▲ 243 ▼ I'm brave enough to say it: Linux is good now, and if you want to feel like you actually own your PC, make 2026 the year of Linux on (your) desktop (www.pcgamer.com) submitted 7 months ago by inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca 41 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 12 points 7 months ago* (1 child) Eh, i'm not in favor of Linux supporting abusive practices. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SalamenceFury@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (2 children) I'd trust Valve with the ability to only allow signed drivers way more than Microsoft. And also, Valve could make it so whatever thing they do to make SteamOS secure is optional and is only turned on if someone installs a game that requires kernel level anti-cheat, thus giving the user the ability to either choose to secure their OS to be able to play a game they like that has kernel anticheat, or not do so and keep using SteamOS (or whatever linux distro they choose assuming Valve allows this secure environment thing to be exported to all Linux distros) as is. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago Okay, kernel and user space are separated for a reason. Security reasons, if I recall college classes correctly. So why would I introduce a non-necessity access to kernel space? permalink fedilink source parent [–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago Again you are thinking the opposite, adding anticheat mitigation is less secure of an OS. You have unknown code accessing everything at the absolute lowest level. What you are asking for is a less secure kernel and OS to run anticheat permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SalamenceFury@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (2 children) I'd trust Valve with the ability to only allow signed drivers way more than Microsoft. And also, Valve could make it so whatever thing they do to make SteamOS secure is optional and is only turned on if someone installs a game that requires kernel level anti-cheat, thus giving the user the ability to either choose to secure their OS to be able to play a game they like that has kernel anticheat, or not do so and keep using SteamOS (or whatever linux distro they choose assuming Valve allows this secure environment thing to be exported to all Linux distros) as is. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago Okay, kernel and user space are separated for a reason. Security reasons, if I recall college classes correctly. So why would I introduce a non-necessity access to kernel space? permalink fedilink source parent [–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago Again you are thinking the opposite, adding anticheat mitigation is less secure of an OS. You have unknown code accessing everything at the absolute lowest level. What you are asking for is a less secure kernel and OS to run anticheat permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago Okay, kernel and user space are separated for a reason. Security reasons, if I recall college classes correctly. So why would I introduce a non-necessity access to kernel space? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago Again you are thinking the opposite, adding anticheat mitigation is less secure of an OS. You have unknown code accessing everything at the absolute lowest level. What you are asking for is a less secure kernel and OS to run anticheat permalink fedilink source parent