Forums

Not that it matters because the admins at this site don't seem to care!

Sort:
DiogenesDue
Colby-Covington wrote:
Botvinnikfan720 wrote:

 

😂😂😂It controls the game from the level of a human player.  It received the move as played by a mouse click. U get it? U understand that yet?

Yes, but the input data it generates is useless because it does not carry the verification sequence or isn't appropriately encrypted with the correct key.

You are always so quick to jump to conclusions, while lacking the most basic knowledge to even interpret the information given to you.😒

You would be great casino owner for the next Ocean's movie.  

"But, but...the security guards put the money bags in the armored car and locked them up and drove them to the bank.  They followed every protocol and signed off on every step once they took possession of the bags.  How could there be Monopoly money in the bags?!?  It's inconceivable..."

DiogenesDue
Botvinnikfan720 wrote:

See Colby? See how you act like you're so smart, and then type more stupid comments? By all means, keep showing us how retarded you are. 👍

This seems a tad excessive wink.png.  Personally, I just don't like to see people spouting nonsense that confirms the extremely commonly held and mistaken belief that bullet and blitz are free from cheating.  I'm not here to kick anyone while they are down, just to refute them while they are still standing on their soapbox...

Colby-Covington
Botvinnikfan720 wrote:

SMH. 🤦🤦🤦 A listener can't tell who is making the move.  It only knows the ip address, the browser, the type of computer, the SSL keys, and the type of request.  It has no idea who made the request. It just knows "this computer" made this request. Sure they can detect if someone is using a code to read the screen because of that request, but if everything is on the user side and doesn't rely on manipulating code, just sending the moves... It's impossible to really know.  Only way to know is to monitor the games for perfect computer moves. That's it. 

I understand that you believe one can simply access and falsify listener detection directly at a hardware initialization level while an application is capturing, but that again just demonstrates how utterly uninformed you really are.

It's pointless to argue with someone who is obviously below the level of an average layman and I won't waste any further energy on you.

You are simply obstinate, unwilling to accept anything but your own misguided views.

 

 

Colby-Covington
btickler wrote:

This seems a tad excessive .  Personally, I just don't like to see people spouting nonsense that confirms the extremely commonly held and mistaken belief that bullet and blitz are free from cheating. 

It's mostly low rated players who accuse others of cheating, especially in Blitz and Bullet, as they are simply unable to conceive both their own lack of skill and the various levels of advanced players.

You don't typically see this at the top at all, because these people understand what's possible.

DiogenesDue
Colby-Covington wrote:
btickler wrote:

This seems a tad excessive .  Personally, I just don't like to see people spouting nonsense that confirms the extremely commonly held and mistaken belief that bullet and blitz are free from cheating. 

It's mostly low rated players who accuse others of cheating, especially in Blitz and Bullet, as they are simply unable to conceive both their own lack of skill and the various levels of advanced players.

You don't typically see this at the top at all, because these people understand what's possible.

None of which invalidates my point wink.png.

Colby-Covington

It absolutely does, because this "extremely commonly held and mistaken belief", as you so eloquently put it, is predominately held by low rated beginners.

dmxn2k

I do believe if someone wanted to make a bot that played for them on say Chrome, they could make a bot that analyzed the chess board using a program from the outside that moved the mouse on a Windows level to move the piece. 

But, I don't believe many people, especially those rated 2200 and below, are doing that.

I do agree that the lower rated the player, the more accusations they make about cheaters. But the higher rated, and better a chess player, one becomes, the more silly they will realize it is to think someone rated 1500 (for example) is cheating

VintagePawn

Since this discussion has specifically deteriorated into a cheating discussion, locking.

 

Discussions of cheating, potential cheating or cheat detection are not allowed on the general forums. If you would like to have that discussion, join the following group.

 

https://www.chess.com/club/cheating-forum

 

Chess.com takes cheating very seriously:

 

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-com-fair-play-and-cheat-detection

 

https://support.chess.com/article/648-what-do-i-need-to-know-about-fair-play-on-chess-com

 

To report a suspected cheater to the Support team, please select Report Abuse under the Help menu, click the report link on the player's profile, or use this link: https://support.chess.com/article/346-contact-us. All reports are investigated, even if there is no immediate visible action.

This forum topic has been locked