And I answered it? There are multiple wealthy people involved. Do you expect the full name, address, and social security number of every individual? I don’t care to do all that research for you. My point still stands, Bluesky’s devs are in debt (via investments) to wealthy people who will want to extract value (money) from it. Enshittification is inevitable.

https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/24/bluesky-raises-15m-series-a-plans-to-launch-subscriptions

They’ve invested millions and they wouldn’t unless they expected a significant return. The only way to get a return on a social media investment is either ads or subscriptions via enshittifying it just enough to get people to pay. bluesky is destined to be trash.

OP has posted (and re-posted) about Bluesky about 40 times in the last 48 hours. I’m down voting every single one. Quit shilling for billionaires.

OP has posted (and re-posted) about Bluesky about 40 times in the last 48 hours. I’m down voting every single one. Quit shilling for billionaires.

yes, lets further divide what’s left of the US. /s

You don’t have to make an informed decision.

Correct, but you are still presented with a decision that adds friction to the onboarding experience. I was aware of how Mastodon works and that I could migrate and it took me a while to create an account because I didn’t want to “waste my time”. I can’t imagine a regular user being prompted to “select an instance”, decide to go with the first one they see, and registration is either closed or invite only. That’s a huge barrier to entry compared to being forced into a single login that is always open.

Meanwhile, if you’re worried about something you don’t align with, then you don’t even get that choice with a centralized platform like Bluesky. For example, I don’t align with any of this shit https://toad.social/@davetroy/113476788536250587

100000% agree with you. I would never create a bluesky account because of that. Unfortunately people aren’t as informed and most really just don’t care.

Having to make an informed decision is a barrier to entry. it took me a while because I wanted to make sure I didn’t join (and waste time/effort) something I didn’t align with.

check out Give up Baby Go by Peach Pit - if you like it you’ll probably like their discography.

Thoroughly dismantling America. Sad day for Americans, exactly what Putin ordered.

wouldn’t implementing ranked choice voting in blue states just further fracture them and weaken them against red states? I would think it would make sense to initiate ranked choice in red states first.

Its in a very alpha state, but check out Zen browser. Based on Firefox, incredibly fast and customizable. Their github page: https://github.com/zen-browser/desktop

“if you don’t wanna do forced labor, just don’t commit crime”.

a poor education and ignorance (willful or other) are a key factor to why they have that sentiment.

an educated and informed person would realize that “punishment” does not benefit society. they would see how other countries approach the topic and realize that treatment and support are what criminals need ( not all of them obviously ). an informed populace would also look internally and realize prison-enforced slavery incentivizes increased incarceration of petty crimes, which only pushes people into more crime, not to mention private prisons and the 13th amendment make for an evil combination.

to quote SOAD:

All research and successful drug policy show that treatment should be increased

And law enforcement decreased while abolishing mandatory minimum sentences

First I’ve heard of browseraudit, thanks for sharing!

EDIT: For comparison I got the same scores on Firefox (duh) and the following on Edge.

Score :

• Passed : 392
• Warning : 39
• Critical : 0
• Skipped : 0

Bonus! Browserbench.org speedometer 3.0 scores:

• Firefox; version 132.0.1 (64-bit)): 13.9
• Firefox nightly; version 134.0a1): 18.6
• Zen; version 1.0.1-a.17 (Firefox 132.0)): 17.6
• Edge; version 130.0.2849.68 (Official build) (64-bit): 19.8

if it was pure theater my friends and family who pay for all their streaming services would be able to share the content without permission from Netflix, Hulu, etc. That this is not the case disproves your claim that it’s pure theater. It does exactly what it aims to do and that’s raising the barrier to entry for piracy.

It doesn’t meaningfully impact the rate of cheating at all

So EA and every other anti-cheat software is paying developers to make software that does nothing? I don’t follow.

No, it doesn’t. Cheating is still incredibly common on games that install malware

I never claimed it’s flawless or that it works in all cases. Think of it like antivirus software. Does it catch every and any malware that has and will ever exist? No. Does it still work to minimize all kinds of “bad shit” for normal end users? Yes.

If people care enough to cheat, they will cheat whether you have kernel access or not.

Lets rephrase that: If people care enough to commit crimes, they will commit crimes whether you have cops in your city or not - Your statements logical conclusion would be to get rid of police and crime investigators. Does that sound reasonable? It shouldn’t, and it doesn’t make sense against anti-cheat software for the exact same reason.

They use it for the exact same reason they use DRM. Because they can.

They use it because it solves a real-world problem that’s unsolvable by other means. There’s no real alternative because you have to trust the end-user, who, although may not be very likely to cheat, makes it extremely easy for a bad person to spoil the fun for everyone else.

I would love to live in a fantasy world where we don’t need cops, a government, rules, regulations, and anti-cheat software, but there are bad apples that will spoil the fun for everyone.

It also can’t possibly theoretically “reduce harm” when every single installation on every individual computer is many orders of magnitude more harm than all cheating in every game ever made.

I mean “reduce harm” in the strict sense of spoiling the fun in gaming. vulnerabilities happen with all software, this isn’t unique to anti-cheat.

Client side validation cannot possibly provide any actual security

Except it already does.

but even if that wasn’t the case and it was actually flawless

Nobody is claiming its flawless. This is the same anti-seat belt, anti-air bag, anti-mask, anti-vax argument. It “DoEsn’T WoRk iN eVeRy CaSe!” - that was never the intent. It’s about harm reduction.

it would still be unconditionally unacceptable for a game to ever have kernel level access.

Anyone with a technical background would agree with you, as do I, but the reality is anti-cheat software with kernel level access already exists and it works specifically because it has kernel level access.

Right, but the server is still receiving data from the client. If the client sends a plausible head shot, even though it was actually a miss, how would the server know? You still need client-side “police”, AKA anti-cheat software to mitigate a significant type of software-based hacks.

Now that I’ve typed it out, cops are actually a great analogy to anti-cheat software. Cops play the exact same role. Nobody wants them around until a crime has been committed. Cops/anti-cheat software don’t catch everyone, but the threat of being caught mitigates some crime/hacks, and for the cases where criminals/hackers are caught, society/gamers are better off for it.

In closing ACAB - I completely understand why we don’t want anti-cheat software on our computers, but there really is no better way; or if there is, I still haven’t heard it.

And when one client sends actuons that are weird and doesn’t line up with it’s internal game state

What if my hacked client sends actions that are not weird, completely plausible, but didn’t happen and instead were faked? E.g. I take a headshot and would have missed, but my client sends data that I actually shot them dead center, because I wasn’t completely off? How would the server know it wasn’t me?

Genuinely curious, because this isn’t my area of expertise, but how do you design a server to be “better” if it has to trust data from a remote client?

Example, if the client is compromised - because as they’ve said, they have no way to “attest” that the kernel is not compromised - how would the server know any better?

If my Apex client tells the server I got a perfect headshot, how would the server know I didn’t fake the data? Is there a real answer to this problem or are we just wishing they come up with an impossible solution?

My general understanding is that EA is 100% correct. Now, on the other hand, maybe the should just limit plays between Linux <-> Linux so people can at least still enjoy the game (I’m moving to Linux soon so I’ll basically no longer be able to play the game, which is, as my primary gaming addiction, a huge loss I’m willing to take).

There’s compromises EA could take, but I think the Linux market share is just too small for them to care to spend any resources - even though they’re raking in billions (~$3.4 Billion) and could spare a few resources to find a good middle ground. Capitalism at it’s finest.