raptorfactor

If your friend thinks it's okay to threaten to assault a driver, especially for an issue that wasn't the driver's fault, then it sounds like "da hood" is where he belongs...

This is cursed:

https://github.com/es3n1n/defendnot/blob/master/defendnot-lo...

If you're curious what's actually going on there:

https://github.com/es3n1n/defendnot/blob/master/cxx-shared/s...

Then why not just explain it? It would be far more persuasive than acting rabid.

Please keep the Rust community away from Zig. (I joke. Mostly...)

> They might sell their software or distribute it to people that do play to cheat, but the cheat designers are rarely motivated by a desire to be at the top of a leaderboard that will boot them off for obvious manipulation. So the entire concept of blaming the players for wanting to win so bad is really just an emotional "we're the poor developers" deflection.

Are you sure you're not deflecting the issue onto a group of people that doesn't really exist either? I.e. The group of people who are just "hacking to hack" - these people do exist but they are exceptionally rare (w.r.t the likelihood of running into a player using that persons cheat) compared to the ones who are in it for some personal gain, financial or otherwise. Also this group is typically not the one having an oversized negative impact on the game (as always there are exceptional cases - but it's not the norm).

The cheat designers are motivated by money, and their customers are motivated by a desire to be at the top of a leader-board (or to grief, or because they feel "everyone else is doing it so I have to", etc). I'm not sure it makes sense to throw out the entire argument just because a level of indirection is there. If the customers stopped caring about winning at any cost, it follows that most of the cheat developers would have no more motivation to maintain the cheats (at least as publicly available to the masses), because the money would dry up and the work would not be worth it anymore.

RMT is also huge in certain games. For example Escape from Tarkov is infested with cheaters not because they want to get on the leaderboards, but because they want to sell items/services to other players for real money (cheating by proxy basically), and again those players spending real money are doing it to gain an advantage in-game.

It's also important to note that that maintaining a public cheat is _very_ different to maintaining a private one. Basically nobody who is just 'hacking to hack' is going to be publicly maintaining a cheat for a major competitive online game just for the heck of it. Privately for sure, that happens all the time where things are traded/sold between just a handful of people. But nobody is out there maintaining free public cheats for Valorant, Apex, Siege, etc. (or at least not one that puts a meaningful effort into evading anti-cheat, which is sort of the point).

Sometimes the two groups overlap (i.e. an individual might "hack to hack" in their spare time, whilst also contracting for a commercial cheat developer), but if the commercial incentive disappears, so does the most of the negative impact on the game even if that individual continues to cheat personally (because 1 is less than tens of thousands - and the people who were previously buying cheats don't have the skills to replicate it themselves).

This surprised me too, so I checked: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/vec/struct.Vec.html#capacity-a...

"Vec does not guarantee any particular growth strategy when reallocating when full, nor when reserve is called. The current strategy is basic and it may prove desirable to use a non-constant growth factor. Whatever strategy is used will of course guarantee O(1) amortized push."

Seems it should be amortized just like in C++?

Yeah, if you're not an experienced developer with the necessary skills and free time to fix an issue then you shouldn't be allowed to say anything even remotely negative about it. Everyone who uses Linux should learn C (and every other language used to write common software), become experienced with Linux development (at every level of the stack - got a kernel bug? better learn kernel dev too), and then fix every bug they run into across the myriad of software they use - otherwise they should shut up. /s

That idiocy aside, there are legitimate reasons why someone may be unable to contribute to particular projects (especially ones like Wine) even if they possess the required technical ability. For example I am disqualified from contributing to Wine for legal reasons.[1]

[1] https://wiki.winehq.org/Developer_FAQ#Who_can.27t_contribute...

Imo it's the opposite. Learning to use FFMPEG feels like overkill when OBS makes simple tasks simple.

Having never used such a language, I'm curious, what's the debugging experience like? Can I source level step the application in the original language or do I have to debug the generated C?

Uhh, how about youtube-dl?

LXSS is actually the name used in one of the kernel drivers and various other components. WSL is just the user-facing name.

Counter anecdata. I monitor my heartrate (along with other relevant statistics like speed, distance, elevation, and barometric pressure) while engaged in activities like mountaineering. Even when I'm not physically straining myself but just carefully traversing an exposed face, I don't consider a raised heartrate there 'less healthy' in and of itself because it's a side-effect of the excitement I'm feeling, and that feeling (sometimes not necessarily in the moment, but always afterwards) gives me an overall sense of improved wellbeing. Do I get stressed out sometimes? Sure, it's a dangerous activity. But overcoming that and accomplishing my goal rewards my mental health in a different way. Only half tongue-in-cheek: Maybe the faster driver was simply having more fun?

In this case you're probably right that the faster driver was just more stressed for no real benefit, but an EEG is not always a good proxy for how "healthy" something is (even ignoring obvious cases like physical exertion).

If you have a link to the study I'd love to read more.

EDIT:

One other thing I missed on the first read of your comment was the fact that the driver was instructed to "drive as fast as possible" and then given access to roads with no speed limits. I feel like that would have the potential to exacerbate the 'negative' side of things and that a more reasonable middle-ground could be found both in terms of driver stress and also fuel economy.

Isn't there some confirmation bias (not sure if that's necessarily the correct term here, but you'll get the gist regardless) here in that you're more likely to remember the situations in which you catch up with the person who passed you (i.e. "look at this idiot getting nowhere"), and less likely to remember the situations in which that person makes a light that you don't and you never see them again? Massively depends on the specifics of the roads you're on too of course (and also how the lights are timed).

So they need to take a huge cut to provide awful service regardless? Huh?

Steam's DRM is nothing like the DRM which is causing constant issues on AAA titles. Of course you can apply Denuvo over top of Steam's DRM, but the 'normal' Steam DRM is very easy to remove or emulate (if you're learning to reverse-engineer it's actually a pretty good commercial target to learn on) and doesn't contain a bunch of dumb triggers executing huge chunks of virtualized code constantly during gameplay.

Sure, but that's not what was up for debate in the comment chain you were responding to. That was specifically about how well it handles "recent" games. Not how well it handles old but still popular games. WoW also runs great under Wine for example afaik.

I'm not diminishing the value of games like that running well under Wine, I think it's great. But it's not the same as "recent" games running well.

As one of the GPs points out anti-cheat is unfortunately another big hurdle. CS:GO works great because VAC runs in user-mode and Valve go out of their way to specifically detect Wine and adjust behavior as appropriate (I reverse engineered it extensively some years ago). I think EAC has a native Linux client, but many of the big names are still unplayable.

If you try to play Valorant, Apex, Siege, Warzone, PUBG, etc. my understanding is they'll barely even launch, let alone allow you to join a multiplayer match.

CS:GO is far from a "recent" game. It still gets regularly updates sure, but it's nearly a decade old and the engine hasn't evolved in that time in a way that would make it comparable to a current-gen game.

Because if I can just load my own driver before you load your anti-cheat driver it significantly lowers the difficulty of defeating the anti-cheat. Whoever gets into ring0 (or below) first usually 'wins'.

So for example Valorant's anti-cheat leverages a hypervisor which is always-on, and then an additional client which runs when you launch the game.

The situation is similar with the ESEA counter-strike client.

I just refuse to play games with measures like that. Especially given the fact ESEA got caught deploying a bitcoin miner with their client.

These games always have cheaters anyway, so what am I giving up all that privacy and security for?

Is there something about HIBP that makes them more authoritative than anybody else other than having 'pwned' in the name? Genuine question, not being facetious. All I can find is conflicting reports all over the place so I'm trying to understand why, if this is the "true" etymology, this isn't the explanation given in Wikipedia for example? I guess I just don't understand who I should trust, or more importantly, why.

I'm not backing any particular account (in fact the two links I provided disagree with each other), my point was just that it seems silly to be so overly confident on ANY account. Unless, again, there's something special about HIBP in this regard? I'm definitely no internet historian so you'll have to fill me in a little further. :)

I'm not the person you're arguing with originally, but you may want to do some research before being quite so pompous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet#Owned_and_pwned

>The term was created accidentally by the misspelling of "own" in video game design due to the keyboard proximity of the "O" and "P" keys. It implies domination or humiliation of a rival,[21]

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/buzzword/entries/pwne...').

>There are various theories about the etymology of pwned. >One of the more popular accounts is that it originated in the online computer game World of Warcraft, where a map designer misspelt owned (where own was intended to be used in the sense of 'conquer' or 'dominate').

What was that about being "confidently incorrect" again?

> Does HN not understand this?

I don't WANT this. That doesn't mean I don't understand it.

This is not true. Here, I took these screenshots for you where I copied an unsigned binary to a random location and forced a UAC prompt:

https://i.imgur.com/BSJlSAf.png

https://i.imgur.com/4ZVNsPN.png

I also did the same with a signed binary:

https://i.imgur.com/xpSiMMY.png

https://i.imgur.com/ACLydv0.png

Interesting. What OS and Firefox build are you on? Firefox always copies the full URI for me. (Windows, Firefox 69 - and I'm pretty sure I get the same behavior on my Linux machine at home, but I'm at work right now so can't confirm.)

If I had a PM come by my office twice a day to "check-in" I think I'd quit.

The same functionality is available: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/preprocessor/warning?vi...

EasyAntiCheat and BattlEye rely on kernel drivers, which WINE has no support for.

Do you have examples which aren't Google sites?

Do you have an example of which "parts of Windows work incorrectly"? Windows runs just fine without a pagefile. Of course if you have a piece of software which then tries to use more memory than is physically available those allocations will fail, which in 99.99% of software results in termination or a crash, but the OS itself works just fine (as does all the software as long as you're not hitting your physical memory limits).

I was responding directly to: "You could've gone to the best university in your country, but if it's not a top institution in the US or a handful of others [...] I feel like most big names in tech won't even look at your resume."

Definitely agree that it's very circumstantial.

Actually my work experience had almost nothing to do with it, as pretty much all of it was done under NDA. What really helped me was having a set of public personal projects which demonstrated competency in relevant areas (I know because I had a discussion about it with my hiring manager after I'd been working there for a couple of months - I was curious about how much the lack of a degree mattered when they were filtering candidates).