such behavior). That you feel morally obligated to adhere to a set of rules that the game designer sets forth, regardless of your ability or willingness to modify them, is your own prerogative. It is neither a legally enforceable nor culturally common.
Survival multiplayer sever mods (e.g. hey0's hmod) are the equivalent of "house rules" in a game of Monopoly among friends. As long as you're within the bounds of the rules established by the house, there are no morally questionable activities that arise from playing in such a way. Parker Brothers (or Hasbro now, if I'm not mistaken) can't disrupt your friendly game with a knock on the door and remind you that they frown upon you changing the game mechanics to allow for that jackpot under the Free Parking space.
I do, however, recognize a gray area, as stated by some other posters. In short, I don't support modifications made to a single player's client that may have adverse affects on others concurrently playing on a multiplayer server. This follows the above example of a new player joining a server and using a "mod" to spawn diamond blocks in another player's house, thus breaking the established rules of the server. Here, I propose we recognize this as a "cheat" despite it being a "mod" or even a "hack." They haven't defrauded the developer, but are instead breaking the rules of a game that have been agreed upon by several who are playing said game.
TL;DR Let's not get all confused about this issue. Stealing code or software is immoral and possibly criminal (hacking). Calling the modification of a game's rule set to suit your preferences "immoral" is laughable (modding). Destroying the experience for others who have not agreed to play by your rules is just plain rude. It's for you to decide if you feel bad about doing it, however (cheating).
The problem with Minecraft modding, and especially Minecraft modding, is the fact that the game client is written and distributed in Java, which can be decompiled by pretty much anyone with the ability to type a few words into Google.
That being said, there will never be a true "end" to clientside modding, as Java is simply too hard of a language to enforce rules upon. If Notch added some kind of remote verification, to verify that each client had the correct hash, it would still be breakable, as someone could just intercept that packet, drop it, or do something else.
Those who are using this to their advantage are probably the ones Notch is most worried about. Notch already expressed that he wasn't too fond of AO, which is problematic. Why? If Notch starts trying to shut down mods that he dislikes, then you get a double negative. In most cases, the reason why those modders can do what they do is that they know enough about the situation to develop work-arounds, while the rest of us sit around with broken modifications.
tl;dr: If Notch tries to stop clientside modding, those who are using it for cheats will find workarounds, while the rest of us will be either doing the same or nothing - a lose lose situation. As a Valve fan, I can attest to the success of mods - specifically Counter-Strike: Source. CS was a mod for Half Life 1, that was so good, Valve hired the guy who made it. There's a reason why companies like Activision can't keep a game running for 2 years, but Valve has to literally rip people away to get them to stop playing. Notch should be more like Valve, and less like a giant publisher.
Frowning is fine. The whole Cease and Desist orders are ********. The very notion of handing them out for mods is ridiculous. they're editing the game, adding stuff, and offering them as OPTIONAL downloads. Nowhere does Notch lose money. Hell, if the mods are amazing enough, it draws people to the game. I'm not understanding how you can frown on community involvement. What does Notch plan to do with Minecraft, keep it same old same old? The damn game thrives o ncreation, it needs new, innovative features, and the community has provided them. double so if the mods only work in singleplayer.
Not once has Notch said he was going out of his way to stop any mods from developing. He simply said he frowned upon the act of distributing the client-side mods. Which he has every right to. If he wanted to C&D them that'd be his prerogative as well, especially since they distribute his copyrighted (and possibly patented) source code in the process. But that's not what Notch said at all. He simply said he "frowned" upon client-side mods being distributed. He's said you're free to mod your client all you want, but that it doesn't give you the immediate right to distribute those mods.
Now, if you wanted to make mods that alter the client and that Notch couldn't really find fault with, then mods should be distributed as patch files with no actual code. Come up with an easy what that even a nincompoop could follow so that they patch the files without any of Notch's original work is being distributed with it. Then Notch would have little room to frown.
Granted, a bit of his frowning is beyond this reason and more a concern of support issues but that's a whole different argument.
I, for one, take no pleasure in waiting for trees to grow. So I took care of that with a mod. I don't care about the hard work put into harvesting resources, so I use INVedit to take care of all of my needs. I don't happen to like biomes as they are right now, so I use mods and make them a little bigger and change them up a bit. I like to explore my worlds, so I use HoverBoats for that. That's how I make Minecraft fun for me.
Now this isn't meant as a slam against Notch. I love him for making Minecraft, and I think he deserves money for what he did. He struck gold! And I think that's cool. Keep workin' on Minecraft, and feel free to charge me, 'cause I can't and probably won't do anything about it. :biggrin.gif:
There was some stuff I found that I had an urge to argue against earlier in your post, but whatever. It'd just be restating what's been said and I managed to pinch a nerve in my neck so yeah.
ANYWAY.
I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum, where I use InvEdit and other similar mods very rarely- however I have nothing against the people who do. As I said before, though, it's when multiplayer is involved is where things get a bit iffy (also of course the stuff like mods possibly containing viruses, and the other technical things like source code release). There should at least be some options in multiplayer to control the use of mods. Not only for RP/more strict servers, but to prevent griefing and other similar actions.
I don't know much about code, especially not Java. If I'm doing anything involving development for games, it's nothing even remotely this intensive. I'm usually a spriter, graphic artist, mapper, or all of the above- so the only real coding I do is oldschool (in notepad) with HTML for layout codes.
I know very little about exploits or anything of the sort, however I DO know Java is still Java- so there's a large amount of limits as far as regulation is concerned.
Notch isn't going around handing out C&D letters, and honestly with his track record that route is unlikely unless you're doing something extremely detrimental to the game... Alas, I am NOT Notch, so I can not speak in his place on the matter.
Regardless as to how this all plays out, though, Minecraft will always have a special place in my [insert cheesy body part metaphor here].
Gods, Notch has really just entered a Minefield and gods is he going to get hell from these forums, but I for one respect him for showing his feelings. I admittedly use INVEdit for building because I for one don't have the time to dedicate to digging every single piece of stone I need for a house, and instead use the program to throw myself the hard to mine or find materials and then build a nice home, as for the rest, I work by hand. What Notch is more worried about, at least, from his texts are that he is fearing a sourcecode leak, the ultimate damnation of a Indie Game. I mean really, cut the poor guy some slack. Though, Half-Life 2 did indeed have a leak and it resulted in the loved and adored game we all know, but that was a rare occasion. Do remember that one does not OWN a piece of software, you merely buy the right to use it, such as one does when they borrow money, you don't OWN the cash, your just holding onto it.
i honestly believe he only wants to discourage modding until minecraft is finished and even then, probably to help him with tracing error reports and knowing if it's his code causing problems or mods.
If Notch really wanted to stop modding entirely then he shouldn't use java, as anyone with pretty much any decompresser on their computer can decompile the java file with ease.
Also, I don't see why he frowns upon modding. You have to own minecraft to make mods for it, and making mods for it will retain more interest in the game then he can personally. Also he doesn't have to do any work to make modding easier; even though every update breaks half the mods out there, people still use them.
Having said that though, and looking at it from Notch's view point, do you then go on making your program so that it can accomodate these mods, which means more work. And what about rights and legalaties of creative ideas? Do you put something in your own program and claim it as your own, even though some mod seems to have made that idea first, or do you have to pay of every mod maker to fix your programing because they got to it first, even though the idea was already in his head and not expressed or finished and put out in time? Mods are fixing problems, but just maybe Notch was in the process of fixing it already, just slated for future updates. Does he now have to recognize these modders in some way legally? I think this is where his concern might be. I'm for modders but is it going to cost him and us the game in the end fighting over who did what first?
I think Notch should just impliment his program to what he originally sought to do despite what modders have made, and that modders should conform to his program, not the other way around. Modders can add mods, make the game as playable to the buyers wishes, and even ask for money, why not, no one being forced to buy a mod. If you don't like a mod don't get it. I do like alot of the mods though.
I don't think anyone has ever asked that Notch create the code to accommodate the game mods. That's just silly.
Even in bigger games, such as Garry's Mod and World of Warcraft, mods/add-ons are all created to conform to the existing code.
This ties in to people blaming Notch for client muck-ups during updates:
That's not his job.
There's countless people making mods for Minecraft, and I'm willing to bet some people don't post about all of their mods. For Notch to keep track of every single one and edit code to ensure the smooth functioning of a players mod is a ridiculous notion. It is up to the users, and the mod creators, to look after the stability of their personal game client and performance when messing with the inner workings.
Back up your files and saves.
Keep an eye on mod/client updates, and compatibility issues.
If a mod is bugging up, or is causing problems in areas that would otherwise be normal gameplay, consult the MOD creator. Not Notch and the rest of the team.
If by chance it has been completely ruled out that a mod of yours is causing the issue, THEN you should contact Notch, as it could be a legitimate issue on his end.
You do realize that games like Civilization 4 & 5 did create code to accommodate game mods. Obviously those dev's are silly, eh?
Well for one, I've never played any of the Civilization games- however that point is irrelevant.
There's a difference between a highly staffed team, and Minecraft. Notch only recently added more people to his staff, and they're all just now settling into an office.
Providing support for every mod out there, and then doing maintenance with each update (in ALPHA, mind you) is, to put it simply, SILLY.
I'm not saying that sort of thing is out of the question entirely- what I'm saying is at this current stage, it would be rather irresponsible and would only increase the work load.
Not to mention the fact that the current state of client-side mods allows for a "troll" to insert anything he wants. Most people would never know if they added a mod that acted as a trojan and then Notch would end up getting the flak for it.
Indeed, he's just not been certain as to what extent and how to implement it yet. However, a good mod loader and API for Minecraft would do wonders to protect both Notch and the player base.
Actually, Minecraft currently does not enforce the player's inventory at all. This is not so much a concern of legit mods as security in general. If Notch doesn't implement any server side security cheaters will take advantage of this no matter what.
Whaaat?! Of course it's relevant! It invalidates all of your opinions, because you are obviously are heartless criminal that hates their life and hates having any ounce of happiness in their brains. You're basically a mad, insane, raving, crazy, vacuous psychopath. :wink.gif:
I don't really know what to say. My opinion is this: everyone has a different idea of fun, each somewhat unique. There isn't an "almighty standard" for what people like in a game, or, to rephrase, for what people want in a game. It doesn't matter what Notch intended for this game to be like, because it's none of his business what we do or what we don't do with all his hard work, regardless of legalities. He has a right to do whatever he wants to stop it, but it's still none if his business. He can take measures to crush every ounce of creativity out of our souls, but that won't necessarily do anything. He really can't stop us from doing stupid stuff and blaming it on him. Heck, maybe we should all just blame everything on him, out of spite for all the money he's making. :tongue.gif:
I, for one, take no pleasure in waiting for trees to grow. So I took care of that with a mod. I don't care about the hard work put into harvesting resources, so I use INVedit to take care of all of my needs. I don't happen to like biomes as they are right now, so I use mods and make them a little bigger and change them up a bit. I like to explore my worlds, so I use HoverBoats for that. That's how I make Minecraft fun for me.
Now this isn't meant as a slam against Notch. I love him for making Minecraft, and I think he deserves money for what he did. He struck gold! And I think that's cool. Keep workin' on Minecraft, and feel free to charge me, 'cause I can't and probably won't do anything about it. :biggrin.gif:
Notch can't go and be upset with the makers of these mods. They're adding actual, fun content to the game. Not useless crap no one wants like Useless Books, Useless Paper. Etc etc. Making Minecarts fun? Making a.. Oh, I don't know, Something people have been asking for forever, A BRIDGE? These are things Notch should of considered. How can he say he feels like he'll never make a bridge for the game?
How can Notch, Creator of the game, Go and limit the creativity of the game, which focuses on your creativity and ability to make whatever whimsicals you have? Limiting a building games creativity is like giving a man a fortune and telling him he can't spend any of it.
It's quite easy to say you frown upon them when those mods distribute sections of code from the original game. Now if they were distributed as diffs that we had to edit ourselves, or through a patcher, instead of the usual distribution of the modified file then it'd probably be a different story all together.
Frowning is fine. The whole Cease and Desist orders are ********. The very notion of handing them out for mods is ridiculous. they're editing the game, adding stuff, and offering them as OPTIONAL downloads. Nowhere does Notch lose money. Hell, if the mods are amazing enough, it draws people to the game. I'm not understanding how you can frown on community involvement. What does Notch plan to do with Minecraft, keep it same old same old? The damn game thrives o ncreation, it needs new, innovative features, and the community has provided them. double so if the mods only work in singleplayer.
The first case, I argue, is the most important application of the notion of morality. It is the equivalent of piracy, and there is a moral quandary associated with that type of "modding." I'd go so far as to argue that this kind of modding is, in fact, hacking and Notch should not be expected to tolerate such activity.
The second case, on the other hand, is a matter of personal preference insofar that the modifications you've made are in compliance with applicable copyright statutes (i.e. you haven't stolen the game nor do your hacks allow for such behavior). That you feel morally obligated to adhere to a set of rules that the game designer sets forth, regardless of your ability or willingness to modify them, is your own prerogative. It is neither a legally enforceable nor culturally common.
Survival multiplayer sever mods (e.g. hey0's hmod) are the equivalent of "house rules" in a game of Monopoly among friends. As long as you're within the bounds of the rules established by the house, there are no morally questionable activities that arise from playing in such a way. Parker Brothers (or Hasbro now, if I'm not mistaken) can't disrupt your friendly game with a knock on the door and remind you that they frown upon you changing the game mechanics to allow for that jackpot under the Free Parking space.
I do, however, recognize a gray area, as stated by some other posters. In short, I don't support modifications made to a single player's client that may have adverse affects on others concurrently playing on a multiplayer server. This follows the above example of a new player joining a server and using a "mod" to spawn diamond blocks in another player's house, thus breaking the established rules of the server. Here, I propose we recognize this as a "cheat" despite it being a "mod" or even a "hack." They haven't defrauded the developer, but are instead breaking the rules of a game that have been agreed upon by several who are playing said game.
TL;DR Let's not get all confused about this issue. Stealing code or software is immoral and possibly criminal (hacking). Calling the modification of a game's rule set to suit your preferences "immoral" is laughable (modding). Destroying the experience for others who have not agreed to play by your rules is just plain rude. It's for you to decide if you feel bad about doing it, however (cheating).
It allows us to express and do things we wouldnt normally be able to have or do.
The problem with Minecraft modding, and especially Minecraft modding, is the fact that the game client is written and distributed in Java, which can be decompiled by pretty much anyone with the ability to type a few words into Google.
That being said, there will never be a true "end" to clientside modding, as Java is simply too hard of a language to enforce rules upon. If Notch added some kind of remote verification, to verify that each client had the correct hash, it would still be breakable, as someone could just intercept that packet, drop it, or do something else.
Those who are using this to their advantage are probably the ones Notch is most worried about. Notch already expressed that he wasn't too fond of AO, which is problematic. Why? If Notch starts trying to shut down mods that he dislikes, then you get a double negative. In most cases, the reason why those modders can do what they do is that they know enough about the situation to develop work-arounds, while the rest of us sit around with broken modifications.
tl;dr: If Notch tries to stop clientside modding, those who are using it for cheats will find workarounds, while the rest of us will be either doing the same or nothing - a lose lose situation. As a Valve fan, I can attest to the success of mods - specifically Counter-Strike: Source. CS was a mod for Half Life 1, that was so good, Valve hired the guy who made it. There's a reason why companies like Activision can't keep a game running for 2 years, but Valve has to literally rip people away to get them to stop playing. Notch should be more like Valve, and less like a giant publisher.
Not once has Notch said he was going out of his way to stop any mods from developing. He simply said he frowned upon the act of distributing the client-side mods. Which he has every right to. If he wanted to C&D them that'd be his prerogative as well, especially since they distribute his copyrighted (and possibly patented) source code in the process. But that's not what Notch said at all. He simply said he "frowned" upon client-side mods being distributed. He's said you're free to mod your client all you want, but that it doesn't give you the immediate right to distribute those mods.
Now, if you wanted to make mods that alter the client and that Notch couldn't really find fault with, then mods should be distributed as patch files with no actual code. Come up with an easy what that even a nincompoop could follow so that they patch the files without any of Notch's original work is being distributed with it. Then Notch would have little room to frown.
Granted, a bit of his frowning is beyond this reason and more a concern of support issues but that's a whole different argument.
There was some stuff I found that I had an urge to argue against earlier in your post, but whatever. It'd just be restating what's been said and I managed to pinch a nerve in my neck so yeah.
ANYWAY.
I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum, where I use InvEdit and other similar mods very rarely- however I have nothing against the people who do. As I said before, though, it's when multiplayer is involved is where things get a bit iffy (also of course the stuff like mods possibly containing viruses, and the other technical things like source code release). There should at least be some options in multiplayer to control the use of mods. Not only for RP/more strict servers, but to prevent griefing and other similar actions.
I don't know much about code, especially not Java. If I'm doing anything involving development for games, it's nothing even remotely this intensive. I'm usually a spriter, graphic artist, mapper, or all of the above- so the only real coding I do is oldschool (in notepad) with HTML for layout codes.
I know very little about exploits or anything of the sort, however I DO know Java is still Java- so there's a large amount of limits as far as regulation is concerned.
Notch isn't going around handing out C&D letters, and honestly with his track record that route is unlikely unless you're doing something extremely detrimental to the game... Alas, I am NOT Notch, so I can not speak in his place on the matter.
Regardless as to how this all plays out, though, Minecraft will always have a special place in my [insert cheesy body part metaphor here].
Also, I don't see why he frowns upon modding. You have to own minecraft to make mods for it, and making mods for it will retain more interest in the game then he can personally. Also he doesn't have to do any work to make modding easier; even though every update breaks half the mods out there, people still use them.