rdri

Windows 8.1 was great, you just have to enable the start button and disable Metro. It's basically a faster Windows 7.

Developers have full control over servers in most cases. A viable server side anti cheat should be a thing. For every case of "client sending false data to server" we can come up with a solution to verify that to some degree. Finally, it should help a lot to rely on player generated reports and utilize replay recording on server.

But no, developers will continue to rely on 3rd party solutions (made by people who never developed a game), even infect their co-op-only games with it, and complain "uh oh we can't handle Linux cheaters".

What's more interesting is that DRM developers don't have enough experience with game development. They have no idea how the game code should really work for everyone to not be affected by something that is injected inside (and they are injecting a lot - some executables get inflated by more than 1 gb I think).

That's also a lie. There is no way it would be impossible to remove the protection code (or parts of it) or make it not execute. That alone makes him a clown.

Seems it's fixed now?

It actually seems more like a windows 10 compatibility dilemma for developers. You can support older systems but it would require some effort. The problem is not the absence of some specific certificates, but the absence of newer ciphers altogether.

This does give security but also removes backwards compatibility with some clients that might be important for some websites.

Hard disagree on denuvo. If it's no problem for you then you must have tons of experience in re. Which puts you into some 1%-ish group. Depends on the type of mods you do of course.

You can. Google steamless.

Steam DRM is nothing like stuff people should be aware of. Ask any modder for confirmation.

There is still plenty of fish for advertisers, sadly.

the messages are decrypted on the server

What you said means they can be decrypted on the server. But there is no proof of that happening in the past. People got into problems not because someone uncovered their content in telegram, but because that content was effectively public from the beginning.

You switched the topic of the discussion. My original comment stands, as it corrects some part of your first comment.

I didn't suggest anyone to use telegram.

They have repeatedly worked with governments and worked against the interests of their users.

Even though those allegations are arguable, I know what you mean. And those cases don't involve compromising the actual encryption from what I understand.