Firearms are loud. Their use draws a lot of attention.
BB guns aren't silent, although they're nowhere near as loud as firearms. Also, paintball guns with the paintballs frozen can easily break windows, but they aren't particularly quiet either.
Slingshots are close to silent. Unless you're near either the shooter or the line of fire, you're unlikely to notice. I think there is some merit in suggesting slingshots may be the weapon of choice here.
It's a question of which happens first: the supply of fresh water (and all currently viable alternative sources) runs out, or commercial fusion power actually works. Because if the latter happens, desalination will solve the fresh water problem.
There is no water problem, anywhere on the planet. Only a fresh water problem, which is really an energy problem.
If you went outside and threw your body at a car, do you think you could break a tail light?
If I had a multi-tool on my belt or in my pocket, or even just a heavy keychain or belt buckle, then absolutely I could see that breaking a tail light. Or a flashlight, or any number of other hard, dense objects that fit in a pocket.
Drop me in a new situation with unwritten rules I haven't been around long enough to witness, and I'll have to ask because I can't just figure it out. It's just not one of my strengths to figure out the rules by context, I need them spelled out. That's not being a dick, it's being somewhat oblivious to social clues, and there are a substantial number of other people like me out there -- especially in geeky pursuits like gaming. This is why I spelled it out that dickish behavior would be pointed out before it would be acted on -- so that players didn't feel like they had to walk on eggshells. I can't define everything that counts as dickish, but it's only fair to cut everyone some slack for the very same reason.
Is it cheating to use macros to automate repetitive tasks that are little more than pushing buttons in the right order? Or to use macros to spam a low-cost attack as a form of suppression fire? I have hardware that can do that. Are my 18 button mouse, Nostromo controller, and Cherry programmable keyboard now cheats?
I have a few macros specifically for Minecraft. One switches to the bow and draws it back until it is released, consolidating two button presses into one. When released, the shot is loosed as usual but then the macro immediately switches to sword on the assumption that I'm still fighting. Another button switches to the sword and raises the shield when pressed, and lowers the shield and swings the sword when released. Again, this is just consolidating two button presses into the down motion, and another two button presses into the up motion. A third one (very useful for mining) switches to whatever light source I put in slot #6, places one, and then switches back to the pickaxe. Yet another switches to the slot which should have food, holds the button down long enough to eat, and then switches to sword. The assumption is that if I'm using it, I'm probably in combat, and if I'm not, drawing the sword does no harm.
The X-ray rule on my server was always that you could not use X-ray to gain a competitive advantage. You can't use it to make a beeline for diamonds you shouldn't be able to see. You can't use it to spot someone's underground base. But if someone pranked you and put a chicken under your floorboards, I didn't care if someone enabled X-ray to locate it. Likewise, if someone's redstone mysteriously stopped working, I'd actually recommend they enable an X-ray resource pack to find the problem, instead of tearing out walls in desperation. Either way, the only way I (or another mod) was able to determine if someone was using X-ray was from their actions. The client does not require hacking, just the loading of a resource pack which is something practically every player does just to make the game easier to look at. The client does not inform the server what resource pack is in use, so if someone enabled X-ray and then kept the use so subtle as to escape detection, it was simply not possible to stop them. Thus, the only choices remaining were (1) suck it up and hope players didn't abuse it when nobody else was around (and then roll back whatever they did, if it was sufficiently obvious), or (2) make it worthless with some sort of obfuscation. I started with option 2, and eventually settled on option 1 when there were no longer new players to be suspicious of.
There was a list of rules. Rule 0 was "Do not make unenforceable rules." Somewhere down the list about 5 or 6 was "Don't be a dick. You will be informed if you are being a dick. Continuing to be a dick will get you banned. I run this server because I like to play Minecraft with other people, not because I love administering servers, so if you are a persistent thorn in my side, you will be gone." I only had to invoke the ban part of the rule once, and that player literally had to demolish the entire city center to earn it.
Hiring someone with a photographic memory to take a test and then tell you what all the questions were sure sounds like cheating too, but it is exactly the business model for Mike Russ Financial Training Centers. This is legal, they've been doing it for decades, and it works exceptionally well. Regurgitating canned answers when you've only learned a small set of them looks exactly like regurgitating canned answers when you have (attempted to) learn the entire book, and the latter is what everyone else is doing. The main difference is that the Mike Russ trainees generally do it faster, unless they consciously stall between questions (as they are instructed).
Without an enforcement mechanism, a rule has no teeth and breeds only contempt. With too aggressive (or too arbitrary) an enforcement mechanism, either people get excluded because of inability or unwillingness to jump through all the hoops, or people (usually the very best players) are falsely accused.
"What you like making videos of, our advertisers no longer like. Too bad for you." Whose fault is it when the goalposts move? The party that owns the field!
The dealer is there to watch for such activity. Also, walking away from the table folds your hand (unless you are all in). The game itself is set up to prevent other players from peeking at your cards -- but if you are picking them up so far your neighbors can see them, that's too bad for you. (I've been seated next to such a player. I told him what he was doing, once. After that, you bet your ass I looked at his cards when he kept doing it.) This is more like the dealer insisting on looking at everyone's cards, and then being sloppy about it so that information is exposed. In that case, change the careless dealer! (Or server, in this case.)
My point is that ultimately, the server has no control over what is running on the client end. Even if they insist on scanning the client machine for cheats (which is perpetually taken to excess and I do not personally allow on my system because I don't trust them either, same reason I will not disable my ad blocker), there are ways around it with the use of a second machine controlling the client machine.
That something is possible means someone, somewhere, is likely to try it. If it works, they'll keep doing it. If you cannot determine that they are doing it, then you cannot enforce a rule against it without getting false positives, such as accusing people of using an aim-bot when they really are that good. If you can't think of a practical way to enforce a rule, don't even make it a rule. It just makes all the other rules seem equally open to question. Certainly you can consider the rule internally, but any actual binding rule must have a means of enforcement or it is a waste of time.
Except the other player can take the game state at the time they stood up (a simple photo will do) and confirm it looks the same when they get back. They don't have this power in an online game -- they can't even stop the game by stepping away.
Yes, the problem is latency. But the servers still need to stop sending everyone's location to every player, if they don't want that information exploited. If that means having to make a unique status packet for every player from the ground up, instead of attaching player specifics to a generic report, then so be it.
The more YouTube tightens its rules, the more people are going to find themselves on the wrong side of those rules through no fault of their own. They may survive that, but only until a competing service provider (or several) takes chunks of the uploaders they refuse to pay, and the influx of new creators dries up. Then they will decline from attrition.
Then it shouldn't be considered cheating to use whatever data the server sends you to build your view.
I used an obfuscator on my Minecraft server for a long time. It caused all sorts of problems, like coming around a corner and not getting a refresh. It also slowed the server down overall. But I had to do it, because so many people use X-ray, up until such time as the player base settled into the same six people and I was able to turn it back off.
If you don't have the CPU power to do checks, and you don't have the human operators to watch the activity of suspicious players, you're going to get cheaters. The smart ones won't get caught, because they will be able to distinguish between what they should see and what they shouldn't and act accordingly. They will just always seem to get lucky when they have to make guesses which way to go.
Get inside, stay inside, listen on the radio for the all clear.
Presuming your radio survives the EMP.
The radio station, particularly AM station, stands a better chance of surviving because in many cases, the transmitter amplifiers are still closet-sized tube amplifiers. Of course the studio will probably get toasted, but it's easier to work around that than it is to work around a tens-of-kilowatts amplifier going up in smoke.
That's a good way to keep newcomers and single-issue candidates out. Only the popular would dare to run, and we'd be left with even more of a celebrity shitshow than we have now.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh good, I heard timecube.com was looking for a new writer.
Firearms are loud. Their use draws a lot of attention.
BB guns aren't silent, although they're nowhere near as loud as firearms. Also, paintball guns with the paintballs frozen can easily break windows, but they aren't particularly quiet either.
Slingshots are close to silent. Unless you're near either the shooter or the line of fire, you're unlikely to notice. I think there is some merit in suggesting slingshots may be the weapon of choice here.
It's a question of which happens first: the supply of fresh water (and all currently viable alternative sources) runs out, or commercial fusion power actually works. Because if the latter happens, desalination will solve the fresh water problem.
There is no water problem, anywhere on the planet. Only a fresh water problem, which is really an energy problem.
If you went outside and threw your body at a car, do you think you could break a tail light?
If I had a multi-tool on my belt or in my pocket, or even just a heavy keychain or belt buckle, then absolutely I could see that breaking a tail light. Or a flashlight, or any number of other hard, dense objects that fit in a pocket.
Kinda hard to run over someone who hits you from the side, with our without AI.
Drop me in a new situation with unwritten rules I haven't been around long enough to witness, and I'll have to ask because I can't just figure it out. It's just not one of my strengths to figure out the rules by context, I need them spelled out. That's not being a dick, it's being somewhat oblivious to social clues, and there are a substantial number of other people like me out there -- especially in geeky pursuits like gaming. This is why I spelled it out that dickish behavior would be pointed out before it would be acted on -- so that players didn't feel like they had to walk on eggshells. I can't define everything that counts as dickish, but it's only fair to cut everyone some slack for the very same reason.
How do they flip it over without you noticing when it only has adhesive on one side?
This is unfortunately true at present. If the opportunity seems sufficient and Google hasn't bought laws against it by then, someone will try again.
Then where is the line?
Is it cheating to use macros to automate repetitive tasks that are little more than pushing buttons in the right order? Or to use macros to spam a low-cost attack as a form of suppression fire? I have hardware that can do that. Are my 18 button mouse, Nostromo controller, and Cherry programmable keyboard now cheats?
I have a few macros specifically for Minecraft. One switches to the bow and draws it back until it is released, consolidating two button presses into one. When released, the shot is loosed as usual but then the macro immediately switches to sword on the assumption that I'm still fighting. Another button switches to the sword and raises the shield when pressed, and lowers the shield and swings the sword when released. Again, this is just consolidating two button presses into the down motion, and another two button presses into the up motion. A third one (very useful for mining) switches to whatever light source I put in slot #6, places one, and then switches back to the pickaxe. Yet another switches to the slot which should have food, holds the button down long enough to eat, and then switches to sword. The assumption is that if I'm using it, I'm probably in combat, and if I'm not, drawing the sword does no harm.
The X-ray rule on my server was always that you could not use X-ray to gain a competitive advantage. You can't use it to make a beeline for diamonds you shouldn't be able to see. You can't use it to spot someone's underground base. But if someone pranked you and put a chicken under your floorboards, I didn't care if someone enabled X-ray to locate it. Likewise, if someone's redstone mysteriously stopped working, I'd actually recommend they enable an X-ray resource pack to find the problem, instead of tearing out walls in desperation. Either way, the only way I (or another mod) was able to determine if someone was using X-ray was from their actions. The client does not require hacking, just the loading of a resource pack which is something practically every player does just to make the game easier to look at. The client does not inform the server what resource pack is in use, so if someone enabled X-ray and then kept the use so subtle as to escape detection, it was simply not possible to stop them. Thus, the only choices remaining were (1) suck it up and hope players didn't abuse it when nobody else was around (and then roll back whatever they did, if it was sufficiently obvious), or (2) make it worthless with some sort of obfuscation. I started with option 2, and eventually settled on option 1 when there were no longer new players to be suspicious of.
There was a list of rules. Rule 0 was "Do not make unenforceable rules." Somewhere down the list about 5 or 6 was "Don't be a dick. You will be informed if you are being a dick. Continuing to be a dick will get you banned. I run this server because I like to play Minecraft with other people, not because I love administering servers, so if you are a persistent thorn in my side, you will be gone." I only had to invoke the ban part of the rule once, and that player literally had to demolish the entire city center to earn it.
Hiring someone with a photographic memory to take a test and then tell you what all the questions were sure sounds like cheating too, but it is exactly the business model for Mike Russ Financial Training Centers. This is legal, they've been doing it for decades, and it works exceptionally well. Regurgitating canned answers when you've only learned a small set of them looks exactly like regurgitating canned answers when you have (attempted to) learn the entire book, and the latter is what everyone else is doing. The main difference is that the Mike Russ trainees generally do it faster, unless they consciously stall between questions (as they are instructed).
Without an enforcement mechanism, a rule has no teeth and breeds only contempt. With too aggressive (or too arbitrary) an enforcement mechanism, either people get excluded because of inability or unwillingness to jump through all the hoops, or people (usually the very best players) are falsely accused.
"What you like making videos of, our advertisers no longer like. Too bad for you." Whose fault is it when the goalposts move? The party that owns the field!
The dealer is there to watch for such activity. Also, walking away from the table folds your hand (unless you are all in). The game itself is set up to prevent other players from peeking at your cards -- but if you are picking them up so far your neighbors can see them, that's too bad for you. (I've been seated next to such a player. I told him what he was doing, once. After that, you bet your ass I looked at his cards when he kept doing it.) This is more like the dealer insisting on looking at everyone's cards, and then being sloppy about it so that information is exposed. In that case, change the careless dealer! (Or server, in this case.)
My point is that ultimately, the server has no control over what is running on the client end. Even if they insist on scanning the client machine for cheats (which is perpetually taken to excess and I do not personally allow on my system because I don't trust them either, same reason I will not disable my ad blocker), there are ways around it with the use of a second machine controlling the client machine.
That something is possible means someone, somewhere, is likely to try it. If it works, they'll keep doing it. If you cannot determine that they are doing it, then you cannot enforce a rule against it without getting false positives, such as accusing people of using an aim-bot when they really are that good. If you can't think of a practical way to enforce a rule, don't even make it a rule. It just makes all the other rules seem equally open to question. Certainly you can consider the rule internally, but any actual binding rule must have a means of enforcement or it is a waste of time.
Except the other player can take the game state at the time they stood up (a simple photo will do) and confirm it looks the same when they get back. They don't have this power in an online game -- they can't even stop the game by stepping away.
If that is the only way that the rules of the game can be enforced, then that is how it needs to be done. You can't trust the client.
Yes, the problem is latency. But the servers still need to stop sending everyone's location to every player, if they don't want that information exploited. If that means having to make a unique status packet for every player from the ground up, instead of attaching player specifics to a generic report, then so be it.
The more YouTube tightens its rules, the more people are going to find themselves on the wrong side of those rules through no fault of their own. They may survive that, but only until a competing service provider (or several) takes chunks of the uploaders they refuse to pay, and the influx of new creators dries up. Then they will decline from attrition.
Then it shouldn't be considered cheating to use whatever data the server sends you to build your view.
I used an obfuscator on my Minecraft server for a long time. It caused all sorts of problems, like coming around a corner and not getting a refresh. It also slowed the server down overall. But I had to do it, because so many people use X-ray, up until such time as the player base settled into the same six people and I was able to turn it back off.
If you don't have the CPU power to do checks, and you don't have the human operators to watch the activity of suspicious players, you're going to get cheaters. The smart ones won't get caught, because they will be able to distinguish between what they should see and what they shouldn't and act accordingly. They will just always seem to get lucky when they have to make guesses which way to go.
Like rain on your wedding day.
What about devices with antennas roughly a meter long? This describes an awful lot of radios, which were my specific concern.
I don't know, people can wrap their heads around fucking up once. A second such incident would probably have the result you mentioned, though.
Get inside, stay inside, listen on the radio for the all clear.
Presuming your radio survives the EMP.
The radio station, particularly AM station, stands a better chance of surviving because in many cases, the transmitter amplifiers are still closet-sized tube amplifiers. Of course the studio will probably get toasted, but it's easier to work around that than it is to work around a tens-of-kilowatts amplifier going up in smoke.
Agreed, it was a false alert, not a fake one.
Where the title goes wrong is that Kiesza is the singer, not the composer. Benoit Carre is the composer, and is French.
That's a good way to keep newcomers and single-issue candidates out. Only the popular would dare to run, and we'd be left with even more of a celebrity shitshow than we have now.