Do you say this about all QoL updates? I’m not going to use this and also think Google sucks in general, but this is such a benign, optional little feature for people who might find it more convenient. Isn’t that what development should be all about?
To be fair to you, I thought they were talking about AWS S3 at first and was very confused until I read the article.
Yeah I know about that, like I indicated in my comment up there. How in the world do conservatives factor into that situation? That’s what the commentor above said and I’m curious.
What in the world happened? I played a lot in the first few weeks and remember the Creek situation as just being some people who played that planet constantly. How tf did real world politics come into that situation specifically?
I think it’s both for me, which I think is what you might be saying as well. I would absolutely push the button to create the copy, or whatever, because I think I would derive satisfaction from creating a life (identical to mine, no less) that was free of the circumstance I was in, which must have been dire. However, I definitely don’t consider that instance “me” even if I do consider the copy a legitimate, separate version of “me”, so I don’t feel that I have perpetuated my own instance, leaving me in whatever fight-or-flight terror I was in to cause the scenario in the first place.
I found that the tradeoff came in the form of being more explicit, thus requiring fewer comments and less explicit readmes. Developers who normally struggled with naming things well would do better in PowerShell since it kinda “forced” them into the habit and structure. I know fans of Go (myself included) generally like that it takes that concept to the extreme. It fit my needs well at a time when I had a team of juniors to manage and teach.
Overall though, nothing wrong hating that strictness or verbosity! Lots of good options that support the reverse extreme and more moderate ones.
You’re right that Bash is among the worst options available, but it is common and what our friend above indicated he had experience with. I think your points are all valid, but I also find that most professional situations don’t offer much choice in the matter anyway. I used PowerShell because it was my company’s standard and there were 10 years of technical debt built around it. I got to know its ins and outs because of that and find some of them neat.
I don’t think anyone should take any of my messages as saying PowerShell is best in class for any particular use cases, but I do enjoy using it. I’m all Python and Golang now anyway 🙃
Oh and that’s somewhere where PowerShell really shines! Check out the examples on the docs page for some examples and see how easy they are to read and write compared to sed/awk/etc.
I also think PowerShell being object-based instead of string-based gives it flexibility for those of us who have experience with object-oriented programming languages. Being able to ship around objects to functions, splatting, etc are huge value adds for me personally.
Again though, sooooo subjective! Some people will legit hate that it’s object-based and hate the syntax. The world supports all kinds of developers and we’re all making cool stuff, so it’s all good!
Not hating, but you should really try it out before forming an opinion. PowerShell Core is multi platform and if you value readable scripts at all, PowerShell is heads and shoulders over bash. I know all of us admins are proud of our bash scripts, but bash reads like hieroglyphics to anyone who didn’t write it. PowerShell has noun verb syntax and just heaps of syntax sugar. Scripts, even more than code imo, needs that readability for fast debugging and maintenance.
But hey, opinions on languages and such are highly, highly subjective. No skin off my nose if you just don’t like it at all.
And PowerShell, as an addendum
I’m not arguing that anything is good or bad. I’m all for people modding their single player games. I’ve played Frankenstein Skyrim myself many times. I’m a big fan. All that said, this game has a multiplayer element through Galactic Warfare and matchmaking co-op. I think anticheat is entirely reasonable in those scenarios. You can say the multiplayer-lite GW feature isn’t worth the limitation (I would probably share that view), but AC is not evil in all situations. It’s just kind of entwined with certain online multiplayer features, to avoid the equivalent of “Boaty McBoatFace” happening when trolls hit critical mass in your game.
I’m a DevOps engineer by trade, and do a lot of work with network security. “Never trust anything on the other side of a connection” is fine and all as a rule of thumb, but real solutions have more nuance than that. What is “trust”? Should I just never connect to anything? Obviously we have to, so we’re already assuming some level of “trust”. There are always degrees of trust, and a peer to peer game server is a higher degree than browsing a site hosted by a server, is what I think the developer meant.
Now, I agree with you, this shouldn’t be some full substitute for proper network security or whatever, but I don’t think they’ve given any indication that’s the case. I can also speak from experience that certain choices in tooling are thrust upon dev teams at times, for cost or “political” reasons. It’s also fully possible it’s just a bad call from a techie who worked on a prior project with it or something.
Hey, I’m not arguing that mtx are a good thing for consumers or anything like that, and I’m with you that they’ve had an adverse effect on progression systems. I just see the logic in their reasoning for having anticheat. Anything client side could be subverted by those same cheats, and it still wouldn’t address the second issue of the impact on the shared galactic conflict feature. All that said, this was a poor choice of implementation and I don’t think it will pay off for them. I don’t think you’d be seeing the same backlash if it was something like EAC. Maybe from the techy crowd on Lemmy, but not from the average consumer.
The developer lays out their reasons:
HELLDIVERS 2 is a co-op/PvE game, why do we even need Anti-Cheat?
That’s a great question, and there’s two related but separate points to it:
First, we want everyone to have a great time playing HELLDIVERS 2, with friends, ex-friends or randoms. What we’ve seen in some of our and others’ games is that rampant cheating tends to have a very negative effect on players openness to playing, especially with randoms.
There’s an anecdote from HELLDIVERS 1 I’d like to share:
When we released HELLDIVERS 1 on PC there was effectively no anti-cheat implemented. Additionally HELLDIVERS 1 uses a peer-to-peer networking model, and that means, from a security perspective, each game client will blindly trust each other.
Shortly after release we noticed there was a cheat going around which granted 9999 research samples. Unfortunately any non-cheaters in the same mission would also be granted 9999 research samples. These non-cheating players now had their entire progression ruined through no fault of their own.
We were able to deal with a lot of these early issues without using a third party solution, but it took a lot of work, and most of it was done reactively.
Incidentally HELLDIVERS 2 also uses a peer-to-peer networking model, but this time around we’re trying to be more proactive and make sure everyone can play the intended experience.
Second is the Galactic War. There’s this huge metagame going in the cloud which all players (and game clients) participate in. Even though we have other countermeasures in place, a cracked game client could make it easier to disrupt the Galactic War, which would sour everyone’s experience
I think those are reasonable explanations for anti cheat having a place in their game. I’ve been hit with that example scenario before in other games and it just ruins the fun entirely for a lot of progression-driven players, like me.
What I haven’t seen a good answer for is the reason for this AC solution specifically. It seems like they could have gone for something much more popular and compatible than what they did. If it was for cost reasons, I think that’s a short sighted decision. Regardless, it has me thinking twice about a game I was fairly certain about trying, so that’s disappointing.
They didn’t do one in this case, but I have heard stories of these sorts of malicious actors paying people stateside or elsewhere to take the video interviews. I’ve had to do ID checks on video in recent-ish interviews.