| 00:28.04 | *** join/#bzflag CIA-112 (~CIA@cia.atheme.org) |
| 01:39.01 | *** join/#bzflag spldart_droid (~spldart@bzflag/contributor/spldart) |
| 01:39.01 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v spldart_droid] by ChanServ |
| 01:41.40 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@nsc69.38.101-238.newsouth.net) |
| 01:56.15 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@nsc69.38.101-238.newsouth.net) |
| 01:56.48 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@bzflag/player/Swigg) |
| 02:18.45 | *** join/#bzflag JeffM (~Toybox@cpe-76-167-239-8.socal.res.rr.com) |
| 02:18.46 | *** join/#bzflag JeffM (~Toybox@unaffiliated/jeffm2501) |
| 02:18.46 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v JeffM] by ChanServ |
| 03:10.18 | *** join/#bzflag tofu (~sean@BZ.BZFLAG.BZ) |
| 04:57.03 | *** join/#bzflag KTL (~KTL@213.219.143.114.adsl.dyn.edpnet.net) |
| 05:17.41 | *** join/#bzflag DarkCalf (DC@173.231.40.98) |
| 05:19.56 | *** join/#bzflag [dmp] (~dennis@users.d75.net) |
| 05:19.57 | *** join/#bzflag [dmp] (~dennis@unaffiliated/dmp/x-546784) |
| 05:23.47 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03L4m3r 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r8202 10/Passion: /* April Fools */ |
| 05:26.43 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03L4m3r 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r8203 10/Passion: /* April Fools */ |
| 05:49.59 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03L4m3r 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r8204 10/Passion: /* Passion of the Polygon */ |
| 06:00.30 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03L4m3r 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r8205 10/Passion: /* L4m3r's Re-work */ |
| 06:44.57 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 0390.222.185.229 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r8206 10/Passion: /* Current Map */ |
| 06:56.12 | SpazzyMcGee | ^ that'll be me |
| 07:32.53 | *** join/#bzflag KTL (~KTL@213.219.161.127.adsl.dyn.edpnet.net) |
| 07:43.18 | *** join/#bzflag fuz_ (nobody@vau75-10-88-164-23-88.fbx.proxad.net) |
| 07:44.47 | *** join/#bzflag bier (~bier@p5085ED38.dip.t-dialin.net) |
| 09:09.03 | *** join/#bzflag kierra1 (~Jolie@c-98-230-46-23.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) |
| 09:47.20 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03Ahnawiki 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r0 10/User:Ahnawiki: |
| 09:48.07 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03Ahnawiki 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r8207 10/User:Ahnawiki: All about me |
| 09:49.22 | brad | lol what |
| 12:11.36 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03Blast 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r0 10/User:Ahnawiki: Spamming links to external sites |
| 12:11.46 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: 03Blast 07http://wiki.bzflag.org * r0 10/User:Ahnawiki: |
| 12:11.46 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: content was: "I am a Business Analyst. I write articles and blogs on different |
| 12:11.46 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: topics like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel Travel], Wellness, Business and |
| 12:11.46 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: Writing. I am ..." (and the only contributor was |
| 12:11.47 | CIA-112 | BZFlag: "[[Special:Contributions/Ahnawiki|Ahnawiki]]") |
| 13:42.33 | *** join/#bzflag mdskpr_ (~mdskpr@108.25.131.122) |
| 13:42.53 | *** join/#bzflag mdskpr_ (~mdskpr@108.25.131.122) |
| 14:24.49 | *** join/#bzflag meeba (~lamer@c-75-71-83-2.hsd1.co.comcast.net) |
| 14:40.20 | *** join/#bzflag kierra (~Jolie@unaffiliated/kierra) |
| 14:42.39 | *** join/#bzflag spldart (~spldart2@c-98-201-137-215.hsd1.tx.comcast.net) |
| 14:42.39 | *** join/#bzflag spldart (~spldart2@bzflag/contributor/spldart) |
| 14:42.39 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v spldart] by ChanServ |
| 14:42.41 | *** join/#bzflag Quol_Home (~ian@modemcable089.251-57-74.mc.videotron.ca) |
| 14:55.35 | *** join/#bzflag SpazzyMcGee (~SpazzyMcG@5adeb9e5.bb.sky.com) |
| 15:02.05 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@nsc69.38.101-238.newsouth.net) |
| 15:10.34 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@nsc69.38.101-238.newsouth.net) |
| 15:12.28 | *** join/#bzflag Rex1 (~Erden@188-194-103-105-dynip.superkabel.de) |
| 15:22.08 | *** part/#bzflag kierra (~Jolie@unaffiliated/kierra) |
| 15:22.14 | *** join/#bzflag kierra (~Jolie@unaffiliated/kierra) |
| 15:28.40 | *** join/#bzflag TD-Linux (~thomas@2001:468:1910:1001:21b:77ff:fec4:659b) |
| 15:28.40 | *** join/#bzflag TD-Linux (~thomas@about/essy/indecisive/TD-Linux) |
| 15:59.56 | *** join/#bzflag TsingTao (477d320a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.71.125.50.10) |
| 17:00.08 | *** join/#bzflag Rex1 (~Erden@188-194-103-105-dynip.superkabel.de) |
| 17:02.32 | *** join/#bzflag JeffM (~JeffM@67-131-219-2.dia.static.qwest.net) |
| 17:02.38 | *** join/#bzflag JeffM (~JeffM@unaffiliated/jeffm2501) |
| 17:02.38 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v JeffM] by ChanServ |
| 17:29.07 | JeffM | blast007, perhaps if you quote more things he'll understand |
| 17:29.16 | blast007 | ;) |
| 17:29.16 | JeffM | I think you shoudl just put your change in bzfs |
| 17:29.27 | JeffM | range based forced registration is not a bad idea |
| 17:29.46 | blast007 | it's kinda silly that a bzid respects the antiban permission |
| 17:29.56 | blast007 | because it's a pretty damn specific type of ban ;) |
| 17:29.58 | JeffM | lots of things are kind of silly |
| 17:30.02 | JeffM | yeah |
| 17:30.10 | blast007 | though the change was a bit more than that |
| 17:30.24 | JeffM | the tierd approach you put forward is pretty standard in blocking people |
| 17:30.32 | JeffM | and it makes sense |
| 17:30.34 | blast007 | I was going to make it so that issuing a ban by callsign or slot number would still idban someone even if antiban was in effect |
| 17:30.50 | JeffM | that makes sense |
| 17:30.57 | JeffM | cus you really want to ban THAT dude |
| 17:31.03 | blast007 | yeah |
| 17:31.12 | JeffM | antiban honestly only makes sense for ranges to me |
| 17:31.21 | JeffM | it's the only time you will accidently get someone |
| 17:31.22 | blast007 | hmm, true |
| 17:31.33 | JeffM | even a single IP is an attempt to ban a single user |
| 17:31.46 | blast007 | well, let's say there's some people at a university or the same household |
| 17:31.52 | blast007 | you might want to ban one person, not all of them |
| 17:31.53 | JeffM | ok |
| 17:31.55 | JeffM | sure |
| 17:32.00 | JeffM | but yeah not ID ban |
| 17:32.14 | JeffM | if you are ID banned you are ID banned |
| 17:32.24 | JeffM | that shoudl be the first ban checked |
| 17:32.30 | JeffM | cus it has the least room for error |
| 17:32.48 | blast007 | now, in the event that someone has antiban and you do a /ban by callsign/slot, should it *just* add the idban, or should it add the IP ban as well? |
| 17:33.43 | blast007 | (currently when you ban by callsign/slot on a registered user *without* antiban it will issue both an IP ban and an ID ban) |
| 17:34.50 | JeffM | I think in that case you really want to ban that person so we should take all effort to ban them |
| 17:34.59 | blast007 | k |
| 17:35.14 | JeffM | a specific ban act on a user should efectivly REMOVE anti-ban |
| 17:35.42 | JeffM | antiban was intened to prevent specific admins from being locked out in range bans IIRC |
| 17:35.59 | blast007 | with the current system, if a trouble maker gets on a whitelist, a server admin can't ban them until the group leader removes that user |
| 17:36.09 | JeffM | yeah that's not fun |
| 17:36.27 | JeffM | if we need a system that prevents lower admins from banning higher admins where both have antiban we'll need some other data |
| 17:36.31 | JeffM | like an "admin level" |
| 17:36.37 | blast007 | yep |
| 17:36.38 | JeffM | and you can't ban higher then your level |
| 17:37.05 | blast007 | there's quite a few limitations in our current permission system |
| 17:37.12 | JeffM | yes |
| 17:37.24 | blast007 | doesn't integrate with plugins (custom permissions) as well as I would like it to |
| 17:37.40 | JeffM | indeed |
| 17:38.40 | JeffM | a good goal would be to take a look at the entire admin system and write a spec that refactors it based on how players use it |
| 17:38.49 | JeffM | and see what client features could be enabled to assist in that |
| 17:39.07 | JeffM | I'm fine with the client knowing what permisiosn the user has and providing better GUI tools to assist in admin |
| 17:40.15 | JeffM | probably should look at how freenode does it with services, cus I'm going to bet it's a very similar workflow |
| 17:41.08 | blast007 | freenode has 'flags', so basically the same |
| 17:41.44 | blast007 | there's a "founder" flag that gives more control over the channel |
| 17:42.02 | JeffM | perhaps we need an owner group by default |
| 17:42.26 | JeffM | then /password could just put the user in that group for the session |
| 17:42.40 | blast007 | in 2.0 I had a plugin that would set operator status on myself so that I could kick idle admins ;) |
| 17:43.47 | blast007 | but yes, overall probably need a look through and refactor, much like everything else |
| 17:44.17 | JeffM | goes to the dentist |
| 18:05.39 | *** join/#bzflag Pimpinella (~frank@gondolin.pimpi.org) |
| 18:10.38 | BulletCatcher | Short of a major reengineering of the ban system, it might be easiest to add a new "registered callsigns only" type of ban for hosts/IP addresses. |
| 18:10.40 | BulletCatcher | This would provide the desired functionality for those who want it without changing the way the rest of the system works. |
| 18:11.14 | BulletCatcher | Another goal for a new ban system is IPv6 support. |
| 18:16.54 | blast007 | BulletCatcher: what benefit would that provide? would it ignore antiban? |
| 18:17.25 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@nsc69.38.101-238.newsouth.net) |
| 18:18.39 | *** join/#bzflag swigg_ (~swigg@nsc69.38.101-238.newsouth.net) |
| 18:18.47 | swigg_ | JeffM: What do you do as a senior admin when a lesser admin needs to be banned? |
| 18:18.51 | BulletCatcher | The benefit is that it wouldn't surprise server owners by changing the way the rest of the ban system works. |
| 18:19.06 | BulletCatcher | My idea would not affect antiban, but that change could be done independently if desired. |
| 18:19.20 | blast007 | shrugs |
| 18:19.42 | blast007 | either of them won't be done before 2.4.2.. speaking of which.. I need to keep working on that instead of playing minecraft ;) |
| 18:19.56 | BulletCatcher | :-p |
| 18:20.19 | swigg_ | I had a problem with someone with an attitude problem who felt they were untouchable, so therefore no reciprocity |
| 18:20.36 | swigg_ | until I had the owner remove antiban for lower groups |
| 18:20.45 | swigg_ | as per Blast007's advice |
| 18:20.49 | blast007 | swigg_: currently you can't do much other than stuff like that |
| 18:21.03 | swigg_ | Still want your plugin :P |
| 18:21.12 | blast007 | I don't have one for 2.4 |
| 18:21.20 | blast007 | don't know if it works anymore anyway |
| 18:22.01 | blast007 | BulletCatcher: my idea definately needs some more thought put into the implications of such changes |
| 18:22.07 | *** join/#bzflag swigg (~swigg@bzflag/player/Swigg) |
| 18:22.50 | swigg | For bans, Thumper seems to have the best system |
| 18:22.52 | BulletCatcher | Yeah. That's why it is better to just leave the current system as is for now, even though it is imperfect. |
| 18:23.15 | BulletCatcher | Integrating the idea of upper and lower admins would be something to be done in the ban system rewrite, but realistically that isn'g going to happen in the foreseeable future. |
| 18:23.30 | blast007 | well, and honestly, I don't think anyone is going to bother with it anyway, given the current development speed ;) |
| 18:23.32 | swigg | add it to the wish list |
| 18:23.37 | blast007 | so it's all just talk so far |
| 18:24.11 | swigg | well at least you all know the inherient weaknesses in the current system |
| 18:24.16 | blast007 | swigg: what, a shared ban file? what else does he have besides that? |
| 18:24.24 | BulletCatcher | All it takes is for one developer to be motivated, but I don't see that happening. |
| 18:24.32 | swigg | that tenacious plugin he has |
| 18:24.42 | blast007 | meh, not worth it |
| 18:24.47 | swigg | log in and go on a tk spree |
| 18:24.58 | swigg | pretty effective |
| 18:25.05 | blast007 | simple stuff like that could be added |
| 18:25.13 | blast007 | instead of a kick, do a ban |
| 18:25.14 | blast007 | stuff like taht |
| 18:28.54 | swigg | do you guys forsee being able to amend the whitelist in the same fashion as the banlist? |
| 18:30.29 | BulletCatcher | What whitelist? |
| 18:30.37 | swigg | any whitelist |
| 18:30.50 | swigg | server specific |
| 18:31.04 | BulletCatcher | Are you asking if we could add a whitelist feature to bzfs? |
| 18:31.19 | swigg | yes |
| 18:31.28 | swigg | I guess it could be done via plugin? |
| 18:32.02 | BulletCatcher | Anything is possible, but right now motivated developers are scarce. |
| 18:32.11 | swigg | I thought it was interesting that you mentioned whitelisted players being unbannable |
| 18:32.46 | BulletCatcher | The current whitelist method involves a global group whose members get the anitban permission. |
| 18:33.17 | BulletCatcher | That does, indeed, make them unbannable while they belong to the group. |
| 18:34.56 | swigg | so... It's only accessable to group leaders. Ok |
| 18:35.28 | BulletCatcher | Maybe it would be sufficient to make the antiban permission apply only to poll bans. |
| 18:35.30 | BulletCatcher | Let the server owner sort it out if admins start banning each other. |
| 18:36.05 | swigg | Benfish fixed it with a three teir rank system |
| 18:36.12 | swigg | cops, admins and trusted |
| 18:37.14 | swigg | we had probs with admins abusing perms, making racial slurs, etc |
| 18:38.30 | swigg | but admins banning other admins is truly going nuclear; That can make blood wars |
| 18:39.44 | BulletCatcher | The server owner has ultimate responsibility for choosing admins, and the current system supports that. |
| 18:40.21 | swigg | Reminds me of the scene in Indiana Jones when he had the rocket launcher pointer at the ark and said "It all depends on how reasonable we're all willing to be" |
| 18:40.33 | swigg | *pointed |
| 18:41.42 | BulletCatcher | Yup, and it is the server owner's job to choose reasonable admins. |
| 18:41.46 | BulletCatcher | Presumably, an admin who bans another for the wrong reason will soon lose admin status. |
| 18:42.48 | I_Died_Once | are you guys about to draft a bill of rights for admins, players, and server owners? |
| 18:42.53 | swigg | official servers as JeffM suggested would be great for all of that too. |
| 18:43.23 | swigg | Maybe a "Bill of privilages"? |
| 18:44.00 | BulletCatcher | I_Died_Once: No. The project plans to continue to support server owner dictatorships. |
| 18:44.28 | BulletCatcher | :-| |
| 18:44.42 | I_Died_Once | <PROTECTED> |
| 18:45.08 | BulletCatcher | That *is* how it works in the BZFlag universe. |
| 18:45.14 | I_Died_Once | that, and fear of this battle station.... |
| 18:45.18 | *** join/#bzflag TimRiker (~TimRiker@bzflag/projectlead/TimRiker) |
| 18:45.18 | *** mode/#bzflag [+o TimRiker] by ChanServ |
| 18:45.53 | swigg | That would be neat, as a discrete chain of command could be established instead of "Go whine to the owner" |
| 18:46.16 | I_Died_Once | yeah but i aint answering to nobody as to why i banned any given asshat |
| 18:46.45 | swigg | ha! just like 'Sniper15' did to you. :P |
| 18:46.47 | I_Died_Once | then again, i am one of those regional governors |
| 18:48.13 | swigg | a dog with no teeth has no bite to his bark |
| 18:48.23 | BulletCatcher | The difference is that you don't have to fear a visit from Darth BulletCatcher, I_Died_Once. |
| 18:49.11 | I_Died_Once | our blockade is perfectly legal and we would be happy to recieve ambassadors |
| 18:50.29 | I_Died_Once | get it, blockade? |
| 18:50.47 | I_Died_Once | ='s bans |
| 18:51.10 | I_Died_Once | i'll be here all week, try the veal! |
| 18:51.52 | swigg | Veal = "Some kind of meat" as per 'Meatballs' |
| 18:52.03 | JeffM | wow that's a lot of text |
| 18:52.26 | JeffM | swigg, that should be up to the owner, admins should not be managing themselves |
| 18:52.42 | JeffM | the owner picked them, if the owner picked a bad one they should manage it |
| 18:53.58 | swigg | Jeffm: Every incident makes for a 'court of slander'. Thank heaven I have f5'd every time something happened |
| 18:54.47 | swigg | never mattered what actually happened; it was all in how it was presented |
| 18:56.15 | JeffM | yes that is one reason I think having a subset of the servers be run by the project would be a good idea |
| 18:56.16 | swigg | I do agree; every owner should have a guide to instruct and train admins on conduct and accountability |
| 18:56.25 | JeffM | it also would help new players have a good place to go |
| 18:56.45 | I_Died_Once | been doing that for years |
| 18:56.52 | JeffM | well I think we have too many servers because we use servers to mean map |
| 18:57.01 | JeffM | and people want map options. |
| 18:57.05 | blast007 | swigg: the server owner should also have log files that they can read for situations like that. a screenshot should not be necessary. |
| 18:57.45 | swigg | Oh well; Mother necesisity. |
| 18:59.54 | blast007 | JeffM: I'm not even sure if people want map options. map authors and server owners certainly think that people want options.. yet players stick to the same maps for years |
| 19:02.24 | swigg | blast007: a 'featured map' in listserv would introduce variety |
| 19:02.58 | swigg | basically a map picked by the listserv leaders |
| 19:17.54 | JeffM | blast007, players play where other players are |
| 19:18.16 | JeffM | so yeah we have a bunch of crap servers that simply exists so someone can play a map once |
| 19:18.24 | JeffM | thats why I like the room idea |
| 19:18.35 | JeffM | it lets maps come and go as needed |
| 19:18.39 | JeffM | with out cluttering up a list |
| 19:19.11 | JeffM | it woudl change how maps are published of course, they would be submited to the official servers for inclusion |
| 19:19.22 | *** part/#bzflag TimRiker (~TimRiker@bzflag/projectlead/TimRiker) |
| 19:19.30 | JeffM | but then that's also cool since you don't have go and beg people to host a server just for your map |
| 19:55.21 | KTL | will try to avoid having to download 900 small pics by using the sprite-approach, one big pic from which selections get used |
| 20:07.18 | JeffM | be warry of blending due to mip mapping if you pack them too close |
| 20:07.30 | JeffM | you could get edge pixels from other images to blur in |
| 20:13.06 | JeffM | blast007.... too... many....quotes...... |
| 20:13.39 | JeffM | and all because I put a name on your idea... wow |
| 20:26.53 | KTL | mmm ... it gives a nice speedup to make the extents-zone length in only one dimension, as if you have some invisible orthogonal line in the map... the trick that follows is to choose the location and dimension of the extents line in such a way that the mesh associated with it is shown as much as possible (aka doesnt mysteriously vanish half the time) |
| 20:27.25 | KTL | also, the graphics card doesnt like many extents on the same spot |
| 20:27.42 | KTL | try to avoid overlaps with extents |
| 20:30.13 | JeffM | the graphics card? or our octree? |
| 20:30.27 | JeffM | cus the graphics card dosn't know what "extens" are :) |
| 20:30.31 | KTL | there is nothing to collide with ... |
| 20:30.43 | JeffM | the graphics card dosn't know or care about collisions |
| 20:30.54 | KTL | what is the octree (meant of collision detection as far as i know) do with the extents? |
| 20:30.56 | JeffM | it's just told to draw a bunch of fragments |
| 20:31.07 | JeffM | it uses it to know what nodes the object is in |
| 20:31.20 | JeffM | so it knows who can collide wiht it, and when it's vissable |
| 20:31.30 | KTL | he... weird ... all those meshes are just drawinfo's |
| 20:31.44 | JeffM | to the card all objects are meshes |
| 20:31.49 | KTL | and those extents really have influence on what is shown and what is not |
| 20:31.55 | JeffM | yes |
| 20:32.02 | JeffM | the octree is used for visablity |
| 20:32.25 | JeffM | they are used for the octree to decide if the object is inside the camera frustum |
| 20:32.36 | KTL | then it is the octree that get's crazy with many overlapping objects |
| 20:32.41 | JeffM | those outside the frustum are not drawn or sent to the card |
| 20:32.42 | JeffM | yes |
| 20:32.43 | KTL | extents* |
| 20:32.55 | JeffM | our viz system isn't that great |
| 20:32.59 | KTL | is there a separate octree for collisions? |
| 20:33.02 | JeffM | it's WAYYYYY Ybetter then it used to be |
| 20:33.03 | JeffM | nope |
| 20:33.14 | KTL | mmm :) |
| 20:33.28 | JeffM | the same world octree is used to determine what objects are near a player or shot |
| 20:33.38 | JeffM | it's used in a different way of course |
| 20:33.46 | JeffM | but then drawinfo geometry is never collided with |
| 20:33.53 | JeffM | thats why it's DRAWinfo |
| 20:34.06 | JeffM | the normal mesh geometry is used for collision |
| 20:34.22 | KTL | i will try to keep all that in mind (while making maps) |
| 20:34.42 | JeffM | remember that draw info was intended for graphic only effects, like fire |
| 20:35.05 | JeffM | so for collisions, ether you don't care, or surround it with an invisible real object |
| 20:35.22 | KTL | i dont care about the collisions, i do care about fps |
| 20:35.38 | JeffM | your FPS slowdown is probalby swaping to each texture |
| 20:35.50 | JeffM | GL is fastest when drawing multiple faces using the same texture |
| 20:35.56 | KTL | barely, it's the extents that make a huuuge difference |
| 20:36.00 | JeffM | moving from one texture to another is a slower operation for most cards |
| 20:36.06 | KTL | so a lot of my slowdown must be ... because of the octtree |
| 20:36.16 | JeffM | the extens will help the octreee decide when to draw it |
| 20:36.22 | KTL | i can make it very fast by tweaking the extents |
| 20:36.34 | JeffM | if the extens are too big the octree will thing the object is visible when it is not, so it is drawn pointlessly |
| 20:36.52 | JeffM | the extens should be as close to the actual size as possible |
| 20:36.59 | KTL | even a lot smaller |
| 20:37.07 | KTL | yes it will not be drawn all the time |
| 20:37.08 | JeffM | you can run into clipping issues then |
| 20:37.15 | KTL | but it will be much faster still |
| 20:37.21 | JeffM | sure cus you draw it less :) |
| 20:37.39 | JeffM | honestly moving it to one texture will be a big speedup |
| 20:37.39 | KTL | i have been able to experiment here with 900 panels with each another texture rotating around 0,0,0 |
| 20:38.05 | KTL | and suppose i would have 900 extent boxes of the same size on 0,0,0 then the octtree will hang the game for an instant |
| 20:38.30 | KTL | but if i have 900 extent-line that do not overlap and are long enough to be usually in the view ... then every goes fine |
| 20:38.53 | JeffM | yeah it was not meant for that kinda density |
| 20:39.02 | JeffM | remember it's a silly LAN game :) |
| 20:39.27 | KTL | it's the only thing i know where i can try to do this kind of stuff :) |
| 20:40.14 | JeffM | really? cus most real graphics engines will do a lot better then this |
| 20:40.23 | JeffM | use an ogre sample app..... |
| 20:40.36 | KTL | i cant play in that |
| 20:40.51 | JeffM | they have a standard movement controll :) |
| 20:40.54 | JeffM | so yes.. yes you can |
| 20:41.19 | JeffM | they even let you use shaders |
| 20:41.21 | JeffM | :) |
| 20:41.42 | KTL | i try to ... avoid making something that goes in some dusty directory to never come out of it again |
| 20:42.02 | JeffM | umm... that pretty much describes this project right now ;) |
| 20:42.33 | KTL | sssjjt there still are players, the database is still filling up, the viewer/bzflag client can easily be installed everywhere |
| 20:42.55 | JeffM | soon you will get to braganing, it's ok |
| 20:44.23 | JeffM | but try the single texture thing, with one extens box, I think that will be your best bet |
| 20:44.44 | JeffM | you are getting a speedup by using multiple extens because then only subsections of the object are drawn |
| 20:44.49 | JeffM | and that's less texture swaps |
| 20:44.51 | KTL | i will do that, the moment i have some mental idea on how to organize it all |
| 20:45.03 | KTL | (i want it to be regenerated every so many days) |
| 20:45.08 | JeffM | at some point you will spend more time in the octree then you will on a texture swap so it'll loose adavantage |
| 20:45.42 | JeffM | we sort our drawing by material(texture) if we can to minimiize texture swaps for that same reason |
| 20:46.20 | KTL | so all texmats with the same texture come in a row ? |
| 20:46.27 | JeffM | yes |
| 20:46.33 | KTL | this is gonna be fun |
| 20:46.43 | JeffM | openGL is a state machine, it only has one texture "Active" at a time |
| 20:47.14 | JeffM | we keep the textures loaded in card memory with bindings, but there is still a delay when you activate or rebind a texture to the current context |
| 20:47.24 | JeffM | so you want to do that as few times as possible |
| 21:17.34 | *** join/#bzflag Quol (~Ian@webout1.futureelectronics.com) |
| 22:01.36 | *** join/#bzflag Erroneous (~DTRemenak@67-131-219-2.dia.static.qwest.net) |
| 22:01.36 | *** join/#bzflag Erroneous (~DTRemenak@about/essy/CrazyCoder/DTRemenak) |
| 22:01.36 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v Erroneous] by ChanServ |
| 22:29.13 | blast007 | man, responding this this thread is becoming painful |
| 22:29.25 | JeffM | then don't |
| 22:29.36 | blast007 | pfft, but I'm OCD, so I have to :P |
| 22:29.51 | JeffM | your idea is valid, his is another idea that is based on not understandin how the code or admins actualy work |
| 22:30.09 | JeffM | I'm sure it would work. It would just be more cumbersom |
| 22:30.17 | blast007 | he keeps making stuff up as he goes along so that he sounds like he's right |
| 22:30.21 | JeffM | most of his arguments are just about what he think he did or did not say |
| 22:30.27 | JeffM | it's just babble |
| 22:30.34 | JeffM | yeah he wants to be "right" |
| 22:30.41 | JeffM | when there isn't a right or wrong |
| 22:31.07 | JeffM | he has to have the last word |
| 22:31.16 | blast007 | but I can lock threads ;) |
| 22:31.37 | JeffM | true |
| 22:31.59 | JeffM | remember this is the guy who can't keep java, javascript, j# seperate in his head |
| 22:32.03 | JeffM | he's a LOON |
| 22:32.06 | swigg | what thread? |
| 22:32.24 | JeffM | if you do't know then you don't need to know ;) |
| 22:32.26 | swigg | Every time I lock threads the instigator usually just starts a new one |
| 22:32.32 | JeffM | he won't |
| 22:32.39 | blast007 | then I delete it that new one ;) |
| 22:32.46 | JeffM | but then that's blast's deal with |
| 22:32.47 | JeffM | yeah |
| 22:32.49 | blast007 | s/it // |
| 22:35.23 | JeffM | I put a generic "we'll review it" comment in |
| 22:35.32 | JeffM | how hard is your fix? |
| 22:35.56 | swigg | I was going to suggust you capitulate |
| 22:36.15 | JeffM | his ideas are valid, if not optimal |
| 22:36.18 | JeffM | he just likes to argue |
| 22:36.24 | JeffM | and it's pointless to continue that |
| 22:36.38 | JeffM | the point has been brought up and a developer will review it |
| 22:36.41 | JeffM | that's all we can do |
| 22:37.24 | JeffM | local reg will not be reenabled :) |
| 22:40.46 | blast007 | I'd wait until after 2.4.2 for it, if at all |
| 22:40.54 | JeffM | ok, so never |
| 22:40.58 | blast007 | sure ;) |
| 22:41.00 | JeffM | that was it, we tried |
| 22:41.50 | JeffM | if it's just due to time you have, can you describe the changes to someone else? could probalby convince someone to poke at it |
| 22:42.02 | JeffM | or are you conscerned about stability? |
| 22:42.21 | blast007 | well, it was a bit more than just changing the bzid to ignore antiban |
| 22:42.30 | blast007 | the '/ban' command would need changing as well |
| 22:42.32 | JeffM | is the risk high? |
| 22:42.45 | blast007 | probably not terribly high |
| 22:42.49 | blast007 | since it's pretty simple logic |
| 22:43.02 | JeffM | if it can be described decently we can have someone try to do it |
| 22:43.05 | JeffM | like mudskipper |
| 22:43.15 | JeffM | and roll it out if it dosn't fly |
| 22:43.16 | blast007 | it's just determining which types of bans to issue when banning by slot or callsign |
| 22:43.33 | JeffM | well we can start with a subset and see how that works |
| 22:43.43 | JeffM | I say do IP and ID and go from there |
| 22:44.15 | JeffM | if it's a big issue or people want options we store what bans are done in a var or config option |
| 22:44.15 | blast007 | if we say that banning by callsign/slot always issues an IP ban (and ID ban if registered), then it's simplier |
| 22:44.29 | blast007 | I was initially doing it where it would *only* do an ID ban if they had antiban |
| 22:44.36 | JeffM | naw do both for now |
| 22:44.36 | blast007 | so it got more complicated |
| 22:44.38 | JeffM | see how it works |
| 22:45.04 | swigg | what else is there? There doesn't seem to be any consistency with host strings. |
| 22:45.24 | JeffM | there is the super secret client ID we could use |
| 22:45.27 | JeffM | but I don't like using that |
| 22:45.43 | swigg | never trust the client, you all say |
| 22:45.58 | JeffM | it's very partial to the star sign the player was born under |
| 22:46.04 | JeffM | dosnt' always work for gemini |
| 22:46.06 | swigg | I always wanted something based on the MAC address |
| 22:46.21 | JeffM | you can set your mac to anything |
| 22:46.40 | swigg | it would still work for all but the most persistant |
| 22:46.47 | JeffM | not really |
| 22:46.58 | JeffM | we have tried to secure against a number of things here |
| 22:47.05 | blast007 | swigg: it's a simple registry tweak, and some drivers have it right in their interface |
| 22:47.11 | blast007 | and you wouldn't even need to do that |
| 22:47.18 | blast007 | you just change the client to not read that |
| 22:47.21 | JeffM | yeah MAC and VID are not that secure |
| 22:47.32 | swigg | well, one thing I note: The client detects the video card |
| 22:47.39 | blast007 | so? |
| 22:47.40 | swigg | yeah but not everyone is that smart |
| 22:47.43 | JeffM | the client lies |
| 22:47.46 | blast007 | it just takes one ... |
| 22:47.56 | JeffM | the client asks GL what the card decided to tell GL it was |
| 22:48.18 | swigg | well.. in my business we can shoot for 95% |
| 22:48.28 | blast007 | swigg: this is shooting for 0% |
| 22:48.34 | swigg | the last 5% is about 20 times more expensive |
| 22:48.34 | blast007 | since it would. not. work. |
| 22:49.22 | swigg | well... If you consider trying to outsmart Blast or Jeffm... maybe |
| 22:49.42 | swigg | but there are very few blasts and Jeffm's |
| 22:49.50 | JeffM | adding additonal ways to ban people is not how we should be spending time on bz |
| 22:49.57 | blast007 | a brain dead squirrel could figure out how to change the line of text that sends the MAC address |
| 22:49.59 | JeffM | for the little amount of time we spend on BZ |
| 22:50.14 | JeffM | the ID ban change is simple and makes sense |
| 22:50.49 | *** join/#bzflag Supertanker (~Supertank@unaffiliated/supertanker) |
| 22:50.58 | swigg | I always thought you guys could make unique id's via self destructing code |
| 22:50.59 | JeffM | but we don't need to waste time figuring out exotic ways to get yet another ID from the client |
| 22:51.05 | JeffM | huh? |
| 22:51.21 | JeffM | we can only make IDs on code we control, and we don't control the client |
| 22:51.33 | swigg | something that does a hardware id, phones home and deletes itsself |
| 22:51.53 | JeffM | that still requires the remote client to execute something |
| 22:51.55 | blast007 | swigg: would. not. work. |
| 22:52.06 | JeffM | also a HUGE security risk |
| 22:52.10 | blast007 | and besides, we're not ubisoft |
| 22:52.10 | JeffM | and a deployment nightmare |
| 22:52.12 | swigg | maybe one day I'll have a good idea |
| 22:52.13 | JeffM | yeah |
| 22:52.35 | JeffM | do you want every server sending an executable for you to run? |
| 22:52.41 | JeffM | even if deletes your C drive? |
| 22:53.19 | blast007 | well, we have to nuke your drive from orbit. it's the only way to be sure. |
| 22:53.23 | *** join/#bzflag Flash (~jwmelto@c-75-70-62-116.hsd1.co.comcast.net) |
| 22:53.24 | *** join/#bzflag Flash (~jwmelto@bzflag/developer/Flash) |
| 22:53.32 | JeffM | it woudl make bzflag very secure |
| 22:53.35 | JeffM | as in unplayable |
| 22:53.37 | JeffM | but secure |
| 22:54.17 | JeffM | if identifying a user is needed for something, then we should add registration to the game |
| 22:54.23 | JeffM | and just make everyone register |
| 22:54.28 | swigg | I think if you did a closed source module like they do with VM's it might be possible |
| 22:54.32 | JeffM | and limit what servers they can play on untill they verify |
| 22:54.37 | swigg | never release that code |
| 22:54.55 | JeffM | the trust relationship runs a different way there |
| 22:55.02 | JeffM | that is the client trusting the host |
| 22:55.03 | swigg | yeah, official servers would fix that |
| 22:55.09 | JeffM | so they choose to download a component |
| 22:55.18 | JeffM | dosn't work the other way around |
| 22:55.26 | JeffM | there is no way for us to be sure they ran what we asked them to run |
| 22:55.31 | JeffM | since they can always lie |
| 22:55.38 | JeffM | also there is no way for the client to trust our code |
| 22:55.50 | JeffM | also we don't have packages for every platform |
| 22:56.02 | JeffM | so that would be very hard in the linux space |
| 22:56.16 | swigg | but if it were done with a secure key, if the response wasn't what you expected they couldn't authenticate |
| 22:56.20 | JeffM | there woudl be several dosens of packages for every CPU/runtime combo |
| 22:56.50 | JeffM | they could still run a different app, one that had been hacked to return a valid code |
| 22:56.54 | JeffM | and so what if they authenticate |
| 22:56.57 | JeffM | whopty do.. |
| 22:57.00 | JeffM | they can stil cheat |
| 22:57.11 | JeffM | and jsut get another ID and authenticate as an other user next time |
| 22:57.14 | swigg | well... look at the havoc that happens when listserv goes down |
| 22:57.29 | JeffM | that's because so many people tie permisions to logins |
| 22:57.36 | JeffM | so we don't need another way to authenticate |
| 22:57.42 | JeffM | then one we have works |
| 22:57.45 | JeffM | we just have to use it for everyone |
| 22:57.58 | JeffM | the core issue being discussed is what do with people that don't authenticate |
| 22:58.27 | JeffM | thats why I say the simplest solution is to not allow those people to exist |
| 22:58.44 | swigg | ok... I'll kill them. give me the address |
| 22:59.21 | Erroneous | or actually, y'know, admin your servers. you don't need to know who exactly everyone is, just whether or not what they're doing is acceptable or not. |
| 22:59.31 | JeffM | yeah |
| 22:59.44 | swigg | why not do an experiment then? |
| 22:59.47 | JeffM | if the admins were paying attention most of these discussions would not be needed |
| 22:59.49 | Erroneous | authentication should be superfluous for most players |
| 22:59.52 | swigg | pick one miscreant |
| 23:00.00 | swigg | spoogebobspermpants |
| 23:00.13 | swigg | find a way to defeat him |
| 23:00.15 | JeffM | don't we autoban for saying that name? |
| 23:00.27 | swigg | only overseer does that IIRC |
| 23:00.27 | JeffM | you are talking about a different problem that has nothing to do with authentication |
| 23:00.41 | swigg | it would be an interesting study |
| 23:00.43 | JeffM | I know how to minimize what we can do |
| 23:00.48 | swigg | he's not that smart |
| 23:00.59 | swigg | yet he always returns |
| 23:01.01 | JeffM | nether is bzflag |
| 23:01.10 | JeffM | sure cus it's easy to cheat |
| 23:01.17 | JeffM | make it harder to cheat and he's done |
| 23:01.25 | JeffM | that's different then making it harder for him to login |
| 23:01.38 | JeffM | cus making it harder for him to login often makes it harder for OTHERS to log in too |
| 23:01.53 | JeffM | too many people focus on the connection aspect for people like that, not the rest of it |
| 23:02.00 | JeffM | and the solution is simple |
| 23:02.09 | JeffM | put good admins on all servers |
| 23:02.16 | JeffM | he will be removed as he shows up |
| 23:02.52 | JeffM | if you don't want to baby sit every game, then we have to start limiting what he can do with a client |
| 23:02.58 | JeffM | do death checks on the server |
| 23:03.07 | JeffM | that takes out a huge group of cheats |
| 23:03.25 | swigg | heuristical analysis |
| 23:03.43 | JeffM | of what? laggy inconsistent dat? |
| 23:03.45 | JeffM | data |
| 23:03.52 | JeffM | we don't have a consistent gamestate to anaalize |
| 23:04.05 | Erroneous | humans are great at heuristics. computers not so much. so...use good admins. |
| 23:04.10 | JeffM | they are all affected by differing amounts of lags |
| 23:04.12 | JeffM | yeah |
| 23:04.14 | swigg | well, if it were made into a report, it would create a watchlist |
| 23:04.28 | JeffM | or we could just force his client to die when shot ;) |
| 23:04.29 | swigg | and essentially do the same thing |
| 23:04.58 | swigg | that would make a good plugin |
| 23:05.25 | JeffM | I love how people sugest these huge hard tasks to do what people do to stop cheaters instead of just sugesting what every other game does that is easy |
| 23:05.31 | JeffM | it can't be a plugin |
| 23:05.39 | JeffM | we have to redo the sim system |
| 23:05.41 | Erroneous | apparently not THAT easy ;) |
| 23:05.42 | JeffM | it's not hard |
| 23:05.45 | JeffM | it's just a lot of code |
| 23:05.56 | Erroneous | indeed it is |
| 23:05.59 | swigg | I would like to see something to alert the admins of suspect players, then we could watch them |
| 23:05.59 | JeffM | it's easier then replecating human reasoning for refing a game :) |
| 23:06.30 | JeffM | this is why I think this project is doomed, too many people think like that |
| 23:06.40 | JeffM | automate the people instead of fix the game |
| 23:06.46 | JeffM | it will never end in fun |
| 23:06.53 | swigg | These problems are not unique to BZ |
| 23:06.58 | JeffM | exactly |
| 23:07.08 | JeffM | and look at how other games solve them |
| 23:07.25 | JeffM | they get an authorative game state |
| 23:07.29 | JeffM | that takes care of most cheats |
| 23:07.42 | JeffM | then you can use specific huristics for some aspects, like aimbot trackin |
| 23:07.48 | JeffM | but they will always be wrong in some cases |
| 23:08.03 | JeffM | we arn't even close to having to worry about that level |
| 23:08.11 | JeffM | we can't even say "that dude should have died" |
| 23:11.30 | swigg | I dunno; Most of the time when I see a miscreant, I just get a gut feeling, then cross check them and am usually right |
| 23:11.44 | JeffM | sure cus you are made out of meat |
| 23:11.58 | JeffM | let me know when you are done writing code that simulates meat ;) |
| 23:12.12 | JeffM | people are good at that |
| 23:12.14 | JeffM | machines are not |
| 23:12.17 | JeffM | all they can do is math |
| 23:12.36 | JeffM | what math do you do in your gut? |
| 23:12.44 | swigg | estimation |
| 23:12.48 | JeffM | of what? |
| 23:13.01 | swigg | numbers, behaviors, etc |
| 23:13.02 | JeffM | and how much is based on the player name? ;) |
| 23:13.11 | JeffM | see you can't even desribe it |
| 23:13.17 | JeffM | how can you program that |
| 23:13.31 | swigg | That takes engenuity |
| 23:14.35 | swigg | well... at least it's not for lack of want |
| 23:16.49 | swigg | I think that if you guys can find a solution it will help online gaming in general |
| 23:17.02 | swigg | even message boards, etc |
| 23:17.29 | JeffM | you really don't play any other games do you? |
| 23:17.41 | swigg | some, not much |
| 23:17.46 | JeffM | and yes writing a smart AI would help the WORLD not just games ;) |
| 23:17.48 | swigg | what do you suggest? |
| 23:17.52 | JeffM | yeah most other games don't have this issue |
| 23:18.04 | JeffM | those that do are for a very small subset of issues, like aimbots |
| 23:18.13 | JeffM | and for that some games use punkbuster |
| 23:18.23 | JeffM | it does something similar to what you descrive |
| 23:18.35 | JeffM | use statistiacs to determine validity levels of players |
| 23:18.39 | JeffM | but it needs a clean state |
| 23:19.04 | JeffM | go play another FPS online |
| 23:19.12 | JeffM | they don't have the same level of cheating that we have |
| 23:19.26 | swigg | most of them make me sick with vertigo |
| 23:20.29 | JeffM | excuses excuses |
| 23:30.21 | *** join/#bzflag Delusional (~delusiona@pool-96-236-228-70.pitbpa.fios.verizon.net) |
| 23:38.14 | *** join/#bzflag TimRiker (~TimRiker@bzflag/projectlead/TimRiker) |
| 23:38.14 | *** mode/#bzflag [+o TimRiker] by ChanServ |