Riot Games wins lawsuit against cheaters - end of botting?

Kei143·Mar 6, 2017·36 votes·5,251 views

Riot Games awarded $10 million in lawsuit against cheat service

Tldr - Riot wins lawsuit against cheating service provider for $10million. Cheating service will cease to continue development on their programs.

So will this be the end of botting / scripting? Doubt it. I'm sure there are other smaller companies out there that would make scripts / bots, but if one of the biggest is gone, then it should be a large problem out of Riot's hair.

Rest is just to slowly weed out the existing programs and stop distribution on them or ban the remaining users.

I wonder if this will stop the bot complaints in ARAM / Coop VS AI games.

93 Comments

Nobody1111Mar 6, 201719 votes

when it was posted in GD the curator had this response:

{quoted}

The money isn't as important as the fact that Riot gained control of all their related websites. This means they have access to their entire user/subscriber base and their information. This can potentially be used to support a massive scripting ban-wave against anyone that has ever used their services.

h5LYF41LamMar 6, 20171 votes

of course they won the lawsuit riot not only owns the game and every change made on it without riot's permision is illegal but riot also own's recorded footage of the game .

vampirekid13Mar 6, 20178 votes

{quoted}

Tldr - Riot wins lawsuit against cheating service provider for $10million. Cheating service will cease to continue development on their programs.

So will this be the end of botting / scripting? Doubt it. I'm sure there are other smaller companies out there that would make scripts / bots, but if one of the biggest is gone, then it should be a large problem out of Riot's hair.

Rest is just to slowly weed out the existing programs and stop distribution on them or ban the remaining users.

I wonder if this will stop the bot complaints in ARAM / Coop VS AI games.

its just a public victory, it doesnt change anything, the company that "lost" will not pay 10 million, and will continue to operate, not even change brand, just change parent company. all the other companies will also not care about it, since most are based outside the US there is no way to enforce such a ridiculous court order anyway.

also, blizzard already tried this. it took years before managing to take down blizzhackers in court, and even then all of the actual script writers just moved to another site and continued doing what they did before anyway.

Awkward CouchMar 6, 20171 votes

{quoted}

its just a public victory, it doesnt change anything, the company that "lost" will not pay 10 million, and will continue to operate, not even change brand, just change parent company. all the other companies will also not care about it, since most are based outside the US there is no way to enforce such a ridiculous court order anyway.

also, blizzard already tried this. it took years before managing to take down blizzhackers in court, and even then all of the actual script writers just moved to another site and continued doing what they did before anyway.

Pretty much this. Not to mention Riot probably lost money suing them.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20171 votes

And IMO, it is bad PR for Riot.

Riot is now in a long list of companies that is willing to sue for arbitrarily large sums of money, just because of a wounded ego.

Truth is, Riot could easily end botting in every mode. They simply don't want to be the effort and finances into doing so.

LauchmelderMar 6, 20177 votes

You can't "end" botting. You know why? Because the coders will always find a way to create new bots.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20171 votes

You absolutely can. Sorry to rain on your parade. There are simple steps you can take which prevent non-humans from interacting with the game.

Why do you think CAPCHA was invented? There are methods that aren't CAPCHA, which also work, as well.

LauchmelderMar 6, 201711 votes

You probably also think that IP bans work if you think someone can get rid of cheaters for good.

And before you come up with this:

However, a programmer can easily write code to detect and prevent botting and scriptting. Well, easy for a programmer with a lot of experience.

Yes they can. And the coder will find a way around it.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20171 votes

IP bans don't work.

MAC ID bans do.

You can get around IP bans by using X_Forwarding_For and X_Forwarding_To packet injection, as well as select VPN's. (Not all VPN's properly mask your IP in other words.)

Nobody1111Mar 6, 20179 votes

MAC spoofing is easy, very easy. Also splash damage, shared computers, net cafe, schools and more.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20171 votes

It actually isn't since you can pull the mac address directly from the NIC/mobo.

The only way around it is to buy a new Mobo/NIC. Which gets rather expensive quickly.

Nobody1111Mar 6, 20178 votes

You can't pull the MAC directly from the NIC/mobo without directly accessing my computer, you don't have a access level to that, you can ask my computer for my MAC, and that will go through my operating system, and I can tell my operating system that it has a different MAC address, and that is the answer you will get back.

thats how MAC spoofing works, I've done it before.

I'm telling you as a person who studied networking. pls you may know programming, but you don't know networking.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20172 votes

The second you double clicked on LoL to run the program, you have given that program permission to access BIOS/UEFI information.

The only thing it cannot do, is WRITE to the bios/uefi. It can read from it directly, all it wants.

It has nothing to do with your operating system at that point. Zip. Nada.

Each NIC/Mobo has a MAC address hard coded into it. It is not software. MAC spoofing only works on local broadcast network, it does not change the MAC address that is hardware coded into the chips.

The reason why you think what you do, is because NETCODE, cannot access your bios/uefi information. Which means it has to rely on what your OS says.

HOWEVER, league isn't netcode. It is a compiled Executable file which has direct access to your hardware.

ahferroin7Mar 6, 20177 votes

That would be true, if everything were still using DOS or CP/M (or any number of real-time operating systems). On all modern computers, the OS moderates ALL hardware access. Period. League links (indirectly) through msvc or libc (Windows or OS X respectively), and uses the networking API there, which goes through the OS's network stack.

Also, nothing running in user mode without administrative privileges has access to BIOS or UEFI settings, even read access. With limited exceptions, you can't even see another processes memory layout, let alone the firmware memory layout. That's part of the point of having an operating system, it's to isolate user mode programs from hardware as much as possible so they can be more portable.

If you don't believe me, go ahead and take pretty much any arbitrary third-party program for any modern operating system that uses networking, and check what libraries it links against. Nothing rolls it's own networking stack these days, because it's a serious pain to do so and have it work correctly. If you're really adventurous, go hook a function tracer up to any such program, and you'll be able to clearly see system calls being made into the OS networking stack.

Additionally, almost all modern NIC's store the mac address in an EEPROM or flash ROM on the board, and it's actually pretty easy if you know what you're doing to change it there too.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 7, 20171 votes

Right so what you are saying is that you are just smart enough to not know what hardware abstraction is.

And that you have no clue how complex flashing an EEPROM actually is.

Writing to a EEPROM chip isn't as simple as downloading a script guy. And most of the trolls that get banned don't know how to locate a EEPROM on a green board, remove it with a solder station, rip the data from the EEPROM, figure out exactly what all the stored data is, reprogram the EEPROM using a EEPROM programmer, and then resolder it onto the card.

But sure... if you think all of that is 'simple', it is simple.

Further, if your COMPLETELY FALSE CLAIM THAT, " the OS moderates ALL hardware access. Period.", were true, SpeedFan, OpenHardwareMonitor, GPUz, CPUz, and several THOUSANDS of other programs wouldn't work as they do.

You really shouldn't misrepresent facts just to attempt and drive home a false narrative.

" nothing running in user mode without administrative privileges has access to BIOS or UEFI settings"

Settings no, however you can read data from the bios any time you want. If you couldn't, your PC would stop working correctly.

No programs could read current time (bios holds time), generate random numbers, read or write text, etc, etc, etc. This is all hardware access, that goes through bios.

EVEN IF what you were saying were the case, which it is not, the most that would happen is windows would prompt that the program requested administrator privileges. And 99.99% of the home users would already be the default admin, and that would be no problem.

The really funny thing about all these arguments is that companies already successfully ban by MAC address. What I am saying is already in practice elsewhere. Yet here you kids are, arguing against reality.

Further,

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/network/ethtool/ethtool.git/tree/ethtool.c

Example source code of how to pull MAC directly from the hardware itself.

I think the most disgusting thing about all of this, is the massive downvotes simply from being educated on the topic. Really shows how anti-intellectual and trollish this community is.

ahferroin7Mar 7, 20175 votes

[{quoted}](name=Naked Baby Thief,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=voyQpEJE,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-03-07T11:47:47.326+0000)

Right so what you are saying is that you are just smart enough to not know what hardware abstraction is.

And that you have no clue how complex flashing an EEPROM actually is.

Writing to a EEPROM chip isn't as simple as downloading a script guy. And most of the trolls that get banned don't know how to locate a EEPROM on a green board, remove it with a solder station, rip the data from the EEPROM, figure out exactly what all the stored data is, reprogram the EEPROM using a EEPROM programmer, and then resolder it onto the card.

But sure... if you think all of that is 'simple', it is simple.

A first year EE student could do it with minimal effort, so yes, it is simple. So simple in fact, that you actually can do it from software with a number of NIC's.

Further, if your COMPLETELY FALSE CLAIM THAT, " the OS moderates ALL hardware access. Period.", were true, SpeedFan, OpenHardwareMonitor, GPUz, CPUz, and several THOUSANDS of other programs wouldn't work as they do.

Guess what, those still go through the OS. They bypass the OS drivers for that specific hardware, but they still go through the OS to access the hardware. They don't have direct access to PCI, or I2C, or SPI, or whatever interface the hardware uses. They by definition can't have such access, because the required instructions immediately trap out to kernel mode (ring 0 on x86, supervisor mode on most other ISA's). Using your specific examples:

SpeedFan: Uses OS API's to talk to the firmware, which then manipulates the hardware, so actually it has 2 layers between it and the hardware.
OpenHardwareMonitor: Uses OS APi's to either talk to the hardware through the OS bus drivers, or to the firmware.
GPU-Z: Similar to OpenHardwareMonitor, except it goes through the GPU drivers so it can access the I2C bus on the card to talk to the monitoring chips directly, or, more commonly, just reads back information from the GPU driver (modern Intel, NVidia and AMD drivers provide almost all of the info that GPU-Z reports already, they just don't have an easy way to see it from userspace).
CPU-Z: Uses the x86 CPUID instruction and reads a small number of MSR's. This is the closest to direct hardware access, except it has to trap through the OS to read the MSR's (because certain MSR's contain inherently sensitive data).

You really shouldn't misrepresent facts just to attempt and drive home a false narrative.

" nothing running in user mode without administrative privileges has access to BIOS or UEFI settings"

Settings no, however you can read data from the bios any time you want. If you couldn't, your PC would stop working correctly.

No programs could read current time (bios holds time), generate random numbers, read or write text, etc, etc, etc. This is all hardware access, that goes through bios.

None of that has gone through BIOS on PC compatibles for years. No modern OS can afford to trap out to real mode just to talk to the BIOS all the time. Windows does use UEFI interfaces for some things (power management (although that's ACPI, not UEFI), RTC, and on embedded platforms boot management) these days, but networking and disk access are not among those things despite having reasonable API's (because both are insanely slow through the UEFI API's).

Seeing as you like the RTC as an example, go start a VM running any modern OS and trace it to see how often the RTC emulation code gets called. You'll see it get hit a couple of times during boot, and then almost never afterwards (possibly every 11 minutes under Linux, but only if you're running a time sync daemon, and even then those will only be writes, not reads). The RTC isn't used for timekeeping while the system is running, that job is done by any of a number of other pieces of hardware (usually the HPET or TSC on x86 systems, although if it's an old OS it may use the PIT) because they keep crappy time. They are kept for a couple of specific reasons, namely keeping time while the OS isn't running, and allowing automatic startup at a specific time.

As for the hardware RNG argument, if it's a TPM, there's an OS driver that mediates access, because that's what the TCG spec requires for certification. If it's a CPU instruction (RDRAND or RDSEED on x86), then you can call it from user code, but you're not touching the firmware at all (except possibly asking the CPU to run some specific snippet of microcode). If it's anything else, it's probably got an OS driver. Very little calls hardware directly for random numbers because it's not portable and it's much easier to just read /dev/urandom or make the equivalent API call on Windows.

Go take a look at the source code for Linux if you don't believe me. Almost nothing there goes through firmware if at all possible, regardless of platform, because it's horribly inefficient and looks bad for the OS when the firmware has bugs.

EVEN IF what you were saying were the case, which it is not, the most that would happen is windows would prompt that the program requested administrator privileges. And 99.99% of the home users would already be the default admin, and that would be no problem. Being an admin account, running a program with administrative privileges, and using the real Administrator account are three different things. There is very little physical hardware access outside

The really funny thing about all these arguments is that companies already successfully ban by MAC address. What I am saying is already in practice elsewhere. Yet here you kids are, arguing against reality.

So is the fact that it is trivial to spoof a MAC address. Anyone with a decent gaming rig could easily run a virtual machine and run the game inside that, thus letting them use whatever the hell they want for the MAC address. Nothing is unique and impossible to spoof. Not MAC addresses, not UUID's, not WWN's, not anything.

Further,

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/network/ethtool/ethtool.git/tree/ethtool.c

Example source code of how to pull MAC directly from the hardware itself.

Ethtool uses kernel API's, not direct hardware access. That's why it can only do things the driver supports for any given NIC, regardless of what the hardware supports. The same goes for anything else. Some other specific examples from Linux include usb_modeswitch, i2c-tools, ddcontrol, bbswitch, DirectFB, hwclock, and any number of other userspace drivers.

I think the most disgusting thing about all of this, is the massive downvotes simply from being educated on the topic. Really shows how anti-intellectual and trollish this community is.

At least half the downvotes are because of your attitude, not the content.

ahferroin7Mar 6, 20174 votes

It's trivial to spoof MAC addresses, every network card in existence can do it with every major operating system. Things have been that way since at least the 80's, because people got fed up dealing with MAC address locked software licensing failing the moment they had to replace their NIC.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 7, 20171 votes

It takes hardware hacking to spoof a MAC address on the hardware level.

Its hard coded into your NIC's and Mobo's. They no longer have duplicates, they are legally restricted not to.

The most you can do is spoof MAC on your local network, and only things which check the OS for MAC ID, not anything that polls the hardware itself.

ahferroin7Mar 7, 20175 votes

No, it doesn't, go spin up a virtual machine running the OS in question, and you can make anything (even stuff that completely bypass firmware) see whatever MAC address you want. In theory, you could block all MAC addresses that have 02 or 03 for their first byte, but there's nothing that requires a person using a virtual machine to use an OUI with the locally administered bit set.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 8, 20171 votes

Again, every electronic networking device is required to have a hardware level MAC id. You can pull this ID, directly from the hardware, with the source code I provided.

Yes, when you attempt to get the MAC information from Windows or Linux, that can be spoofed. You cannot however magically chang the hardware level MAC id. Not without reprogramming it, which is way too complex for a typical pc user.

ahferroin7Mar 9, 20172 votes

You must have missed the virtual machine part, because that by definition means you can't access physical hardware, and VM software isn't required to guarantee unique MAC addresses except on a given installation.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 9, 20171 votes

Ignoring it because it is irrelevant.

You can detect if your code is being run inside of a VM or not. (and prevent it from running).

Just like you can run your code AS a VM, in order to overcome protected mode.

I got tired of arguing with people who have no clue on how to accomplish the things I'm talking about, and would rather shit on a conversation than be perceptive in it.

japhibMar 6, 20174 votes

It's harder than you think, bro.

Scenario 1: Riot puts a CAPCHA in the loading screen to prevent bots. Cheater answer 1: They hire someone for $2 an hour to do hundreds of League CAPCHA's per hour as the bots start their game.

Scenario 2: Riot decides that certain in-game mouse movement patterns constitute "human" behavior. Cheater answer 2: They make the bots move their mouse randomly around the screen as they're playing. If that's not enough, they do some easy data mining of how actual humans move their mouse around during the game and write code that mimics that.

Scenario 3: Riot puts a secret key service into the client-server connection they're using so that it has to be the actual League program talking to the servers, rather than bots. Cheater answer 3: They reverse-engineer the League client and find the secrets. Or, they just use programs that simulate actual mouse/keyboard inputs

If a robot walks into a store and tries to buy ice cream, most people will be able to tell if it's a human. But since everything in LoL happens through the filter of a computer, and the people writing the code are actual humans, it's pretty difficult to tell whether someone is a human or a robot.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20171 votes

It is exactly as hard as I think.

Scenario 1. They do not make enough $$$ to warrant paying people an hourly wage.

Scenario 2. That isn't how you do it. Scenario 3. Keys are just as easy to get around as anything else. That isn't how you do it.

japhibMar 7, 20173 votes

Then how do you do it? Teach us, oh software expert

Naked Baby ThiefMar 7, 20171 votes

I posted code and examples. So I have. Maybe take the time to read.

japhibMar 7, 20174 votes

Your code is great for banning certain MAC addresses

So how do we tell if someone is a robot or a human

You're way off topic and your frustration is leading to a very argumentative tone, leading to downvotes

Naked Baby ThiefMar 7, 20171 votes

So. You are a programmer of 10 years... and you have no clue how to use ethtool to extract a MAC address....

and you have no clue how to keep track of MAC addresses... when people have to log in.....

Right.

I'm downvoting you because you are a liar, and a troll.

japhibMar 7, 20173 votes

Wow, you sure got me that time, with all those dot-dot-dots

Naked Baby ThiefMar 7, 20171 votes

The ... indicates that there is more.

Let me know if you need any more English Composition lessons.

Still curious what University you failed to get an education at.

japhibMar 7, 20174 votes

Your unrelenting condescending attitude is why people are so argumentative with you, and why you've gotten so many downvotes, if you're wondering.

FegoneMar 7, 20173 votes

[{quoted}](name=Naked Baby Thief,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=voyQpEJE,comment-id=00000000000000000000000100000001000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2017-03-07T18:05:57.483+0000) I offered solutions for the problem.

Bwahahahahahahahhaha I wonder why Riot hasn't hired you yet if you know the answer to the problem.... Oh right, I forgot.... lmao

FegoneMar 7, 20173 votes

[{quoted}](name=Naked Baby Thief,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=voyQpEJE,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-03-06T17:11:32.849+0000)

You absolutely can. Sorry to rain on your parade. There are simple steps you can take which prevent non-humans from interacting with the game.

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. You are with no doubt the most naive person I've encountered on the LoL boards in a long time. Blizzard, EA, Riot, nobody has ever figured out a way to completely stop or end botting. But there you sit, and claim with your half ass knowledge you probably read from some subreddit last week, that you know how it can be done and basically know more than the dev. teams of all these studios. Classic.

If that's what you need to boost your daily self esteem, I'm not going to take it away from you though. I pity you, and it would be inhumane from me to burst your bubble, if this is all you have going for yourself. I already feel sorry for you.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 7, 20171 votes

The fact you begin every post with "bwahaha" shows your level of maturity.

You are nothing but a troll, and you don't even have my pity for that. You could be educating yourself or doing something gainful, but instead, you would rather take your insufficient ego out on people online.

Meanwhile you don't even realize why Riot doesn't spend money on fixing a problem, when people play their game anyways.

In fact. Riot stands to gain money from bots. Not lose it. gain.

And I bet Blizzard was absolutely butthurt that chinese farmers flooded the Real $ auction house in D3 with items that, some of which, sold for hundreds of dollars. Which they took a percentage of.

Or the gold farmers that have to purchase extra accounts every time one gets banned. Yeah that doesn't profit them at all.

You genuinely live in a fantasy world, and sadly, you have no one to blame for that but yourself.

Go find someone that will actually have hurt feels from your trolls, child.

FegoneMar 7, 20173 votes

Bwahahaha, I'm laughing because you're the only one in this thread who seems to be oblivious to actual facts. Keep on building your own world with alternative facts though. I'm sure you'll make it far in life.

Blizzard makes money when one of the farmers gets banned, because they have to get a new sub? Don't you see the flaw in your argument? You really think the farmers keep paying their sub for all the banned accounts? Lmao! It zeroes out. One goes down, another comes up. Meanwhile thousands of players quit the game because of it. But I'm sure, Blizzard loves to have a dozen gold farmers on their servers as their most loyal clientele. Man, you should hear yourself talking (or writing in that case), it's hilarious how you try so hard to justify your arguments, but fail miserably. Why I can say that? Add up all the upvotes and downvotes from all your posts on this thread. People aren't as dumb as you think, obviously, and aren't buying your b.s. But keep on posting and replying, it's entertaining at least. It's like watching a puppy trying to carry a bone through a fence gap XD

Naked Baby ThiefMar 8, 20171 votes

Except the facts are in, and WoW was the most popular game for almost a decade.... Which means your entire line of argumentation is mendacious bullshit. People didn't quit just because there were gold bots.

IN FACT, many thousands of people purchased gold from the bots. If it wasn't profitable the gold botters would have stopped.

I get it though. Looking through your comment history all you do is poke sleeping bears and hope to piss one off for your own entertainment.

Hell, you sat and argued about ranked (as a 3 year silver) against DOUBLELIFT. Yes. You sat and literally argued with one of the most experienced players in the game... about ranked...

And here you are now. Arguing again.
Once again, about shit that is so far over your head that you couldn't possibly add anything of worth to the conversation.

I'm sorry that your life is so devoid of love that the best you can do is troll on a LoL forum. Maybe pick an easier target there bub.

FegoneMar 8, 20172 votes

Bwahaha, I really don't know where you get your facts from. Mad Magazine? WoW was never the most popular game. Ever. I'm not saying it wasn't overly successful, but there was not 1 year where it was the most sold game, most played game, or the game with the most accounts.

Wow has what, 100 Million accounts total? Runescape has over 200 Million. And Runescape came out 3 years before WoW, hence is even older. And still more played. Keep on trying kiddo, it's getting more and more entertaining. Like watching a certain orange "politician" argue his points XD

Of course gold farming was lucrative for the farmers. I've never questioned that. Not sure why you bring that up...

Bwahahaha you actually took the time to look up my account? Bwahahah you must have a very fulfilled life, this is hilarious. So what, I argued with Doublelift. Means he gets over thousands of people trying to talk with him or argue with him, but he figures my discussion is worth his time? Go ahead, you try to get his attention. Bwahahah and another one of the points you made backfired miserably on yourself. Gosh, you're really making my morning coffee more entertaining, thanks for your effort and thanks for trying so hard XD

Can't wait for the next comment!

Naked Baby ThiefMar 8, 20171 votes

Yup, was curious to see how deranged you are.

The answer was very.

Hell, you sat and argued about ranked (as a 3 year silver) against DOUBLELIFT. Yes. You sat and literally argued with one of the most experienced players in the game... about ranked...

And here you are now. Arguing again. Once again, about shit that is so far over your head that you couldn't possibly add anything of worth to the conversation.

FegoneMar 8, 20172 votes

What happened, you're starting to repeat yourself. My entertainment value is declining. Come on, you can do better. Bring up something new, unrelated, with alternative facts. Don't let me down.

Just because someone is on a different level, you shouldn't be allowed to discuss a topic? Is that your opinion? Sorry, you're alone with that one, again. Doublelift took time out of his day to discuss it, let's see if he'd do the same if you bring up a topic. Lmao

It's funny how in your discussions you always run out of arguments and start verbally attacking your opponent due to the lack of facts you could present.

How this entire discussion went from you saying: "I know how to get rid of all botters and cheaters" to "Doublelift is actually taking time out of his day to talk to you"

... nuff said, check mate boi :-D

Naked Baby ThiefMar 8, 20171 votes

Nothing more needs to be said to someone like you who is obviously just here to troll.

Its hilarious you are claiming that I am verbally attacking someone, considering how you conduct yourself in conversations.

Constantly, "mwahahaha", and "check mate boi", and only using fallacious argumentation.

You would have to make an actual argument for me to actually have something to refute. Instead you make no actual arguments, then claim victory because your opponent never had anything to prove.

Which is what you should take away from this. You are not anybody that anyone feels the need to prove anything to.

But by all means, continue making an ass of yourself.

FegoneMar 9, 20171 votes

Bwahahaha and you're still getting downvoted, so deep into the thread, lmao Thanks for changing the topic back to something original, I'm entertained again. No more repeating yourself, agreed? After all, this should be fun, at least for me! XD

I call a check mate when it is an obvious check mate, and the fact that you're the only one not seeing this proves my point, boi.

Don't want to go back to your original arguments about how you know how to solve all this? Not even surprised XD I wouldn't either, if I were in your shoes.

I'm pretty sure there's only one clown in this whole discussion and the name of him rhymes with "Baked Lady Queef", Bwahahahahahaha

Naked Baby ThiefMar 9, 20171 votes

Nothing more needs to be said to someone like you who is obviously just here to troll.

Its hilarious you are claiming that I am verbally attacking someone, considering how you conduct yourself in conversations.

Constantly, "mwahahaha", and "check mate boi", and only using fallacious argumentation.

You would have to make an actual argument for me to actually have something to refute. Instead you make no actual arguments, then claim victory because your opponent never had anything to prove.

Which is what you should take away from this. You are not anybody that anyone feels the need to prove anything to.

But by all means, continue making an ass of yourself.

3TWarriorMar 6, 20171 votes

actually, it should be relatively simple to discover when a program is entering mouse information into the league interface

japhibMar 7, 20172 votes

Yeah, but it's equally easy for a coder to write a program that will simulate mouse inputs to the league interface

Awkward CouchMar 6, 201710 votes

[{quoted}](name=Naked Baby Thief,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=voyQpEJE,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2017-03-06T15:36:29.776+0000)

And IMO, it is bad PR for Riot.

Riot is now in a long list of companies that is willing to sue for arbitrarily large sums of money, just because of a wounded ego.

Truth is, Riot could easily end botting in every mode. They simply don't want to be the effort and finances into doing so.

I think it's good PR for Riot, it shows that they are actively trying to prevent scripting (though it works about as well as a wall between Mexico and the US). From the article, it wasn't a botting service that they sued, it was a script company, a slight yet worthwhile mention.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20171 votes

As a programmer of going on 20 years now, I completely disagree.

Suing them merely is financial gain. it does nothing to prevent bots or scripts from being used. Absolutely nothing.

However, a programmer can easily write code to detect and prevent botting and scriptting. Well, easy for a programmer with a lot of experience.

And that is where you know they aren't 'actively trying to prevent scripting'. If they were, someone like me would already have the programming in place to prevent it completely.

This is merely a financial ego trip.

HexaDecimelMar 6, 20178 votes

I am sure Riot has plenty of amazing programmers. If you are so great why don't you prove it.

Naked Baby ThiefMar 6, 20173 votes

No one ever claimed they didn't, this is what is referred to as a strawman argument. You are attacking an argument I've never made.

Do though, please point to where I said otherwise? (Hint: you can't)

HexaDecimelMar 6, 20175 votes

I am not attacking that part of the discussion. It was just a comment. However, if you are going to make statements about how easy it is and how much experience you have I would be interested to see the proof.