I guess it's good they're not releasing the tech, but this still feels like an asshole move. Why invest so much time, effort, and apparent glee in spoiling people's pastime? Like any hobby, there...
I guess it's good they're not releasing the tech, but this still feels like an asshole move. Why invest so much time, effort, and apparent glee in spoiling people's pastime? Like any hobby, there are those who get very good at it and take pride in that -- why deliberately "snipe" top players "on maps they cared about" and lie about it to their faces? It's like the worst stereotype of AI art bros who seem to take pleasure in ripping off indie artist's styles and rubbing their noses in it.
Yeah, the way they talk about it is super gross too. They aren't trying to ruin a cheaters' day -- they're trying to protect their community from you. Condescending the community they invaded and...
Yeah, the way they talk about it is super gross too.
they have spreadsheets. they have bots that automate report tracking. they categorize cheats by type: relax hacks, timewarp, macros, aim assist, multi-account, and whatnot. they track ban statuses. it’s genuinely impressive how organized they are at ruining cheaters’ days.
They aren't trying to ruin a cheaters' day -- they're trying to protect their community from you.
this is why most cheats get caught. not because the software detected them but because a bored 16 year old with too much free time noticed something was off. or because you beat the score of another top player who took the piss.
...
but here’s the thing about sniping top players: they get salty. and salty players report. a lot.
Condescending the community they invaded and manipulated for their own amusement. Disgusting.
Even the "what we learned" section feels like something that is intuitively obvious framed as a revelation. Of course rhythm games are "solved"! Of course humanizing scripted inputs is the...
Even the "what we learned" section feels like something that is intuitively obvious framed as a revelation. Of course rhythm games are "solved"! Of course humanizing scripted inputs is the important part of fooling humans! Of course social engineering works!
They are clearly very skilled at what they're doing, including making an entertaining writeup of the events. I hope they realize they could be using these skills for something that doesn't cause disruption to communities. I'm not a VSRG player or in any of those communities, but this kind of thing strikes me as having the potential for causing long term impacts and suspicions of legitimate players in a way that ultimately causes harm.
They probably could have done almost the exact same thing and tuned it instead to detect cheaters in the replays they trained on and been celebrated for it. I wonder if they ever considered that.
Have you never felt joy at being clever? At figuring out something no one else has done? Have you never taken a joke a little too far before realizing that it had gone wrong somewhere along the...
Have you never felt joy at being clever? At figuring out something no one else has done? Have you never taken a joke a little too far before realizing that it had gone wrong somewhere along the way?
Frankly, I'm glad they posted about it rather than just hiding it. I'm not sure what the community is going to do with the information that it's feasible to provide human-indistinguishable gameplay from a machine in a way that's unprovable? Probably through further expectations of player-cams? I know that especially in strongly-contested speedrunning categories, a separate camera/feed for your hands/controller is a strong proof of personal skill.
The implication that it’s okay to cause harm to a community just because it’s unprecedented or clever does not sit right with me at all. Edit: See @MimicSquid’s response below. I misinterpreted...
Have you never felt joy at being clever? At figuring out something no one else has done?
The implication that it’s okay to cause harm to a community just because it’s unprecedented or clever does not sit right with me at all.
Edit: See @MimicSquid’s response below. I misinterpreted their original comment.
At what point along the way was the point where what they were doing harmful? Well after figuring out how to do it. The creation of the tool wasn't harming the community. It was in the usage of...
At what point along the way was the point where what they were doing harmful? Well after figuring out how to do it. The creation of the tool wasn't harming the community. It was in the usage of it, and the process through which they started fucking around with things that actually mattered to people. If they'd made a mediocre bot that never cracked the top 1000, that also wouldn't have been harmful to any significant degree. Someone's score dropping from 12,365 to 12,366 wouldn't change anything. It was when they started to engage in the social engineering to avoid detection that came with increased scores that it was harmful, and in my reading that was the part they were less happy about.
Ti be clear, I'm not saying they weren't doing something wrong. I'm saying that doing a technical solve of a problem and then running aground on the real world consequences of being clever at a thing where they should have been sensible is a very relatable thing, and them stopping and discussing the vulnerability is, to me, a sign that they weren't assholes, they just went too far trying to solve a problem that didn't need solving.
I understand. That perspective makes sense to me. I didn’t read the piece in the same way you did: I felt like they also believed that the social engineering was at least “interesting”, even if...
I understand. That perspective makes sense to me. I didn’t read the piece in the same way you did: I felt like they also believed that the social engineering was at least “interesting”, even if they regretted it after the fact. I don’t agree; it’s pretty obvious to me that people are somewhat vulnerable because they assume good faith.
I understand where you are coming from, though, and I’ll amend my comment above.
I guess it's good they're not releasing the tech, but this still feels like an asshole move. Why invest so much time, effort, and apparent glee in spoiling people's pastime? Like any hobby, there are those who get very good at it and take pride in that -- why deliberately "snipe" top players "on maps they cared about" and lie about it to their faces? It's like the worst stereotype of AI art bros who seem to take pleasure in ripping off indie artist's styles and rubbing their noses in it.
Yeah, the way they talk about it is super gross too.
They aren't trying to ruin a cheaters' day -- they're trying to protect their community from you.
Condescending the community they invaded and manipulated for their own amusement. Disgusting.
Even the "what we learned" section feels like something that is intuitively obvious framed as a revelation. Of course rhythm games are "solved"! Of course humanizing scripted inputs is the important part of fooling humans! Of course social engineering works!
They are clearly very skilled at what they're doing, including making an entertaining writeup of the events. I hope they realize they could be using these skills for something that doesn't cause disruption to communities. I'm not a VSRG player or in any of those communities, but this kind of thing strikes me as having the potential for causing long term impacts and suspicions of legitimate players in a way that ultimately causes harm.
They probably could have done almost the exact same thing and tuned it instead to detect cheaters in the replays they trained on and been celebrated for it. I wonder if they ever considered that.
Have you never felt joy at being clever? At figuring out something no one else has done? Have you never taken a joke a little too far before realizing that it had gone wrong somewhere along the way?
Frankly, I'm glad they posted about it rather than just hiding it. I'm not sure what the community is going to do with the information that it's feasible to provide human-indistinguishable gameplay from a machine in a way that's unprovable? Probably through further expectations of player-cams? I know that especially in strongly-contested speedrunning categories, a separate camera/feed for your hands/controller is a strong proof of personal skill.
The implication that it’s okay to cause harm to a community just because it’s unprecedented or clever does not sit right with me at all.
Edit: See @MimicSquid’s response below. I misinterpreted their original comment.
At what point along the way was the point where what they were doing harmful? Well after figuring out how to do it. The creation of the tool wasn't harming the community. It was in the usage of it, and the process through which they started fucking around with things that actually mattered to people. If they'd made a mediocre bot that never cracked the top 1000, that also wouldn't have been harmful to any significant degree. Someone's score dropping from 12,365 to 12,366 wouldn't change anything. It was when they started to engage in the social engineering to avoid detection that came with increased scores that it was harmful, and in my reading that was the part they were less happy about.
Ti be clear, I'm not saying they weren't doing something wrong. I'm saying that doing a technical solve of a problem and then running aground on the real world consequences of being clever at a thing where they should have been sensible is a very relatable thing, and them stopping and discussing the vulnerability is, to me, a sign that they weren't assholes, they just went too far trying to solve a problem that didn't need solving.
I understand. That perspective makes sense to me. I didn’t read the piece in the same way you did: I felt like they also believed that the social engineering was at least “interesting”, even if they regretted it after the fact. I don’t agree; it’s pretty obvious to me that people are somewhat vulnerable because they assume good faith.
I understand where you are coming from, though, and I’ll amend my comment above.
It wasn't my perception that was the implication. I think you're reaching on that.