Bot to (semi) automatically cheat online in blitz

@sheckley666 said in #40:

Better to ask this on chess.com
I'm asking here both because every platform including Lichess have to deal with exactly the same problems - even if the money factor is less attractive here for serious cheaters, I suppose - and I expect to find even more anti-cheating expertise here on Lichess. Besides, I have no interest in spending any time on chesscom.

Luxury is not an issue here, of course. The list in #33 is about setting for tournaments and streamers in particular. If cameras are mandatory, it means that they are necessary, and they are indeed, to check if bot's moves or other unacceptable informations appear on the screen, since you don't monitor active tasks on the players' computers in real time. So, allowing headphones poses two questions: 1) how comes that you don't care about what a player can actually listen to, and 2) why you do care in other cases instead, when you don't allow headphones. It's a technical question.

@marvellous-aircraft said in #32:

No you're not.
Can you tell us how you know that?

@Brian-E said in #2:

These devices exist, and when they get used on Lichess the player is quickly caught and banned. That is really all we need to know if we're not privy to the methods of cheat detection, many of which are kept secret to make it harder for cheating players to work around.

You sound like every tyrant who ever existed. "That's really all we need to know." "We're not privy"

Dude, lichess does a great job at detecting cheaters. But to imply that they can detect all sophisticated forms of cheating, and that they are "quickly caught and banned" and "that's all we really need to know" because "were not privy" is absurd.

Of course, Kramnik is right. It's probably not as widespread as Kramnik believes, but it's certainly more prevelant than chess.com would have you believe.

@Sleprithslayer said in #43:

But to imply that they can detect all sophisticated forms of cheating, and that they are "quickly caught and banned" and "that's all we really need to know" because "were not privy" is absurd.
The question here is, what could we forum users contribute to improve lichess' cheating detection, if we were "privy". I guess nothing. What could cheaters learn, if they were privy? Maybe more than nothing.

@MarkIorio said in #1:

I naively thought that all the fuzz about cheating in online blitz games was nonsense, now I'm flabbergasted to discover that bots capable of overlapping best moves upon the online Lichess board, or Chess.com or whatever online platform, while actually playing do exist, with sophisticated features to manage timing and strength, and even capable of inputting moves themselves.

So, Kramnik may be right? How is Lichess protected against real smart cheating with these instruments?

I believe it is somewhat honesty based. If someone was really determined they could probably cheat on any cite, and be really smart about it. However the only good reason they would do this is to play with higher rated opponents without doing any real chess work. But once they get high enough and start playing how they normally would someone would notice the change in quality and report the cheater. So it is honesty based because we believe that there is really no reason for them to cheat.

@HCB1983 said in #47:

[...] Insulting in a forum is not brave nor intelligent. [...]

Beautifully put. I'd like to frame this sentence and put it on the wall here. But I'm not very brilliant at technical stuff: how do I get it out of the rest of your lengthy paragraph?

@Brian-E said in #48:

But I'm not very brilliant at technical stuff: how do I get it out of the rest of your lengthy paragraph?

But that's exactly what you did when you quoted it!

Edit: Wait a minute, that quote wasn't even in the original post. I think you were making a joke that went over my head?
Second edit: Oh wait, never mind it is in the post, I just forgot to turn off match whole words when searching!