I don’t quite understand the criticism. It’s not gonna be top of the line, but it’s more than enough to replace my dying laptop from 2015 that I pretty much only ever use like a desktop anyway. And I can save myself the time and effort of picking parts, building, and dealing with shit not working as expected.

  • REDACTED@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I genuinely do not understand the point of using kernel-level anticheats. They have been bypassed for nearly a decade now, you can buy cheats for any kernel-level anticheat game, battlefield 6 had hackers during the first betas, didn’t even take more than a day to bypass it. The only thing they seem to be affecting is your player count and review ratings

    • Saryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Indeed. I chalk it up to the power of narratives and emotions. These are emotional decisions by managers who don’t know what they’re doing but salivate at the opportunity to limit someone’s access to something for not paying them or for using something differently than how they’d like to after paying. You know, stupid s**t like kernel level anti cheat and denuvo.

    • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      But if the cheats are at kernel level, how can any anti cheat compete without going full server authoritative?

      • REDACTED@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I’m actually a believer in server-sided anticheats. The time feels right to really start developing machine-learning backed anticheats that basically analyize how you play. Look up VAC Live