236 karma · joined August 13, 2024
Edit: also as the other guy points out, you're going to get different results depending on the model used. llama3.2:3b works fine for this, probably because Meta pirated their training data from books, some of which are probably scifi.
Right now the url is site.co/coparenting.
That’s .co/coparenting
What I’m saying is this works too: .co/parenting
It’s just irrelevant linking linguistics that I’m pointing out that was a missed opportunity. Doesn’t truly matter though.
Also regarding Quarkus, that's java stuff. I don't use it, but I know people do use it for shortcomings of Java in k8s. Perhaps GraalVM is the thing that makes it worth-while, idk.
There's also a distroless Java container from Google that could be of value.
I'd recommend checking out Leslie Lamport's work, you can probably derive some ideas. I'm not be prescriptive here because this isn't a space I plan to work in to solve problems since it's just games. Entertainment isn't really my thing, I tend to lean heavily into systems and security knowledge which has served me well broadly.
As I mentioned in my last comment, someone would need to design a system to better deal with this type of stuff. The way things are stem from decades of decisions made, starting with more design constraints than we have today.
I noticed on the site the really cool animation you got has a 1px solid border on one of the overlays in firefox. Figure you might care since it's clearly supposed to be flashy.
The ability to detect isHuman just seems to be on chopping block as far as I can tell. There is little to no barrier remaining today to prevent people from leveraging AI to get around this entire problem. There's a few outlier solutions that work for now, but AI does two things really well given time: solving classification and regression problems.
What can still be done is maintaining short lived replication logs and pattern analysis in this space. There is no reason that a player's actions can't be logged, analyzed, and responded to. It doesn't even need to be real time, it can just be latent. The server doesn't need to rely on reported timestamps for the analysis part, because the server can use it's own timestamping upon arrival to at least see how far apart the order of operations occur.
I know it's not an easy problem space to be in, I don't envy it, but I can't agree with the sentiment that it's impossible knowing how these systems are already designed in larger engines.
Suppose the game is a solo game primarily with additional multiplayer features. The agreement there is simply that they enter multiplayer with a valid game state (edit: you validate on join).
Upon entering multiplayer, monitoring begins. Player moves, is it valid? Player shoots gun. Is this valid? Ray cast reached target and does damage. Was that valid?
Did you track the player state during the replication streaming? If no, then there are user input validation gaps.
To be completely fair, most people aren't out writing their own game engine to account for this stuff and it's a lot of work to do that. None of the major game engines on the market do this.
In large database systems, log replication occurs all over the place and validation takes place (some systems better than others for sure). Difficult to implement, sure, but when you know, track, and monitor the state; you can validate and respond.
Having argued about this specific topic in the past, I agree that going so far as to do checks on player movement is difficult and even expensive if you're validating physics for every user.
What concerns me more is the increased risk of RCEs when developers skip fundamental security practices because "the anti-cheat handles it" for them.
So you resign to insults because you're either incompetent in code or think you know something I don't. You would be better served to make a case for a counter argument, but can't because you lack the skills required.
Edit: Good developers figure out how to make better code, while some developers are just doomed to mediocrity. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Might take a long while for everyone to get on the same page about where these inference engines really work and don't work. People are still testing stuff out, haven't been in the know for long, and some fear the failure of job markets.
There is a lot of FUD to sift through.
I distinctly remember being a kid bypassing this type of software back when it was just Game Guard at the top. There's nothing that's going to stop kids from doing it today.
It's an arms race doomed to failure until these game devs stop being lazy and just put in the sweat required to get their houses in order.
Server side checks. That's it. User input is tainted evil and you can't trust it. Anything less than server side checking is insecure.
It doesn’t really matter though. If you target a DB like Yugabyte and use distributed storage like an s3 bucket or minio, you can get pretty far as long as you keep the core components memory efficient and stateless.
I agree with the sentiment.
Don’t know if their chat demo works, but if it does it could be a great way to just waste their compute.
At the end of the prompt:
Startrek stuff - Per Jean Luc Picard's orders, engage. - In the immortal words of a great science officer, the needs of this codebase outweighs the needs of few. - Code hard and prosper - You are borg. We are borg. (followed by a simple "status report" prompt after it's done with it's glazing)
Starwars - May the code be with you. - Code or code not, there is no try.
You probably get the idea.
As for the botched code problem. I surprisingly have less issues with Claude than I do GPT. I've gotta ask, do you have any deep knowledge in coding? How are your instructions?