Hacker News Reader

Comment by harry8 | Hacker News Reader

The status quo's days are numbered. Online chess shows how.

An AI will play these games like a human but better. The AI can be totally separate from the windows box wearing anti-cheat ankle bracelets just as your brain a separate thing to the windows box when when you play. It can interact with the box via keyboard, mouse or controller.

No windows kernel module is useful in detecting and deterring chess cheating no matter how fanciful or factual the vibrating "device" stories are.

Anti-cheat by kernel module, it's day will be entirely done very soon if it isn't already.

"Any time you beat a computer at a game it let you win." Are we there yet? If not, how long?

View on HN

It never was fair to play vs computers in reaction games or skill games.

IE: Quakebots and Fighting games have perfect reaction times and perfect combos. They can simply block perfectly and counter attack perfectly and never drop a combo.

You act like cheating is new to video games??

--------

We never wanted bot in these games. Still don't want them today, and it's a big reason that playing on public boxes (ex: at an arcade or eSports tournament) is still a thing.

Defeating an opponent in a tournament is a big thing for fighting games. The risk of cheating online is always there so online tournaments are simply never taken as seriously (ie: as much $$$$ risked as real life tournaments).

> You act like cheating is new to video games??

No, I think the point is that with AI the existing anti-cheat measures can simply be avoided by letting the AI play through the same interface as a human. Therefore anti-cheat kernel modules will no longer be useful, and will no longer be a reason to stay on Windows.

It seems like what this needs is the return of video arcades.

Fill a room at the mall with Linux boxen with midrange GPUs and fiber internet and the sort of keyboards you can clean with pressurized water. Charge an entry fee and then sell pizza, cheetos, coffee, soda and beer. Open at 11AM and close at sunrise.

Then publish the public IPs used by the arcade-owned machines at each location in the chain and use different public IPs for the customer WiFi. No DRM nonsense, just a way to know you're playing with someone at the arcade where the management doesn't allow cheats on their machines.

Yes exactly but you do not go far enough with your plans. What is the point of any game if we can not determine who has memorised the meta best and who’s fingers twitch fastest. We need to out law general purpose computing in society and first it must be slowly phased out. Humans have shown they can not be trusted with open platforms they will always cheat and scam each other to gain an advantage. We will also need eye tracking devices to determine if they are cheating by reading notes off paper nearby. I think your plan comes to perfection if we chip everyone in case someone else plays for them on the locked down device.

No one is going to use LLMs if aimbots are available.

Have you even played an FPS vs an aimbots before?

Chess anti-cheat now relies on looking at your moves and spotting mistakes. Not even grandmasters play tactically perfect games so this works pretty well for finding cheaters. In theory FPS games could do the same to detect aimbotting.

and will have to do something along those lines for online play.

I still don't understand why we aren't using server-side gameplay analysis for cheat detection. You can have some obvious inhuman-level gameplay heuristics for real time kicks/timeouts during matches and post-game analysis by AI to flag for review or outright automatically ban gameplay that deviates from normal high-level players.

Games very much are using server-side statistics analysis for cheat detection. Valve made a presentation about it and Epic has an API for feeding game state data to ML anticheat for aimbot detection (game-specific and in addition to their existing anticheat measures)

It’s just that it doesn’t work.

But why doesn't it work?

Either everyone on Earth who’s working on this has a skill issue (which is probably hubris?) or there’s not enough differing humanized enough aimbot from human aim (note: Valve manages to screw up even here, with cheaters in Premier basically rage aimbotting these days IIRC)

In addition, there’s not much these things can do against subtler stuff like ESP.

So now we're using an AI cheat snoop to detect the behaviours of AIs, which means the cheat AI will need to learn to avoid the tell-tale patterns the AI cheat snoop looks for and avoid them, which mean the AI cheat snoop will need to....

It won't close the skill gap bump, but the more an AI aimbot degrades itself to mimic a human to beat cheat detection the less advantage it will give to the players using it.

It is scary how nuanced the cheating tools already here. Here is a video promoting cheat software explaining how nuanced their aimbot system can be made to mimic real play: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrBohlkHMjU

> existing anti-cheat measures can simply be avoided by letting the AI play through the same interface as a human.

Great. Now we are going to get “secure cables” for mouse and keyboard and bluetooth device attestation.

You're already one step behind. The interface the human player is using isn't USB, it's genuine keyboards and mice.

I generally agree with this conclusion but there are a class of cheats that don't just improve the player's speed/aim/reaction time/etc but actually give you information that you shouldn't have but needs to be available locally to hide network latency like players on the other side of a wall.

China solved this years ago with mandatory ID verification to play video games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-name_system_for_online_ga...

This was to prevent children from getting addicted but also leads to real life penalties for cheating in video games.

This a new and exciting use of the word "solved." I don't think I'm completely comfortable with it, possibly due to being raised on a diet of anti-soviet propaganda that spoke of such thing as "freedom" "justice", not sure if people care much anymore but there it is.

In the time span of Nixon to Trump and Mao to Xi, America got caught by China.

The idea of Mao's face or Trump's face on the global reserve currency feels really off.

Your argument appears to be nihilistic in nature: "don't bother fighting the cheating because it's inevitable." Forgive me, but I won't be giving up that easily. No anti-cheat is perfect, and we're not aiming for perfect. We're aiming for a reduction, and the harder we make cheating, the fewer cheaters there are. If cheating requires special hardware to mimic mouse and keyboard input, that significantly cuts down how many cheaters one will encounter in a given day. I have no doubt that the threat vector here widens and deepens as AI becomes more integrated into our operating systems. That does not mean we should give up or accept cheating as inevitable.

Comprehension issue.

"Quotes" of something not said directly that you are quoting is always bad. Quotes containing a summary that is entirely false are even worse. Don't do that.

You can try to deal with cheating as chess.com and others _do_, or you can do something you know will not work. Kernel mods for chess.com would be stupid. Their anti-cheat strategy involves zero windows kernel mods. That is how it will go for all online gaming if it hasn't already. So use something else.

Windows kernel modules won't work much longer if they even still do. Pretending they will, doing nothing to stop cheating is a a nihilistic, give up, faintly ridiculous attitude.

Using quotes to intentionally misrepresent someone is of course bad. I feel I accurately represented your position and nothing you have written refutes that. In fact, you double down here by claiming that chess.com's method is a reasonable solution, and vaguely gesture at "something you know will work." Chess.com relies on inference, which is wildly inaccurate, with many false positive and false negatives. There have been many scandals over the years, and you would know that if you had spent a few minutes on Google prior to this comment.

If you disagree with my interpretation of your nihilism, please go ahead and provide a workable solution for significantly suppressing cheating without the use of kernel level anticheats. Right now you're talking about of both sides of your mouth.

Your reading has serious issues.

“Something you know will NOT work” Is what is written right on the page. You quote it without the “not” wTH? Kernel mods won’t work much longer if they still work at all. Gotta find something else. What? Let’s see. Won’t be kernel mods.

Doesn’t make much sense to see this level of non comprehension of plain English. There’s no point talking against it what i say makes no difference if you read the opposite. Maybe this is convo with AI? Dunno.

Best.

> "Any time you beat a computer at a game it let you win." Are we there yet? If not, how long?

I don't want to beat a computer, I want to beat another person.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com