justJanne

The affordable Sony Xperia 10 series is really good. My new Xperia runs circles around my OG Pixel, costs basically nothing, is waterproof, has upgradable storage and a headphone jack, and besides Apple, Google and Intel, Sony is the only manufacturer that actually has working bluetooth.

Note what other people in this thread are saying.

Sorry, but being a developer I can tell when players are just repeating half-truths they read online.

There's no reason why strategies that work in any other kind of computer science shouldn't work in gaming.

In fact, it sounds like you think a 'ban' is something bad to these players or will stop them. If it did, I'd probably be enjoying Rust still.

The difference between an attack costing $0.00 and $$0.01 is enough to reduce attack volume by orders of magnitude.

Even just costing the attacker 30 seconds is enough to have a massive effect, which is why captchas exist.

Game keys tend to be in the $1 - $5 range, which makes bans an extremely useful tool.

This is also the same for radar hacks. Or if you play a MoBa, screen alert hacks. All they do is boost player performance without being detectable. Most server side anti-cheat can only pick up on certain things, I don’t know Minecraft’s solution but I doubt it catches disguised cheating via code injection.

The real question is: why does the client even know about players who aren't visible to them?

The solution with Minecraft PvP is simple: if you can't see a player, the server won't even tell you the player exists.

If you use a wallhack you can see players walk behind a wall and then just disappear as if they had logged out, and suddenly reappear from behind the wall on the other side as if they had logged in.

What Minecraft anticheat systems do is relatively simple:

1. They only send information to clients if the players should have that information as well
2. after every movement, action, etc they calculate whether the movement you did would have been possible by a real human given the information you should have had at that point, and if not, you're banned
3. all actions and movements are compared over minutes of gameplay and, if your actions are too different from all other players, sent to review by a human (and potentially banned)

You don't need to install anticheat on the player's computers. The players can run all the mods and cheats they want, but cheaters can only see the same information as all other players, can only move the same way as all other players, and can't shoot faster or more precise than any other player.

So while some people may still be cheating, at that point you can't tell the difference anymore.

For comparison, this is btw how all other software outside of gaming is written. In all other parts of computer science you'd get fired if you did what game developers do.

Imagine if reddit would send all DMs to all users and only make the DMs invisible on the client. That'd be an immediate lawsuit. Instead, the server validates who should be able to see what and only sends that information.

Or imagine if banks allowed anyone to make any transaction they wanted, only the banking app verifying that you've actually got that much money. Utterly ridiculous. Of course the servers validate whether you should actually be allowed to do that.

As result, writing third party apps for most websites is allowed, the EU even requires banks to support third party apps, but modded clients for videogames are considered a security risk. What the fuck.

Of course we can restrain them into playing like humans. That's the entire point.

But doing that costs a few cents more for the server operators, which is why most PvP games aren't doing that.

Minecraft PvP servers are running entirely server side anticheat, and there's still a competitive PvP community in that game.

Now if we could restrain them to playing like normal people, I’d still hate them because I don’t play PvP to play against bots.

Again, if you can't tell the difference, why does it matter if it's a bot or a person?

If you're always reacting perfectly, that too can be discovered and used to ban people.

Also, regarding cheap game keys, those would be useful for one or two matches before they'd be banned.

For reference, all Minecraft PvP anticheat is 100% serverside, and yet a competitive PvP community exists.

That's still not gonna help at all. There are already hardware cheats using an nvidia jetson nuc, an hdmi splitter, and a usb interceptor plugged between mouse, keyboard and computer.

Using just image recognition and slight adjustments to your mouse movement you can already get an impossible to detect aimbot.

Now the real question is: why are cheats bad? If a cheater is flying in godmode, sure, that ruins the game. But if the game forces cheaters to play the same way top human players are playing... If you can't tell the difference, does it matter?

By just running all simulation server side and banning superhuman reactions you can easily ban all superhuman cheats. Matchmaking will just sort players by skill and you'll have a peaceful game again.

If you're playing chess, you don't know if your opponent uses a chess computer or not. And it doesn't matter. The game is still fun.

Honestly, supporting linux makes absolutely no sense for vanguard.

If you use vanguard, it's because you're fine with a company taking full control of your system, installing a rootkit tracking your every move.

If you use Linux, at least part of the reason is because you want to take control over your computer back.

To support vanguard on linux, you'd have had to run vanguard as hypervisor with linux running in a para-VM, or you'd have had to modify most of the linux kernel to add tracking and control capabilities that'd never get merged upstream and would break with every update.

The resulting system would be closer to android or a playstation than to actual linux distros.

That's definitely wrong. You should follow danielle's mastodon, she's working on elementary all the time.

It's not just office, SH and many other parts of the German government have been slowly replacing the entire O365 suite with OpenDesk, which is an open source product based on Matrix, Jitsi, LibreOffice, and a few other tools.

The goal is to have a fully integrated solution for calender, chat, calls, documents, cloud storage, etc.

My employer is developing parts of that solution and we recently switched our internal communication over to it, and tbh, it's working really well.

Now is the perfect point in time to do it, with the GDPR ruling regarding O365 and Microsoft fumbling the migration between old teams and new teams.

Fdroid only gained the ability to auto update apps a while ago, so that's why you got that prompt.

Also, if the permissions an app requests change, fdroid can't always auto-update it.

You need to be able to have multiple nodes in one LAN access ports on each others' containers without exposing those to the world and without using additional firewalls in front of the nodes.

That's why kubernetes ended up removing docker support and instead recommends podman or using containerd natively.

There's no alternative for 0.0.0.0 and a firewall if you're e.g. using kubernetes.