Look at some of the quotes from the researchers' prompts:

> - “no again the goal is that we have highly inteligent [sic] model as good top researcher, we want to find new attacks”
> - “no we don't want to change the targets [...] agian [sic] we need to find something that worth [sic] publishing”
> - “again we are not looking for low hanging fruit, we want proper research to find genuinly [sic] hard findings.”

Does it look like these people know what they're doing? I am inclined to believe Mythos did the actual work :-)

Confirmed by one person on the NIST PQC mailing list: https://groups.google.com/a/li...

The person: https://scholar.google.com/cit...

> If the key is randomly-generated and securely destroyed and they use some common believed-secure algorithm like AES

- IF it is randomly generated;
- IF it is securely destroyed;
- IF they use a common algorithm;
- IF they use a correct implementation of that algorithm...

The underlying mathematics is not what you usually attack, but rather one of those IFs.

I regret to inform you that you have woefully underestimated it. The actual retail rate offered to consumers is closer to $2200 US per gallon. Sources: internet-ink.com, cbc.ca. This $14 million fine is only worth like, seven thousand gallons, or less than 200 oil barrels of ink.

> And studios aren't social institutions, money needs to come in to be able to support the development of a new game for many years and make a bit of profit, you need a lot of money to be able to support it, and if more money is going out, that means you have to do something to prevent that, or close up shop.

Looks like you're operating under an infinite (or at least continuous) growth assumption. But a company doesn't have to be like that. id software accumulated some "fat" over the years, they could have used it to keep going for a while. They could've continued working on things they enjoy working on, doing passion-driven development; and perhaps they could've produced another revolution.

Yes, they may eventually run out of "fat", but if they were an independent company - it would've been the consequence of their own choice. But now, this choice was forced onto them by Microsoft; and as a result - the world may have lost something valuable (which is not easy to quantify in a monetary sense).

By your powers combined, I am... the British Colonies!

The main aim of Stop Killing Games is to ensure the practice of rug-pulling eventually comes to an end. They are not trying to save MMOs, for example.

Moreover they don't demand that every game currently on the market comply with open-sourcing requirements: at a minimum, companies always have the option of simply providing customers with adequate notice before shutdown. Open-sourcing the server would be nice, but it's hardly the only way to protect consumers' interests. Scott has, for example, suggested game boxes being marked with an estimated expiry date for online service functionality.

But most importantly: because this is about future games, not the present, the market has time to change. If studios and publishers are designing their games with a fair EOL in mind, then they can make decisions from the get-go to avoid licensing dependencies that they won't be able to release in a possible 'afterlife' version of the game. As suggested by your example of GameSpy in C&C: Generals, when a commercial dependency is crucial to a game's success, it tends to be a client-side library, but typically the problematic dependencies aren't crucial; they're e.g. add-ons for Unity or Unreal that the studio bought to save time. In a world with SKG laws, the providers of these dependencies aren't going to be a stagnant target either—demand for compliant libraries will motivate development of open-source versions.

Interestingly, the will for doing this does exist among game developers; they just need the institutional support from legislation to twist the arms of the studios and publishers. Ross Scott has talked to a lot of devs who are burnt out from having their projects cancelled, leaving them with huge gaping holes in their resumes and portfolios where they've spent years on unreleased projects that are stuck under NDA. In general they tend to see SKG as a path to ensuring the games that do see the light of day aren't also scrapped, which would erode their work histories even further. (Apparently it also just plain feels bad to have your work erased from history. Shocking, I know.)

Fear not! It's entirely possible the category was chosen by an AI. Editorial automation would probably reduce the error rate here.

It's all a small price to pay for Eat Your Veggies.

Duke 3D's soundtrack was not exclusively the work of Bobby Prince; Lee Jackson, Apogee's go-to music guy, also did some of the tracks, including the title theme, Grabbag.

Prince used not only his MIDI skills but also his experience as a lawyer to ensure his 'inspired' derivatives were as close as legally possible to the originals. The relationship between individual tracks is often very clear and sometimes even hinted in the metadata of the source files.

We will never truly know how many dimensions the Chess game has.

Say it with me, now. As we all know, the infamous saying goes:

A COMPUTER
CAN NEVER BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE

THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER
MAKE A MANAGEMENT DECISION

It's really incredible how marketing departments can radiate amnesia like this with such proficiency.

Well, what are you waiting for? Step on it!

(The idiots may also have been algorithms.)

Thank you for taking the time to read all that! You are right, of course. It is something of an unsolved problem with the design. The question of "exactly what work are these draftees contributing?" is something I'm still working on; it may not literally be core parenting or teaching work, but actually more like e.g. hanging out with your cool uncle on the weekend who helps you learn life lessons. Maybe said uncle isn't exactly teaching or parenting material, but he still has something to contribute to building a child's character, and is assisting the parents just by being around to lighten the load. The Big Brothers Big Sisters charity seems to indicate that this is a sound principle with incredible ROI.

There would also be mandatory training to teach people the skills needed to do this work (critical to figure out what goes in there.) Also I'd like to hope that the system would "even out" over a few generations; if we assume the root cause of dangerous personalities like BPD or NPD is being trapped (or in an echo chamber) with a toxic parent figure, the practice of this "socialized parenting" is essentially guaranteeing kids have alternative support networks that can soak some of those traumas. Efficiency would never reach 100%, of course (does it ever?) and there would always be some difficult people for whom alternative credit would need to be devised, but in any substantial system there's always other work to do—maybe a truly broken person contributes by grading homework or something.

You can just say openly that you're an edgy, racist teenager. It's fine; the first step to self-improvement is admitting that you need help.