• Kissaki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Current AI is not smarter than humans. It needs supervised training, and then acts according to that. That’s inherently incompatible to novelty and correct exploration.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This problem seems like the sort of thing machine learning could be good at though. You have some input binary code that doesn’t run, you want an output that does, you have available training data of inputs and correct matching outputs.

      • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        AI is good in doing complex things but bad at doing easy things. Supervision is required at first for learning of course, there’s no AI that works out of the box.

        • Kissaki@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          That assessment entirely depends on what you consider “complex” and “easy”.

          What do you mean by it’s bad at doing easy things but good at doing complex things? I don’t see how something complex would work better than something easy.

          • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            In short.

            Look up what AI does good right now, like finding complex solutions to mathematical issues a human couldn’t. Calculate stuff very fast, replicate natural language etc.

            Look up what AI struggles with at the moment, like drawing hands or recognizing objects or driving a car.

            This statement is only valid in this current state, as AI is advancing faster than most peoples mind by now. Most people have yet to understand LLM or generative AI models.

            That’s what I’m talking about. If you look at the process required to crack Denuvo, then you’ll notice that there’s a lot of guesswork done, something the AI is good at if learned properly. The amount of people who know how to and are willing to spend time cracking Denuvo is shrinking by the day. The amount of software DRM encrypted is rising every day. We need automation soon.

            AI will soon be mandatory for software security as malicious actors will use AI to find zero day exploits and you want an AI to protect you from those real time threats. Anti Virus software already work somewhat into that direction by now but there’s still much room.

        • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          how so? ignoring mathematically unbreakable things like encryption, given enough time, i think pretty much anything could be reverse engineered and cracked, its just a matter of how much time it would take

            • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              yeah but your cpu has to run the unencrypted game, and so i would think its currently impossible to have a local, 100% uncrackable game

              • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                DRM already only does check for validity every other frame or even minute. There’s no use in a game that just closes because it recognized a violation. You do know what causes Denuvo fps spikes? It’s whenever it checks. Of course the software got better by now so it’s less of an issue but it’s still there.

          • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Look up RSA algorithms and project that to other mathematically complex DRM protections. You’re wrong because you don’t understand the tech.

            • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              all im saying is that, if I own the CPU that runs the game, there are incredible advanced techniques for reverse engineering, and given enough time and effort i think it would always be possible.

              encryption isnt exactly the same thing here, because encrypted data just sits there until its unencrypted, but it NEEDS to be unencrypted for your CPU to run it.

              the CPU has to read code that it can execute, and if you can get that code, its probably impossible to have an uncrackable game. that doesnt apply to video game cracking, but I’m sure the NSA could crack denuvo if they wanted to, and could crack any game DRM.

              at the very extreme, if i know the state of all of the transistors and etc inside my computer, nothing is uncrackable. thats all I’m trying to say. yes denuvo will likely get too complicated for anyone to try to crack it, but given enough time and resources, it would be cracked.

      • B3_CHAD@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, any sufficiently advanced A.I can and will outclass humans. For example: there are chess A.I’s that have beaten GM’s as good as Magnus Carlsen on multiple occasions. The better an A.I gets at something the tougher it becomes to counter it. This is one of the biggest risks of A.I development that one day we might make something that makes us seem obsolete. On the positive side that day is really really far.

        • Kissaki@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Where between being beaten in chess and making us obsolete do you think we are? Where do you think cracking games is between chess and human mind?

          I think your estimation is off by a lot.

        • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          ok.

          i have my own opinions on ai, but all of that doesnt matter in relation to cracking denuvo because humans can and do crack it.

          i bet everyone with the skills to reverse engineer it has a nice job in cybersecurity (like working at denuvo), instead of cracking video games for some donations.

        • Raphaël A. Costeau@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          First: you’re comparing Chess, what’s a super simple algorithm, in what machines already “outclassed humans” like, years ago, with anything humans can do. That’s is simplist and wrong.

          Second: until today, the so called Artificial “Intelligence” were only capable of, by consulting a human made big catalogue of many things humans did, reproduce some parts of it or resume a little, what is not that difficult if you have a good synonyms dictionary and tons of human people training you on what is a decent resume and what isn’t. In resume, A.“I.” doesn’t do anything that people didn’t did before, and, when it comes to write texts, it does something objectly worst, in a self-help level of writing. A.“I.” isn’t creative.

          Third: still, there are objectly a bunch of works that are under attack by A.“I.”. The thing about this works is that: or they were obviously possible to be automated before, or they are pointless, or they’ve been doing automatically (a.k.a. alienabally) by the workers, or all the above.

          Fourth: the big guys who are trying to sell everyone the idea that A.“I.” will “outclass all of us” want to believe that there’s no need for human work to generate income, what’s is materialistically and economically not true at all. They say they dream of a world without hard work, actually they mean a world without us, working class people. But they’re wrong, they are still depending on our existence as a class and always will be until the day there will be no classes anymore.

          CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t know if AI is technically better it’s just different and doesn’t play like a human. Humans hate lossing pieces but AI doesn’t care as long as the outcome is a win.

          • gjghkk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Newsflash: Humans also sacrifice pieces in chess. Chess engines are mathematical beasts that are designed for these things only. But what is more important: Chess engines also needs to be made by humans.

          • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            AI absolutely plays like a human as it’s trained by humans. The only difference is, AI will do the most optimal move, while humans might hesitate. That’s also the reason why it’s bad to put AI into fighter or bomber jets. The AI has a clear goal but a human might struggle to fire at an unknown target. Because the human has to life with the consequences.