Vanguard hits new 'Bans-Per-Second' record

Re:Vanguard hits new 'Bans-Per-Second' record by kg on Sunday August 24, 2025 @09:03PM (#45009243)

Part of the problem is that "who's making the internet unpleasant" has a different answer depending on who you ask, and having a list of real identities and thus addresses to associate with your pet out-group is really appealing if the in-group has access to levers of power (or just firearms)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Vanguard hits new 'Bans-Per-Second' record by Dylan16807 on Sunday August 24, 2025 @09:14PM (#45009309)

It wouldn't take a very complicated system to have a unique ID token per app that can't be traced to you but you only get one. Which OP addressed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Vanguard hits new 'Bans-Per-Second' record by aidenn0 on Monday August 25, 2025 @12:57PM (#45015968)

Which means if a ban test is insufficiently specific, you're toast just because you're unlucky.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Vanguard hits new 'Bans-Per-Second' record by ordinaryradical on Sunday August 24, 2025 @09:10PM (#45009275)

I think that’s overanalyzing where this comment is coming from.

At the level of something like spam or cheating, it’s not really a matter of opinion whether or not someone is participating in good faith. Someone who’s only ever one email address away from exploiting your platform that way really needs to be boxed out in a more permanent way.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Vanguard hits new 'Bans-Per-Second' record by AaronFriel on Sunday August 24, 2025 @10:08PM (#45009554)

I don't think those real identities should be public or deanonymizable from outside a given platform.

[ Parent | on HN ]