Comment by craftkiller
1 day ago
You didn't read the thread? It's the comment I was replying to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47718255
They quote "If a game has an aggressive anticheat" and then state "The determination of the average Linux user to ignore the faults of Linux", which is accusing Linux of being at fault for the aggressive anticheat not working.
I did not read that to mean that Linux is at fault, I usually would use "X's faults" colloquially to mean drawbacks, not literally, X is at fault and therefore responsibility for this.
Ah well then we have a slightly different interpretation. I would read "the faults of <x>" as "the flaws of <x>", which would then imply a flaw of Linux is why aggressive anticheat doesn't work when it is just companies deciding it isn't worth their time.
FWIW, I am not alone in that interpretation since this commenter reached the same conclusion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47718389
But I don't think we can conclusively say either one of our interpretations is correct.