Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

S&box is now an open source game engine

sbox.game

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–157 of 157 posts

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#151

Post by Rohansi »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #149
Rohansi wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they try to usurp control of your computer, stop them from doing so. But anti-cheat software is not doing this? You are free to do whatever you want on your computer as long as it doesn't interfere with the game process. Most, if not all, anti-cheats will also not do anything when the game isn't open. Some games (including Rust) give you the choice to play with no anti-cheat, too. You'll only be able to play on…

> You are free to do whatever you want on your computer as long as You are not free. "Your" computer is not actually yours. It doesn't do what you want. > Most, if not all, anti-cheats will also not do anything when the game isn't open. Stop believing this. For god's sake I just posted an example of a corporation that thought it was perfectly justified in hacking their customers and stealing their browser passwords .…

> They could be doing literally anything and you know it. There's no way for you to know unless you reverse engineer the software

Literally anything you run on your computer (running Windows) can take screenshots of your desktop, pull passwords saved in your browser, etc. without running in kernel mode. Even applications that aren't running as Administrator.

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#152

Post by matheusmoreira »

Rohansi wrote: post #151
matheusmoreira wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are free to do whatever you want on your computer as long as You are not free. "Your" computer is not actually yours. It doesn't do what you want. > Most, if not all, anti-cheats will also not do anything when the game isn't open. Stop believing this. For god's sake I just posted an example of a corporation that thought it was perfectly justified in hacking their customers and stealing their browser passwords .…

> They could be doing literally anything and you know it. There's no way for you to know unless you reverse engineer the software Literally anything you run on your computer (running Windows) can take screenshots of your desktop, pull passwords saved in your browser, etc. without running in kernel mode. Even applications that aren't running as Administrator.

That was never in dispute. The point is they cannot be trusted. Not even the "but they wouldn't do that" argument is valid: they would and they have.

Knowing and accepting these risks is a big reason why we run Linux with free and open source software sourced from trusted software repositories.

We put effort into this because we want to control everything that happens on our machines, so that we are not affected by stupid nonsense like that.

Recall what I said in my original comment:

> You want their nonsense absolutely contained and isolated, not deep in your kernel.

We don't want unknown uncontrollable proprietary idiocy running on our computers, least of all in kernel mode.

Ideally that stuff would not even exist to begin with, but since it does we move on to the next best thing: containing and isolating it to the fullest extent. The ideal setup is a VFIO configuration where the host is a Linux system where we have full control and the virtual machine is fully isolated and controlled.

As such we really don't need idiotic "anticheat" software taking issue with perfectly good technologies like virtual machines and hypervisors. Cheaters are using this stuff? I don't care. Just accept it.

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#153

Post by veverkap »

stevefan1999 wrote: post #69
adito wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, you mean Rust (the game[1]), not Rust (programming language[2]). [1]: https://store.steampowered.com/app/252490/Rust/ [2]: https://rust-lang.org/

As someone who both plays the game and used the language at work, and used to do cheat development, I always wonder if I can write a Rust cheat in Rust.

Only Xzibit can do that.

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#154

Post by efdee »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #86
MrZander wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to sacrifice anything, no one is making you install anti-cheat software. > Sacrificing freedom for fun? For video games of all things? That's pretty disgusting and I want people to be better than that. What is the point of freedom if you have a joyless existence?

> What is the point of freedom if you have a joyless existence? > no one is making you install anti-cheat software You don't see the irony here? You don't see the trillion dollar corporations dangling "joy" in front of us and conditioning access to it on acceptance of their bullshit non-negotiable take it or leave it contracts where "we own your computer now" is a clause? The powerful choice is to reject the silly bi…

It's not clear what freedom you are sacrificing. Nobody is forcing you to play those games. If you don't want to let them run their anti cheat system, don't do it. This is not some unavoidable measure.

What a strange hill to want to die on.

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#155

Post by matheusmoreira »

efdee wrote: post #154
matheusmoreira wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the point of freedom if you have a joyless existence? > no one is making you install anti-cheat software You don't see the irony here? You don't see the trillion dollar corporations dangling "joy" in front of us and conditioning access to it on acceptance of their bullshit non-negotiable take it or leave it contracts where "we own your computer now" is a clause? The powerful choice is to reject the silly bi…

It's not clear what freedom you are sacrificing. Nobody is forcing you to play those games. If you don't want to let them run their anti cheat system, don't do it. This is not some unavoidable measure. What a strange hill to want to die on.

This has nothing at all to do with whether you are "forced" to do anything. Anyone who wants to play games should be able to do so without some abusive anticheat taking over their machine.

It doesn't matter what's written in their silly EULAs which nobody reads. I couldn't care less if it ruins the games or costs them billions in profits. You are morally justified in defeating their silly anticheat nonsense in order to enjoy games on your terms without them pwning your computer. You are only morally wrong if you actually cheat.

And it's not at all some "strange hill to die on". This is a fundamental computing freedom issue. It's about who owns the keys to the machine. It's the exact same issue Android users face when they install GrapheneOS only to discover their bank doesn't support it just because it's not owned by Google. In my opinion this should be literally illegal.

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#156

Post by efdee »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #155
efdee wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear what freedom you are sacrificing. Nobody is forcing you to play those games. If you don't want to let them run their anti cheat system, don't do it. This is not some unavoidable measure. What a strange hill to want to die on.

This has nothing at all to do with whether you are "forced" to do anything. Anyone who wants to play games should be able to do so without some abusive anticheat taking over their machine. It doesn't matter what's written in their silly EULAs which nobody reads. I couldn't care less if it ruins the games or costs them billions in profits. You are morally justified in defeating their silly anticheat nonsense in order…

"abusive", "silly", "couldn't care less", "nonsense", "literally illegal". I don't think you'll find many people want to join your cause if you are this aggressive.

More on topic, I agree that you should be allowed to do with your computer what you want. That includes defeating their anti-cheat measures. Your computer, your rules. In return, they can refuse to support you or ban them from their servers. Their stuff, their rules.

But this idea that you are entitled to tell them they have to provide you with a version that does not have their anti-cheat measures, that is pretty far out there. That is where most people will stop following your reasoning.

YMMV.

Re: S&box is now an open source game engine

#157

Post by matheusmoreira »

efdee wrote: post #156
matheusmoreira wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing at all to do with whether you are "forced" to do anything. Anyone who wants to play games should be able to do so without some abusive anticheat taking over their machine. It doesn't matter what's written in their silly EULAs which nobody reads. I couldn't care less if it ruins the games or costs them billions in profits. You are morally justified in defeating their silly anticheat nonsense in order…

"abusive", "silly", "couldn't care less", "nonsense", "literally illegal". I don't think you'll find many people want to join your cause if you are this aggressive. More on topic, I agree that you should be allowed to do with your computer what you want. That includes defeating their anti-cheat measures. Your computer, your rules. In return, they can refuse to support you or ban them from their servers. Their stuff,…

> I don't think you'll find many people want to join your cause if you are this aggressive.

If I come off as aggressive, it's only because of my exasperation due to people sacrificing freedom for video games of all things. Online games that will be dead after a couple years. What a colossal waste.

Anyway, I'm no politician. I'm actually very close to giving up on these so called "causes", precisely because people refuse to listen. There's no point. Being polite doesn't make them listen. Nobody listened to Stallman. Threaten their convenience, their fun and games, and they're gone.

If they won't listen, then they deserve the consequences. One day all the corporations and authorities will start turning the screws on them. Only then will they start caring about this stuff. Nobody will listen to them either.

> But this idea that you are entitled to tell them they have to provide you with a version that does not have their anti-cheat measures, that is pretty far out there.

No.

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fra...

The optimal amount of fraud is non-zero. You could have zero fraud by ramping up the requirements before you trust someone enough to transact with them. That will result in very few purchases though. Decreases profits. So what they do is they let it happen and eat the costs. Fraud isn't a crime, it's an expense. Accounted for.

The optimal amount of crime is non-zero. You could virtually eliminate crime by implementing an orwellian dystopia where everybody is surveilled at all times. Nobody actually wants to endure such a subhuman existence though, so we're forced to accept the risk of crime. Tolerating some amount of crime is the price of our basic human dignity.

Same logic generalizes to online games. The optimal amount of cheating is non-zero. They could eliminate it by taking the computer away from us. That's an affront to our dignity as the owners of the machines. So we have to tolerate some cheating in order to keep our dignity.

These considerations are accounted for in society as a whole. It's no different here.

Post reply on HN