Sure! So some students of mine were working on a multiplayer video game that was started by a different group of students the previous semester. The first group of students made a design choice that, to over-simplify, basically tracked achievements and milestones on the client side and then synchronized those achievements to the server. Players could cheat the system by sending malicious packets of achievements to the server. Some achievements could only be completed by a single person in the game, so this was a big problem for the 2nd group of students to overcome. Faced with the choice of rearchitecting the game to be more authoritative on the server and less resilient to frequent disconnections, which affected some aspects of the game, or creating a logical and verifiable sequence of in-game events on the server side. The students went with the latter, and implemented a Lamport clock using a blockchain to verify the authenticity of the events, and prevent a rogue student from updating the game later to give themself a bonus. Basically, along with needing an authoritative sequence of events that is protected from user interference, it also needed to be protected from developer interference.
It was kinda similar to that situation a few years back of the EVE online developers playing the game and giving their guild members certain bonuses and special in-game items. The solution there was to fire the malicious developers, but I can't exactly fire an entire class of students from an educational project.
EDIT: What seems to be the problem here? I was asked to name a situation where a blockchain would be useful and I did? It's a computer data structure, there are pros and cons that are context dependent like any other data structure. It I so weird to me to receive downvotes because of the politics surrounding a data structure.
How can you trust that the database is really append only? Blockchain provides a way to verify the state of the database and the ordering of the transactions. Beyond that, not much benefit to be had. However, for certain situations, that is a very big benefit!
Actually it's in honor of my brother's birthday because he actually was 13 when I started using the account name. (I am a few years younger) I didn't learn about the HH thing until many years later, but I keep it anyway because thinking about my brother makes me happy whenever I notice it.
It's not woke!! Helldivers 1 and 2 is just a fantasy game based loosely on my favorite movie: Starship Troopers. And if you think Starship Troopers is some sort of woke propaganda, then I can't help you. Don't try to ruin a perfectly good game with pandering wokeness just like you all tried to do with Star Trek.
I don't think that you fully understand what the word "prefer" means. I said that I don't want to give up access to my third-party apps if possible, not that I would never consider a factory reset.
It might help to grab a dictionary before you start policing the internet from your porn account.
"I wish my cancer riddled grandmother wasn't suffering."
"Well, you could always just kill her! Then she would feel anything!"
???
Even more so, I didn't even disagree or say that they were wrong. Just that I'd prefer not to do that because, along with my grandmother not suffering, I also want her to be alive. Contrary to popular belief, humans are capable of wanting multiple things at the same time. Have you ever been thirsty while you had to pee?
IANAL either, but I'm pretty sure you are correct. I put it in another comment somewhere, but I'm more upset about not being given a choice to refuse the change rather than the actual change itself. I don't mind signing the waiver at amusement parks, or to buy a car with no warranty. I just want to know what I'm agreeing to, and I don't like folks pulling the rug out from under me or changing the deal.
The situation feels like if I were to drop out of college, I would be given electroshocks until I'd forgotten anything learned in class.
This is the point that I've been stuck on. There doesn't seem to be clear, easily available, documentation on which models those are. However, I have been able to find many ramble-ly "old man yells at cloud" forum & social media posts (You know, like this one!) when a model doesn't allow it.
IKR? I've been pretty happy with their service up until now. Sure, the home menu ads were certainly annoying, but were easily ignoreable and didn't interfere with normal use of the TV.
It's weird, I don't mind waiving rights when I know what I'm in for. (I'll sign the release form when I do something inherently dangerous.) However, I don't like having the deal changed out from under me, and I certainly don't like not being given a choice. I should have had the ability to hit decline, then forfeit my right to access roku on-demand services and maybe even firmware updates. But, whatever I had installed and working with 3rd party services shouldn't be affected. They shouldn't be allowed to disable the hardware. Honestly, and I mean speaking from the heart here, I probably would have just clicked OK without much thought about it if they'd at least included the disagree button.
Sure! So some students of mine were working on a multiplayer video game that was started by a different group of students the previous semester. The first group of students made a design choice that, to over-simplify, basically tracked achievements and milestones on the client side and then synchronized those achievements to the server. Players could cheat the system by sending malicious packets of achievements to the server. Some achievements could only be completed by a single person in the game, so this was a big problem for the 2nd group of students to overcome. Faced with the choice of rearchitecting the game to be more authoritative on the server and less resilient to frequent disconnections, which affected some aspects of the game, or creating a logical and verifiable sequence of in-game events on the server side. The students went with the latter, and implemented a Lamport clock using a blockchain to verify the authenticity of the events, and prevent a rogue student from updating the game later to give themself a bonus. Basically, along with needing an authoritative sequence of events that is protected from user interference, it also needed to be protected from developer interference.
It was kinda similar to that situation a few years back of the EVE online developers playing the game and giving their guild members certain bonuses and special in-game items. The solution there was to fire the malicious developers, but I can't exactly fire an entire class of students from an educational project.
EDIT: What seems to be the problem here? I was asked to name a situation where a blockchain would be useful and I did? It's a computer data structure, there are pros and cons that are context dependent like any other data structure. It I so weird to me to receive downvotes because of the politics surrounding a data structure.