We live in a terrifying time

Well, the nanobots that you are describing do not exist, so they aren’t what is making the time terrifying

True, however TLS does not encrypt the hostname/IP address of the servers that you are connecting to, so your ISP can monitor the servers you visit. A VPN provides an encrypted tunnel for your traffic, so your ISP can only see that you are communicating with the VPN server. However, the VPN provider can see the hostname/IP of the servers in order to forward the traffic to its destination.

Ideally the VPN provider does not monitor or keep logs of the connections, but this is not always the case. A VPN offers privacy from the ISP or from other clients connected to the local network when using public WiFi.

It can also provide some level of anonymity, because the server that you are connecting to will only be able to see the VPN IP address connecting to them, instead of your home IP address. It is possible to still be identified by other means besides your IP address, like using cookies or browser fingerpinting.

😍 god I love open source ❤️

• From my R7 240

This is how I do it, yeah the first couple glasses were kinda weird but then once you’ve experienced it and know what to expect, it really isn’t bad at all.

Oh believe me, I know about psyllium husk. Best shit of my entire life. The kind you genuinely have to resist the prideful urge to take a picture of.

Way too late

deleted by creator

I imagine there would be regulations preventing one single individual billionaire from pre-purchasing 40% of the global supply of RAM.

Lol what?? 5800X3D was like $250 when I bought mine. I wouldn’t say it was cheap but its defintely not a “money is no issue” kind of number.

Edit: alright rereading your comment, you were probably talking about people who want to buy a 5800X3D right now with today’s price, and not just anyone who was ever in the market for 5800X3D-level CPUs

Cryptocurrency has transaction fees. They start out as the newly mined coins, paid from the pool of unmined coins. Once the finite number of coins have been mined and that pool is empty, the miners will begin charging fees for each transaction directly to the users making the transactions.

They genuinely don’t make sense as “currency”. Having a public, permanent ledger of all transactions is pretty bad. Buy groceries, pay your rent, and get paid in crypto? Now your landlord, employer, and grocer can see every transaction you’ve ever made, how much your account is worth, and how much you spend. Wonderful!

Sure, you could use a service to obfuscate your transactions, except oopsies, you’ve just reinvented centralized payment processors but worse! Wasn’t the whole purpose decentralization?? It doesn’t even solve the problem its designed to be a solution for.

Cryptocurrency sucks because it just doesn’t make any sense at a fundamental level. That’s not even getting into the economic problems, like deflationary currency, or technical problems, like the exponential cost of hosting a node or the fact that it can only be scaled up to handle at most a teeny tiny fraction of a percent of transactions that a service like Visa handles every day.

What is actually a good currency? Cash.

how do you think COULD anti cheat catch such a contraption?

Server-side analysis of player behavior. It’s difficult and a mostly losing battle, but that’s really the only option that could be effective.

“why dont these games work on linux?”

The games do work on Linux. Many of the games the author described were working with Linux perfectly until the companies arbitrarily made a policy decision to block Linux players from the games. The anti-cheat is what does not work on Linux, for the reasons the author described, however the anti-cheat also does not actually work on Windows either, because it does not lessen cheating in these games. It doesn’t even prevent cheats that use traditional methods that kernel-level anti-cheat was designed to stop, for example there are many videos of cheaters showing off wallhacks and on-device aimbots in Battlefield 6 on launch day. The anti-cheat was defeated in less than 24 hours.

how is such a contraption relevant to a kernel driver on another machine?

Such a “contraption” is relevant because it is what people actually use for cheats in 2025, and because it defeats the anti-cheat described by the author, which they falsely claim is effective at stopping cheaters.

I’m responding to the article you posted.

instead of staying on topic, you diverge the reader to some contraption that as you say doesnt even run code on the machine we are hypothetically talking about

This is simply the current state of video game cheats. It’s not “as I say”; it is. To not even mention it while making claims like “anti-cheat is effective in games like Valorant (one of the most popular games for cheats)” is completely disingenous. Go ahead and search “valorant colorbot” in your choice of search engine.

Wow, what a bad article. “Companies can spy on you anyway so just give them kernel access” is interesting logic… They tout the effectiveness of kernel-level anti-cheat by claiming they’ve never encountered a cheater in Valorant. This is either a lie or ignorance that demonstrates the author isn’t qualified to write on the topic. A websearch will return pages of results and examples of working cheats for Valorant. Valorant is actually one of the easier games to write cheats for.

The majority of cheats used today are not impacted or detected in any way by kernel-level anti-cheat. At all. This is because most cheats are not even run on the machine that is used to run the game. Its wild that the author just doesn’t address this reality.

Cheaters use a 2nd computer, outside the reach of anti-cheat, that receives and processes the video-output of the game. The kernel-level anti-cheat can only monitor the system that the game actually runs on, which is completely clean. The 2nd computer runs either a colorbot (especially trivial and effective for games like Valorant that outline enemies in a solid color) or an AI object-recognition model (a quick search will return loads of specialized models trained for various online shooters) to identify the location of enemies on screen. It then generates mouse movements and inputs that are sent back to the 1st computer running the game, while the kernel-level anti-cheat is completely unaware.

These cheats are so efficient that they are commonly run on cheap hardware like an arduino or raspberry pi, and the code is often very simple, sometimes just ~100 lines of python. They can also be subtle and hard to notice by other players (probably why the author may believe they don’t play with cheaters in Valorant), providing aim-assist or click-assist that works with the cheater’s authentic mouse movements, and sometimes only kicks in when an enemy is already close to the cheater’s crosshair.

The author also cherry-picks examples to lead the reader into believing that all multiplayer games require Windows anti-cheat to be successful, while conveniently not mentioning the many competitive multiplayer games that do support Linux and are a perfectly normal online experience, eg Marvel Rivals, Overwatch, Halo Infinite, or Dota 2. Can the author explain why these games are completely fine without Windows anti-cheat?

They don’t challenge, and misrepresent, the invalid reasoning given by some of these game companies for why they arbitrarily chose to block access from Linux, for example Apex Legends claimed the majority of their cheaters use Linux. But wait, how could they know that if cheaters cannot be detected on Linux? So they must be successfully detecting Linux cheaters. Apex Legends’ actual reasoning for disallowing Linux directly contradicts the claims that the author is trying to make. It’s not true that the majority of their cheaters run Linux, of course. The majority of cheaters fly under the radar by running Windows and allowing the anti-cheat to verify a clean system, while just running the cheat software on a 2nd computer.

Paid $1.42/GB for 256GB DDR4 at the beginning of the year. 1 64GB kit of the same spec RAM now costs more than what I paid for all 256GB.

I think the feeling is the same, but the cause is a bit different. It is more similar to the dot-com bubble, where investors (for some reason?) are hyped to throw their money into AI. So if you can market yourself as AI, you can get big investments. Now that you have all that investor cash, you need to justify it somehow by using AI somewhere, anywhere.

Yeah I’m not saying its perfect and LLMs are non-deterministic so it could give you some crap. You’re not wrong and it’s good to be aware of that. How do you verify some random stranger from the internet wasn’t an asshole and gave you malicious config? 🤷 The best answer is probably just that OP should heed the warning on the website they linked, if they have no confidence or relevant skills:

THIS IS DELIBERATELY MALICIOUS SOFTWARE INTENDED TO CAUSE HARMFUL ACTIVITY. DO NOT DEPLOY IF YOU AREN’T FULLY COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

I pasted the OP unmodified into a local LLM and it gave me this:

Paste this (replace  192.168.1.105 with your Acer’s local IP from Part 1.3): 

server {
    listen 80;
    server_name wowsocool.com www.wowsocool.com;

    location / {
        proxy_pass http://192.168.1.105:8000/;
        proxy_set_header Host $host;
        proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr;
        proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for;
        proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-Proto $scheme;
    }

along with correct instructions on finding the IP of the laptop, port forwarding, and examples on how to set up DDNS for several popular providers. The only thing I can see that is wrong is the port should be 8893 instead of 8000 and they may want to proxy a different path to Nepenthes than /

Nah, they suck for programming or anything involving imperative logic, but they are pretty decent with things that are declarative, like config. I know people want to hate or deny any usefulness of LLM, and it doesn’t help that corpos insist on cramming LLMs into usecases that aren’t applicable to LLMs at all, but this is actually one of the things they are good at.

Ironically, an LLM could generate your nginx config or the guide you’ve requested

Actually, no. (The commenter I’m replying to has edited their comment to make it correct but completely irrelevant)