Linux is a secure operating system, windows is not. Making kernel level anti-cheat for Linux is difficult, and should be functionally impossible; as kernel level anticheat is absolutely no different than malware in its attack vector on the kernel. This means, for lazy dev teams, they can’t implement the laziest possible method of anticheat, which they get upset about since they have lost all ability to actually have anti-cheat teams.
Pretending that any software is 100% accurate in a capitalist setting is a ridiculous thing to do; and every television and car since the 1970s has some software involved.
With cars it generally works well enough long enough in enough cases that that direct ECU or other computer patching isn’t needed, because who cares if you have a misfire in every 100,000 cycles as long as the car still runs.
I was originally referring to the same thing in ICE cars that are in EVs, i.e. the infotainment and gauge display systems which are the majority of software updates in either case study, but let’s not pretend this is the 1950s for ICE cars; yes your ECU on your shitbox probably does legitimately have a software update that has better tuning, especially if the same engine was used in two separate production years. Guess what they updated to get more performance despite it having the same engine in order to justify the next year release? The fucking software. Also many recalls are software based these days for all the things that aren’t directly mechanical, like airbag, or lane assist, or backup cameras, or fuel systems, or the ABS controller. All of those things will inevitably have a software flaw. All of those things can be updated, and are updated at least once during the production cycle if only to add additional hardware support when new hardware is swapped into the same model.
EVs, because they are so much more simple than ICE cars in every single possible way, lean harder on software since that’s the only thing that can really be effectively separated into distinct packages and models until solid state batteries come about.
Given they stopped making them before smart phones were a thing I imagine not, but that’s also why your SiriusXM no longer works if you’re not a brokie and got a level 3 trim.
There’s a reason I said ‘current industry standard,’ things from almost the last century barely qualify as vehicles by modern standards, and your car couldn’t pass a safety inspect for sale in almost any country today.
That’s better than ICE cars having to go to the dealer to update their software, which is the current industry standard.
Associating the soviet union, which before china was the fastest country to ever industrialize, modernize, and innovate past its competition, with stagnation is kinda wild.
They won the space race with 1/10th the budget and more efficient rocket motors. If they saw computers for what the actual potential was like Chile did with project cybersyn, the wall wouldn’t have fallen and a lot of countries would be speaking Russian right now.
There were several wom*n on board (sorry to use a slur.)
Chud Etymology, excerpt from lesson six, Women, or How They Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love Self-Indulgent Misery
Foid <- Femoid <- Root 1: Fem android, implying women have no agency and are simply following society`s programming
<- Root 2: From Mongoloid, implying women are genetically inferior
<- Root 3: -oid (derogatory), used in english as a suffix to usually mean "having the likeness of or related to," meant to separate "Women (read: conservative trad-wife type idealized fantasy women)" and the rest of women.
deleted by creator
I’m not sure Ukrainian authorities know what money laundering is if they think a commodity business could be doing money laundering.
This would lower tax revenue as an average, as demand would be lowered massively for the product (why risk being in a raid even in a ‘legit’ shop you can’t know is actually legit; also price naturally increases with both taxes and the seizure of product reducing supply) and the resources spent investigating pointless things like this are resources that can’t be spent on, you know, murder and looting which is common in war-torn countries. Even white ones.
Given both operational losses and total cost, one would think they would spend their extremely limited resources enforcing things other than minor laws that are effectively victimless.
I’m not saying the entire country should have a war time economy and focus on winning their dispute, but I am saying their opponent is doing that and I’d rather not suffer the effects of Russia winning because Ukraine is spending what would be massive resources investigating and enforcing victimless crimes across most regions in the country.
One would think this is the absolute lowest possible priority.
To specifically spur ground-up pressure on the US government to try to allow BYD and other manufacturers direct access to the US market, since there are effectively no EV manufacturers in the US except Tesla.
deleted by creator
World of Warcraft (yes it still has a bot problem, turns out it’s even more complicated of an analysis with hundreds of thousands of people playing the game wrong) unironically is the biggest game to do this and report on it. They track player movement, skill usage, cursor position on screen and likely a thousand more data points to determine if a real player could possibly do the things being done and auto flag and auto ban based on that.
I believe VAC also has heuristic capability for FPSs if you enable it as a developer, as CS2 (at least, I think CS Source had a similar system) can detect unrealistic movements, perfectly timed clicks and all manner of movement scripts based solely on timing and not memory editing or other executable interference.
But yes most games really don’t want to have an active cybersecurity team dedicated solely to studying game mechanics and deciding what is or isn’t realistic, and while heuristic analysis of memory (i.e. catching injected cheats) is also a thing, that also requires a security team capable of that; and as someone who once tried to get into the cybersecurity field all of that is expensive. You’re not getting a single person, much less a team, for less than 6 figures a year, and the amount of work generated that cannot be automated necessitates a fairly large team. CS2 gets around this a bit by having trusted players review iffy VAC detections which then feed into VACnet (which was released fairly recently) to have AI auto-review the heuristic detections based on known good reviews; but still the sheer volume of detections in a heuristic system (even well tuned ones) requires constant moderation.
No, Heuristic Analysis is deciding what data is likely, what data is unlikely, and what data is impossible, and then deciding, on that scale, the where the data the player is generating resides.
In short: Humans have natural variations in everything they do, even the top 0.0001% of players. So let’s say you want to tackle aimbots in an FPS.
The first thought would be track the number of headshots, and then if a player gets 100% headshots they’re labeled a cheater – but that isn’t accurate because of players like the streamer Shroud. So let’s be smarter. Let’s analyze the median player based on data from every player – not their headshots, not where they shoot, but how they move the cursor to the opponent to shoot.
An aimbot will do a simple mathematical formula to decide how to aim at the target; i.e. if we imagine a 2d grid (centered at 0,0; squared limits of 100) on the screen and the player’s crosshair is at 0,0 and there’s an enemy at 50,50; then a bot would do something like (complete pseudocode:)
While CrosshairPosition(y) does not equal EnemyPosition(y):
Move mouse up (i.e. +y) by 1
While CrosshairPosition(x) does not equal EnemyPosition(x):
Move mouse right (i.e. +x) by 1
Fire()
This results in a predictable and perfectly diagonal move towards the enemy. Now actual humans cannot do this. It doesn’t matter how fine of motor skills they have, period. It is impossible for a human to even accidentally move like this. So we place this in the ‘impossible’ end of the spectrum.
If a player does too many unlikely or impossible actions, flag them for review, and ban them that way. Or, just ban the ones doing objectively mathematically impossible things.
Heuristic Data Analysis requires actual humans actually thinking about what is and isn’t possible in a game, understanding how cheats AND the game actually work, and then defining the spectrum, and then implementing and constantly tweaking it to minimize false positives while maximizing those that tweak their bots to get around the analysis.
Because of this it’s expensive, relatively speaking, than paying a (statistically Israeli) anti cheat company to install spyware on their behalf.
Imagine complaining about an objective upgrade in fish quality.
The UK, where you can rape children to your heart’s content but if you use the wrong bathroom you’ll be hanged.