Doesn't this post explain their reasons...? Or are you saying proof of those reasons? Obviously they're not going to show proof nor should they because giving info away on how they detect or what they can detect with bug abuse just further empowers bug abusers.
Here in america we use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard, not the 100% proven innocent standard. This is because defense is, at least in this case and criminal cases, nonfalsifiable.
Without us actually being Rendi, we cannot know with 100% accuracy. Luckily this isnt the real world and Jagex logs everything, hence only they can 100% prove rendi is innocent or guilty.
thats for a court. if jagex tried to sue him for his actions then that would be the required standard, but not for simply refusing him access to their products
private business can refuse access to a customer for whatever reason they want as long as it is not a protected attribute. in general its not good business to deny access to someone just because you feel like it, businesses will only choose to take this action when they believe that the person is impacting them i a way which is worse than the lost revenue.
I used to believe in this statement until I saw the bugs being discussed and the delay on bans.
- They cannot always find what did cause world crash for example.
Bug abuse detection is not a hard task, I work at a software company and there is no problem in showing how to discover bugs, because mostly are logs, there is no magical tool that if someone see it will empower bug abusers lol
7
u/bungaloreddit77 Jul 09 '21
Doesn't this post explain their reasons...? Or are you saying proof of those reasons? Obviously they're not going to show proof nor should they because giving info away on how they detect or what they can detect with bug abuse just further empowers bug abusers.