25 years ago when I was a teenager I had a terrible problem with CD cases getting broken and thrown away. I would have those CD stack cases filled with loose random CDs and no keys. I believe it is still around but GameCopyWorld (just google it) is how I was forced to install.
Honestly, I should have just taped paper on the CD top with the keys, but I was a kid and didn’t think very far down the line.
Is this meant as a rhetorical question or are you seriously asking?
Denuvo CEO: “Well, actually, it makes things faster. We streamline the process through several other processes to output the same result. We like to think of it as a fun multiplier. That’s how Denuvo math works here.”
One thing to remember with VirusTotal is that it should only be used as a “tool of consensus”. A lot of AV solutions on their list will false flag binaries presumably to instill fear and get people to buy their solutions over more reputable AV providers. You want the AV that works the best which many people would equate to the most flagging (as logically incomplete as that may be).
If you are seeing 66 flags and many of those being from reputable vendors, then I would say that what they show is likely accurate. Accuracy and relevance being two different things. 100% accuracy on keygen tools doesn’t mean that it is a relevant flag to what you’re trying to do.
You could try software solutions like LOKI (the IoC scanner) or Azul to test specific binaries, though. I believe LOKI is just doing static analysis, but Azul I know automates the sandboxing.
Denuvo’s CEO (I think it was) tried to explain that it couldn’t impact performance, but that’s basically impossible. They are pushing parts of the game through a VM and doing encryption/decryption on the fly. That’s going to generate significant overhead. Whether it were to get pushed to GPU over CPU, blah blah, their DRM is still adding additional hoops for the machine to jump through.
Multiple people mentioned there are on the Epstein list. They probably misheard “kitty exploit” as “kiddy exploit”.
And what did you actually do?
The fact that all of your posts have been involved in sleazy ad campaigns doesn’t give any legitimacy to this one. It’s just digital begging using a false AI sob story.
Yeah, I’m going to have some doubts about the “AI replaced me” part. My company works heavily with AI now and no one has lost their job. What their job was is EXTREMELY important here. Did they make birdhouses at a financial firm?
Nevermind. I found him: https://www.bizprofile.net/ca/woodland-hills/theseus-games-inc https://www.themarque.com/profile/justin-berenbaum His LinkedIn connects Thesus Games with Xsolla.
Yeah, he wasn’t “replaced by AI”.
NOTE: If you’re thinking that maybe it is just a dev working for Thesus Games, you can check the comment history on that account like: https://lemmy.world/comment/24338752 Name changes have to go through leadership meaning this was Justin speaking.
I’m not going to that site because I don’t want malware.
I’m guessing the titles include such classics as:
I don’t see how game streaming at least in the US market would ever work without higher performance infrastructure anyway. Functionally, it’s not a matter of bandwidth but latency. Xbox servers are centralized regionally, so even with latency within WebRTC range (like sub-20ms), cross-country traversal can add up to 30ms which makes games feel awful in terms of control.
That’s wild. So basically a user asking for compensation is treated as the same threat level as that user walking into their offices armed.
That “considered reasonable according to social norms” is REALLY open ended, too. That sounds a lot like the social norm they’ve been trying to push for “you won’t own anything and you’ll like it”.
It has gotten to the point where devs are just being asked to disprove a negative, though.
“Ok, well you didn’t use AI in what you showed but you used it somewhere else.” Short of devs wearing body cams to try and prove literally every step in every process, people are going to have to have some faith that developers aren’t using it.
I mean you’re asking for more evidence without providing any yourself.
Saying “rare” or “antique” books are being destroyed requires more evidence. Since your stance is that is true, name one rare book they destroyed. That should be an easy answer if you have any evidence. Just name one.
I’ll wait…
So there have been a bunch of articles about this lately. They play loose with descriptions in their titles. Here is one example: https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-companies-destroying-rare-books
“Antique books”. One, notice they don’t mention any actual title or ISBN? Two, these are bought through a book reseller (like Book Depot or ThriftBooks), meaning that “antique” just means “used”.
In my personal library collection I have new books, I have used books, and I have rare books. These are not the same thing.
There is a game that is upcoming that I was interested in that clearly used generative AI in a gameplay trailer. I should say I’m not pro/anti generative AI. I’m right down the middle, I see the issues and the potential, so the presence of AI itself for me isn’t a deal killer (Crimson Desert for example).
But, the issue is that this game falsely represented what is going to be in the game. The lighting isn’t planned to be that good. The model rigging isn’t meant to be that fluid. Etc, etc. The problem is a matter of dishonesty.
If a developer uses generative AI for test assets and placeholders, I don’t see that as an issue (especially if they admit to and own that fact). If they use that material for trailers to showcase their work when that will not be part of the work, then that is a different story as that introduces that dishonesty.
If you can purchase a book at a bookstore, then it can be assumed there are sufficient copies in production. They aren’t buying rare books here.
There is a glaringly obvious issue with this article that I see a lot of people in the comments seem to have missed:
Only one copy of any given book exists The pretense to this entire thing is that AI companies are destroying the books both because of the process used AND to prevent competitors from accessing the book. There is more than ONE copy of that book. If you buy a book, that doesn’t prevent me from also buying that book. You can not like AI for a number of reasons, but this is just stupid.
NOTE: If destroying the book actually prevented competitors from accessing it, that means that all of these AI companies are only going out on the weekends to used bookstores looking for good deals on second hand books.
I’m just going to end this here with a final comment:
I know I’m not going to change your mind on this. It doesn’t matter what evidence I provide, you just aren’t ready to have that conversation. And that’s ok.
This has never really been about you. It’s been about all the others. It’s about showing how while there is a lot of AI hype, there is an equal amount of anti-AI hype. Misinformation is misinformation. Doesn’t matter your stance.
We have for 4 years now both simultaneously and perpetually been 3 months away from the AI bubble popping and 3 months away from AI stealing everyone’s job.
So, for those that see this insane comment history, understand as well intentioned as some of these posters are, most everything they say is completely fabricated. They are just passing it along without knowing any better.
Because now you can build it into a franchise. Intergalactic: <INSERT_TITLE>