Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | skupig's commentslogin

It's not OK, but it's a fact.

That "opt-in" is going to be a vaguely-worded auto-filled checkbox and the "consent" will be stretched far beyond what any user thinks they're agreeing to.

That doesn't make any sense. The US enjoys its position of economic power because it has the reputation and wealth to attract skilled people and keep them here.

Skilled people have O visas. The H1Bs are the ones you don’t want long-term.

You can automatically be a citizen through descent of most countries in Europe and Asia, and everywhere in North America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis#Jus_sanguinis_st...


It’s not automatic, it requires applying and at times can take years of proving in terms of paperwork, that is by definition not automatic. I have personal experience with the Greek, German, and Italian systems, prepare your self for 1-2 years to gain it even if you have rights to it.

In some countries it is automatic in others it is not.

Say one of your parents is a citizen of some other country.

If they're Canadian, you're a Canadian citizen. Period. The process is to get your documents that prove it. You don't apply for citizenship, you apply for proof.

In many European countries you are not a citizen. The process is to become one by descent. You apply for citizenship.

Very different.


Why did you need to be a citizen of three countries?

Fair question, though it assumes citizenships are simple things you “use,” which you either need or don’t. They’re not. People attach all sorts of baggage, duties, and rights to them. Mine are a mix of ancestry, residence, and ones I helped my spouse with. They’re not things I “need,” they’re just where my family and life have been. European family trees often produce this. The original point still stands: even when you’re entitled to a citizenship, actually obtaining the documents takes real time and money.

I don't think that's necessarily true, I think companies are lazy and highly invasive anticheat is an easy win they can license from a 3rd party. Algorithmic security, server-side heuristics, and human review can get you far. I have very, very rarely seen a blatant cheater in Overwatch (maybe 3 times in 10 years?), for example, and yet it's been playable via WINE for almost its entire lifetime.


Overwatch is more dependent upon teamwork, ability usage, positioning, etc.

Cheating is endemic in BR and tactical shooter type games. I remember one f2p game was deleting 50,000 cheater accounts every month.


A key phrase being free to play.

If the developer's winning $20 per cheater detection, and puts in extra resources when there's more cheaters, the equilibrium ends up a lot better.

And even for free games, I could imagine different ways to tie a monetary stake in in exchange for skipping invasive anticheats.


I recently had my faith shattered with I saw someone lock onto an ally through a wall in a kill cam, and I haven't played sense.

Blatant cheaters are bad in some ways, but subtle cheat are far worse imo.


There's no reason that kind of client behavior can't be detected server side.


Detect the mouse moving in a "non-human way"? If it were that easy there'd be no hackers. And even if it where, what about wall hacks?


You can detect with high confidence that a player is aiming at something that shouldn't be visible to them. That goes for both aim bots and wall hacks. The longer they play and the more they do it, the higher the confidence. If you don't want to instaban them because you don't trust the detection enough, use it as a preselection of players to manually review.


I think the effect the author is talking about is definitely caused by atmospheric scattering, but the painted effects are different. Those are more likely inspired by overexposure, aberration, HDR, etc. Makoto Shinkai specifically is a filmmaker and often emulates camera effects like lens flare.


People are definitely trying to make HN bots because I have seen several get flagged. No idea to what end though.


the suits or suit minded people have realised that HN is good for advertising to the kind of demographic that'll give them free labour and is easily swayed by whatever the latest trend is


That's why we all love the MIT license.


I think permissive licenses are fine in some cases (particularly if you're trying to standardise something. X11, LLVM, and BSD are good examples), but generally at least weak (LGPL or MPL) copyleft are preferred.

I'm still torn on what kind of license is best for operating systems, though (the GPL has forced companies to actually contribute to Linux but they also try and get around it in so many ways I have to wonder if a weaker license would be better)


In some cases, yes. It has to be used judiciously. The free software pioneers understood this, and wrote a little essay about it (LGPL vs GPL): https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html In short, it depends on the market situation: if you created something new and exciting, you should use GPL (nowadays that would be AGPL) to encourage lock-in. If you created something that is supposed to displace an existing proprietary product, you should use LGPL to encourage switching. These days it'd be MIT, but MIT is exactly the same as proprietary as far as user freedom is concerned.


People still see HN as a valuable place for promoting their businesses. Usually some poorly thought out SaaS.

If you look at what people outside HN talk about HN, it's not uncommon to see wannabe tech entrepreneurs talking about how to promote their products via Show HNs and how to stay HN front page. It's honestly a little sad considering that HN has a tendency to rip these projects apart.


People (and bots) who think HN is the place to “promote their products” don't understand HN (though, as you note, that belief is is widespread and is having an acute effect on our inbox!)

Show HN is for showing a cool project you've built. To warrant front page placement, it has to “gratify intellectual curiosity”, just like everything else. There needs to be some kind of novel breakthrough or something for others to learn from. Or, sure, some way it can help others with their work or life.

And yes, a byproduct of all this may be that some people buy a license or subscription. But submitters who are just trying to get attention and sales for a commercial product don't belong in Show HN.


Possibly to test reactions to a bot they plan to build a startup around.

I've seen some claim they do it to avoid stylometry or being fingerprinted, or because of social anxiety problems.

Some people just have a compulsive need to optimize everything, and HN's guidelines and tone policing are more easily followed by a bot than a human.


> HN's guidelines and tone policing are more easily followed by a bot than a human.

HN's guidelines aren't that strict and the mod hammer is a plushie. It's not difficult to get by here. It's also kind of useful for critical reflection/self-regulation to hear the occasional "you came in too hot" or "don't be boring" from a moderator.

Seems better to me to just try to be sort of reasonable and let the mods nudge you if they need to and let your comments be downvoted from time to time. What is the goal of these people, to never experience correction in their lives? To never write an unpopular comment?


> What is the goal of these people, to never experience correction in their lives?

Look at all the people who complain about cancel culture. There's a huge swath of people who don't ever want to hear "that was mean/bad/shitty".


>What is the goal of these people, to never experience correction in their lives? To never write an unpopular comment?

Yes?


That seems like a really extreme goal to me. I should hope there's a better way to address the anxiety or whatever it is that's motivating it.


Why would reddit bots exist? (In)organic advertising, same concept here.


I didn’t say that people weren’t doing it. I was asking this person not to do that here since it sort of sounds like they have plans to


The ones you see flagged are the very obvious bots. What about the more sophisticated ones? How do I know skupig isn't a bot?


Ever heard of Dota 2? PUBG? Team Fortress 2?


None of those are mods. Dota 2 is its own game built on Source 2. PUBG used UE4. TF2 used Source.


They all started out as mods to games. DotA specifically was a Warcraft 3 mod and ended up making Blizzard change their stance on such things because they lost such a massive IP to a different company. PUBG started as an Arma 2 mod and TF was a Quake mod. All the mendioned games effectively have their origins in mods for other games and likely wouldn't exist (at least in the form they are today) if that weren't for that, is what they presumably were indicating.


Having gameplay originate in a mod is different from a hit game being a mod.


It was a "hit game" while it was still a mod. They were able to find investment to graduate to a standalone game because they already had a player base in the tens of thousands.


Just semantics - DotA 2 and LoL like 90% the same game as the wc3 dota “mod” ( we called them funmaps or custom maps)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psyonix

Rocket League was a sequel to Super Sonic Rocket Powered Battle Cars which was a totally new game but born from the studio building VehicleMod for Unreal Tournament.


We are talking about hit games. Mods previously made by people who released a hit game are out of scope.


We're talking about hit games created specifically as a sequel to a hit mod of another game, and communication to the community of the hit mod that this is where the developers are going, and that they should move to the standalone game if they want to thank the developers for all that unpaid work they did on the mod over the years.


This is totally unrelated so I have to assume that you didn't realize your post looks like it has a random Nazi dog whistle in it, if you were wondering what that other person's comment means.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Words


Why is this flagged? These numbers in the middle of otherwise innocuous comment stand out like a sore thumb


Holy shit, thanks for posting this. I was extremely confused by the other comments as well. Had no idea


You can use yabai without any of the tiling functionality (set the default mode to "float"), I have actually been using it with BTT to fix this exact problem. Thanks for letting me know that a fix has been added directly to BTT though!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: