Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)M
Posts
14
Comments
821
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • That sounds kinda cool tbh. I'm mostly intrigued about the class system, although I've bever really looked into it.

    It sounds pretty similar to Fellowship (although with an RPG part), though, and I'm loving that game.

  • If I'm getting back to a game with gear treadmill, I can just clean uo my inventory and start the next exoansion with a clean slate.

    I have around 70% of the world cleared, several characters leveled to max, but I got through kike half of HoT and a bit of Path of Fire. I opened my full inventory that had a lot of random crafting stuff, consumables a a gew gear sets and I had no idea what's anything for, or what am I even supposed to do next. Did a few quests then gave up in trying to sort it out, since it was just too overwhelming.

    I'll probably give it a try again, love thw game.

  • I've hear good things about GW1, but never got to play it.

    GW2 is my top favorite MMO, although I haven't really played much recently, because due to the lack of gear treadmill it's soo confusing to pick it up again when you stopped playing for a few expansions.

    Will probably give GWR a try.

  • Ngl I've been enjoying Pokemon TCG: Pocket.

    I don't really play that much, but my partner loves Pokemon and just being able to bond over opening packs each night is a minor fun. Sure, it's just glorified gambling with cute pictures, but that doesn't really matter that much. Setting the focus on collecting instead of playing has been a pretty good decision.

    Plus I really like the simplified ruleset if you do decide to play.

  • Youre not the first comment that mentions this, and technically it's right. But the fundamental problem for me is that the AI had a well defined problem - it had one correct answer. Increase text size. It failed, and chose a solution to a problem that 'people who usualy have it, want this solution".

    It was just mediocre solution, that works for median of people.

    It didn't matter that you specified concrete problem you have - I want larger text. It just averaged it.

    Thats the problem with AI. If you want mediocre solution to a very common problem, it works.

    But thats the only way it works.

  • The article doesn't really mention it and only focuses on it providing an incorrect value (150% when it's already at 150%), but this bit that's added as a reader context to the Tweet is even bigger blunder:

    The user asked how to increase text size, but Copilot incorrectly advised changing the "Scale" option in Settings > System > Display. This enlarges text, but also resizes UI, apps, and other elements

    To change only text size, go to Settings > Accessibility > Text size.

  • The article does not mention this, but it's also not a correct solution at all for increasing text size (which was what the guy was asking it how to do). From the reader context of the tweet:

    The user asked how to increase text size, but Copilot incorrectly advised changing the "Scale" option in Settings > System > Display. This enlarges text, but also resizes UI, apps, and other elements

    To change only text size, go to Settings > Accessibility > Text size.

  • one that would be poorly maintained by both us and EAC due to the low user base.

    I'm sure I've been playing a lot of games with EAC, because it's actually one of the few ones that support Linux.

    If I'm not mistaken (judging entirely by the RAC popup/loading), from the games I'm playing, Hell Let Loose, Fellowship, Helldivers 2, I think even The Finals used it.

    Hell Let Loose wasn't working at first, because you have to check a checkbox and enable Linux support when building, which did take them a while.

    So, unless I'm misremembering/confusing it with another anticheat, this is bullshit.

    Also "unless you have an in-house anti-cheat team"

    You made millions out of your player base. You can afford it. You're just lazy.

  • Oh, cool, so if I understand it right, you have a hardware that directly reads the physical memory, so you can access it unrestricted and undetectable from another PC, where the cheat runs, and then you use a HDMI fuser to merge the output of the game and the cheat that runs on the second PC on a single monitor.

    That's actually really clever, I love solutions like this. Not that I approve of cheating, I have 0 respect for people who (unconsesualy, as in all involved parties agree to it being allowed) cheat. But from the hardware/security point of view, it's amazing.

  • Hmm, I guess this makes sense. I wonder if some kind of crawler with higher legs could work, so you keep the advantage of crawly legs and stability, while also keeping the proportions.

  • Oh, cool. Tbh I haven't really looked into cheats much, but I did briefly work in cybersecurity where I was doing malware development, where AV avoidance is basically the same problem as game cheats are dealing with, so I just extrapolated what I assumed works the same.

    This is a cool piece of tech, I'll look into it more. I like seeing new exploits, thanks!

  • It's just a skill issue on the part of the developers.

    Making anti-cheat properly is hard. Writing a spyware that watches everything that happens on your PC and blocks any attempts of touching the game is way easier, but bypassing that is easy with solutions that have higher privledges, thus being invisible even for the anti-cheat. You can just fake calls or hide memory from the anti-cheat, or just edit the anti-cheat in itself.

    The solution for that is to run anti-cheat in the highest possible permission - the kernel.

    Now, you could just make another kernel-level program that would have the same permissions to defeat that, or just edit your OS (i.e Linux, or a VM) where your cheat lives outside and has even higher privileges than the anti-cheat.

    This is where Windows comes in - the only way to run kernel code is to have it signed by Microsoft, and that certification process is extremely difficult and annoying, which puts a pretty big hurdle in front of cheat developers. It's the easy way out.

    You could also somehow reverse-engineer Windows and run a custom version to bypass this. And that's where TPM comes in, which (if I understood it right) validates that your Windows is the official signed one, and thus the kernel anti-cheat is safe. You can't have this kind of affirmation on Linux, and the lazy developers who don't want to invest into actual moderation and proper anti-cheat solutions just resort to kernel anti-cheat rootkit and require TPM to be enabled.

    There's not much Steam can do about this, aside from locking up their OS with signign keys and certification for priviliged software, along with setting up the whole TPM so you can't run modified versions, which isn't really possible since they are based on Linux.

  • I don't get why they have to be humanoid. Like, don't we have a lot better (and more stable) ways how to make a robot that can easily move around?

  • If I had a project as succesfull as this, I'd definitely try to sneak in minor inconveniences like renaming parameters just to screw with them.

  • What the fuck.

  • It may seem like a good idea, but it's still wrong if you really think about it. Just take a look at how this sounds:

    It would not be discrimination if they just allowed all drivers and riders to choose the specific race designation they want to work with. I.e. allow whatever race riders to choose whatever race drivers they accept and vice versa. Most won’t use it and those that do will have a reason to do so. Maybe black drivers don’t want white riders to avoid even the possibility of accusations, [and some white riders won't feel safe with a black driver]?

    Would that be OK?

  • Aren't neural networks AI by definition, if we take the academic definition into account?

    I know that thermostat is an AI, because it reacts to a stimuli (current temperature) and makes an action (starts heating) basted on it's state. Which is the formal AI definition.

    Wait. That actually means transformers are not AI by definition. Hmm, I need to look into it some more.

    EDIT: I was confusing things, that's the definition of AI Agent. I'll go research the AI definition some more :D

  • You're right, I used a wrong word there. It wasn't science, more like public perception maybe? I'd consider lack of research as a part of science, though.

    I'm not sure what better word would fit there instead. I wouldn't say it's the fault of marketing, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they thought it's actually healthier to use this kind of filter.

    The comparison that sparks to my mind are vapes. There's AFAIK lack of research that can tell us anything about long term issues, but a lot of people consider it as healthier. But in this case, common sense is also not correct - because it kind of makes sense that it probably isn't, and it's just marketing.

    But in the case of an asbestos filter, I can see why people (and common sense at the time) would asume that it helps.

    So, I guess common sense is the word that I should've used, because that's what was wrong at the time.