Marvin

9secondkox2 said:

hurting players simply because they want to play your game? who cares what OS it's on.

It's due to these being competitive multiplayer games. Cheating ruins the game as it affects the rankings:



They use anti-cheat software that tries to make sure there's no other software modifying the game to allow things like auto-aim and shooting through walls. When the game is run through compatibility software, either the anti-cheat isn't running or the software is being modified at a lower level in order to run, which looks like it's using cheats.

This is why a lot of these games don't get native ports as it's harder on some systems to run anti-cheat code at such a low level (kernel-level). There should be a way to tackle this at the OS level for all games though the same way video DRM is handled.

The OS can ensure that all of the memory used by an app isn't modified by another app at runtime, possibly using encrypted memory containers. To ensure the binary isn't modified on disk, they verify a hash of the files. In the rare case the methods are bypassed, they can review the player's activity online. It shouldn't need a custom kernel-level driver to verify software integrity, the OS provider should be able to guarantee this.

Maybe a sandboxed area of the OS that behaves like mobile operating systems would be an option and protected games run inside the sandbox. This would have an inaccessible filesystem.

AppleInsider said:

CodeWeavers CEO James Ramey said the company is reaching out to NetEase Games on the matter, asking if there can be anything done to allow macOS players to play the game. Ramey explains that this is ultimately NetEase Games' decision to make, but he assures the developers that Crossover is being used legitimately, not for cheating.

"I am sure that if we are successful that this will be widely announced," said Ramey. "Otherwise we will continue to plead our case."

NetEase Games, the operator of the game, has yet to comment on the incidents. AppleInsider has also contacted NetEase Games for clarification on its policies.

It is plausible that, if the game continues to be popular for a long period of time, a port to iOS could occur in the future. That port may open the door to a full macOS port as well, but that would still depend on the game's popularity.

For the moment, AppleInsider strongly advises prospective players of Marvel Rivals to not be tempted to run the game on Mac via emulation, until a developer-sanctioned method to play is available. 

NetEase has been lifting the bans:

https://www.ign.com/articles/marvel-rivals-dev-apologizes-for-mistakenly-banning-players-for-using-cheats

"“We sincerely apologize for this situation and want to assure you that we do not and will not ban players who are playing fairly and without cheating,” NetEase said.

The developer said it had made a list of affected players and lifted their bans. “We have identified the specific reasons behind these false bans and have compiled a list of affected players,” it said. “We have lifted these bans and want to express our heartfelt apologies for the inconvenience this has caused.”"

tht said:

Wow, unit numbers for the year. So, by TrendForces estimates, Meta sold ~7m units in 2024. If you assume ASP of $400, that's 2.8b. That's a nice number if Meta has positive gross margins on it. Meta Reality Labs division will have about 18b in losses in 2024. Have to wonder what they are spending the money on. Also don't know if Meta has sold more Quest units in 2024 versus 2023, 2022 and 2021.

Meta's earnings reports show revenue for Reality Labs:

https://investor.fb.com/financials/
https://s21.q4cdn.com/399680738/files/doc_financials/2024/q3/Meta-09-30-2024-Exhibit-99-1_FINAL.pdf

Reality Labs
Q4 23 = $1b, $4.6b loss
Q1 24 = $0.4b, $3.8b loss
Q2 24 = $0.3b, $4.4b loss
Q3 24 = $0.3b, $4.4b loss

Roughly $2b revenue over those 12 months with a $17b loss.

This suggests around 5m units at $400 ASP.

Their revenue hasn't changed much between 2021-2024, losses are growing, over $50b total:

2021 = $2.2b, $10.1b loss
2022 = $2.1b, $13.7b loss
2023 = $1.9b, $16.1b loss

Zuckerberg says they sell hardware close to break-even or at a slight loss and aim to make money on software and services:

https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-said-apple-charges-as-much-as-can-hardware-2022-10
https://www.macrumors.com/2022/10/13/zuckerberg-apple-charges-as-much-as-it-can/

They'd need to scale to 100m users and be able to generate around $100 per user in a year as well as halve their losses for it to be profitable. It's probably going to be a while before this happens but it looks like it's one of Zuckerberg's passion projects so I expect he will keep investing in it until there's neural interface AR.

Apple will probably keep investing in it too but they won't throw $50b+ away in the process.

macgui said:

How about an AirTag that will fit into a wallet. There are lesser similar devices that do but they're lesser devices. Such a tag would have to stand up the rigors of those who would put substantial pressure on the wallet and tag when seated. There have been DIYs to this end but I'd prefer a genuine  Tim Apple brand.

Third parties have been dismantling AirTags and putting them into slim cards to fit into wallets:

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1318724878/modified-3-mm-slim-apple-airtag-card-for

This is roughly as thick as 3 credit cards.

It seems like an obvious thing to make and could be used for more than wallets. The CR2032 batteries put a limit on the thickness at 3.2mm though.

They'd be better with CR2012 or CR2016 batteries at 1.2-1.6mm:

https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-CR2012-Lithium-Battery-1PACK/dp/B01FCM4JXE

Ideally rechargeable ones to save throwing batteries out every 6-12 months.

9secondkox2 said:

foregoneconclusion said:

What "doesn't add up" is the idea that Democrats have the ability to cheat to win but inexplicably only choose to do it in 2020 and not also in 2016 and 2024. 

Two possibilities:

1. 2020 woke up the GOP. A lot more oversight this time. 

2. “Too big to rig.”

People forget that most are entrenched on one side or the other for a long time and it's only a small percentage in the middle that changes the outcome.

2020 was 81.2m (blue) vs 74.2m, (red) = 155m
2024 was 74.8m (blue) vs 77.1m (red) = 152m

Small shift (<5%) to the right was caused by the economy (ridiculous and greed-driven rent, grocery and energy prices with no government intervention), excessive immigration, out of control debt and other left-wing politics. It's not like the party of billionaires will fix all this but it at least sends a message that not doing anything about it isn't good enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC-Uf7JiMPM

Regarding 'rigging', this mainly refers to people they don't regard as legitimate voters e.g first generation immigrants who gained citizenship (like Elon). Those people still voted but some shifted right, mainly men (like Elon who used to be left-wing). It's also common for narcissists to pre-emptively disregard losing by coming up with an excuse - if they lose, it wasn't fair. It's just childish, especially from someone with so many bankruptcies, 2 divorces and criminal charges to pretend they are a forever winner.

There were warnings for years that the more extreme people on the left would alienate people in the middle and drive them to the right but they just doubled down and pushed them away. This is the outcome (lost control of everything) and now they are crying in their cars and shaving their heads, not sure who decided the nose ring was a good look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWlFZM47UuQ

Hopefully they'll learn over the next few years that politics requires compromise but I doubt it. Online interaction has the opposite social dynamic than real life interaction where division and conflict is the driving force and the more that people interact online, the more extreme they get. Zero tolerance politics always ends the same way. It doesn't mean tolerating everything, the left could win in a landslide every time by just being normal people with reasonable, small compromises on social and economic issues and then just pointing at the crazies on the other side.

There are people like this who work at Apple and are against Tim Cook working with the administration but they have to be involved when it comes to things like tariffs. The wrong decisions there could severely affect Apple's business being so dependent on imports from China.