In America, the implementation of "moral rights" would unquestionably be a First Amendment violation.

You could take raylib (https://www.raylib.com) and bolt quickjs to that.

Arguably `printk(c byte)` should be `printck(c byte)`, and there should be a separate `printk(s []byte)` that handles an array of bytes.

If `printk` isn't implemented, then fall back to repeated calls of `printck`.

printk is the low level primitive for stdout printing and it's done this way as low level drivers generally only accept single characters.

There are upper level functions which simply takes a []byte and make fmt.Printf() work seamlessly and effectively when not printing on an UART that only takes a single character as output.

In TamaGo stdout is primarily used for debugging.

Most of the criticism is from bandwagoning and emotion rather than critical thought. People screech and gnash their teeth as if the evil developers and AI researchers are conspiring to destroy all art ever; it's quite frankly ridiculous.

You narrowed down the important aspect: personal freedom. It's not about AI, or cameras, or samplers, or synthesizers, or automated this or that, it's about giving people the freedom to do an activity how they want. It's terribly sad that others cry for the removal of this freedom and brand it as some noble cause.

>Chinese company threatens to prosecute copyright infringement

Ha! What a riot!

Rights for me but not for thee (goes both ways, I guess)

> Though some will very likely see this as some kind of "we don't control our computers anymore" move.

This is actually great because Microsoft "security" systems are notoriously easy to pwn. Workarounds will appear almost instantly.

Some of their stuff is but afaik xbox one and series x/s security model have not been broken. Obviously with those they have control of both the hardware and software making achieving it much easier.

Also with xbox one and series x/s they have the dev mode thingie lowering the interest in trying to hack the retail mode.

Yes. That's the point.

Not a rootkit but it does run at kernel level. If Vanguard is a rootkit then so is every anti-virus software (including Microsoft Defender which is on by default)

For example wikipedia description of a rootkit is

"A rootkit is a collection of computer software, typically malicious, designed to enable access to a computer or an area of its software that is not otherwise allowed (for example, to an unauthorized user) and often masks its existence or the existence of other software."

Vanguard does not mask its existence or the existence of other software nor does it get/give access to unauthorized users (you authorized it during install so by definition it is not unauthorized).

You don't manually give permissions to actual rootkits and they do their best to try and hide their existence.

And now AI can pretend to be input devices and need only video output. Kernel anti-cheat will be useless, and we'll be better off for it.

If your solution is bad, it doesn't deserve to work. Find something else.

Though if the AI is only as good as a human can be it is not that desirable. If the cheat does "super human" stuff it can be detected from behavior on the server side though this is after the fact from processing some replay files and thus not that "great" for players as the cheater gets to ruin at least one game.

> “You have to humanize [the cheat] to a degree where the advantage is imperceptible from what a human can do,” said Koskinas. “And once you’re there, you’re not really cheating enough to make it worth it for most users.”

But it is something they acknowledge will be an issue at some point in the future. Personally I think for now AI is way too slow as all the computation needs to happen in a few milliseconds to really be effective.

> Koskinas says he often worries about the use of AI for screen classification, to learn what human inputs look like, and how to reproduce them.

Since AI is everywhere you think it can be used to spot cheaters behaviours ?

The fundamental problem is that a subtle enough cheater is indistinguishable from a good enough human player.

Has been used for some time now.

https://x.com/deteccphilippe/status/1883945555102957617

> “Behavior” refers to an ML suspension (also called “server-sided” anti-cheat), often given to ragehackers.

But then you can just teach an AI to act like a human. Anti cheats in computer games is and always will be a cat and mouse game and AI/ML is just another tool in the bag of many tools (most bans seem to be fingerprinting based basically rebanning previous offenders who failed to get around the fingerprinting system)

Yes, that's the real solution, not rootkits.

AI certainly is not the solution. It has its issues, false positives, and there's barely any way to get support for that case as support agents are instructed with the AI being infallible.

They don't unless a judge orders them. It would be nonsensical to do so as lawsuits typically take years.