Seems like gaming piracy is really dying this time for sure. Most sites are compromised and untrustworthy, big teams are retiring, the one remaining denuvo cracker that i heard of is apparently psychotic... It doesn't seem like it bodes well
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54698 readers
406 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Isn't just piracy that's dying, in my opinion, it's gaming itself, or, at least, gaming as it used to be.
Besides Denuvo being a technology so bad that actually makes the original game worst than a copy without it, everyday comes with tons and tons of games with a pay-to-win approach or some kind of PBE. The only new, original and fun games nowadays are the indies, and it will be that way for a long time, as the industry seems to focus more and more in the mobile market since it's already bigger than the PC and console together.
Gaming is definitely not dying it is a huge market. I don't agree with the direction it's heading though. But there are enough games released to keep my interest.
Gaming is definitely not dying it is a huge market.
Because of it I said "gaming as it used to be."
We need to start creating an AI for that as soon this might get too complex for a human to crack.
i really dont think ai is the solution to this problem. if humans made it, humans can crack it
No, any sufficiently advanced A.I can and will outclass humans. For example: there are chess A.I's that have beaten GM's as good as Magnus Carlsen on multiple occasions. The better an A.I gets at something the tougher it becomes to counter it. This is one of the biggest risks of A.I development that one day we might make something that makes us seem obsolete. On the positive side that day is really really far.
First: you're comparing Chess, what's a super simple algorithm, in what machines already "outclassed humans" like, years ago, with anything humans can do. That's is simplist and wrong.
Second: until today, the so called Artificial "Intelligence" were only capable of, by consulting a human made big catalogue of many things humans did, reproduce some parts of it or resume a little, what is not that difficult if you have a good synonyms dictionary and tons of human people training you on what is a decent resume and what isn't. In resume, A."I." doesn't do anything that people didn't did before, and, when it comes to write texts, it does something objectly worst, in a self-help level of writing. A."I." isn't creative.
Third: still, there are objectly a bunch of works that are under attack by A."I.". The thing about this works is that: or they were obviously possible to be automated before, or they are pointless, or they've been doing automatically (a.k.a. alienabally) by the workers, or all the above.
Fourth: the big guys who are trying to sell everyone the idea that A."I." will "outclass all of us" want to believe that there's no need for human work to generate income, what's is materialistically and economically not true at all. They say they dream of a world without hard work, actually they mean a world without us, working class people. But they're wrong, they are still depending on our existence as a class and always will be until the day there will be no classes anymore.