| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:00 |
IhrFussel |
Is there a way to dump an entire inventory so that I can simply use string.find() to look for certain stacks? |
| 00:11 |
rubenwardy |
to_table |
| 00:12 |
rubenwardy |
bad idea to do that though |
| 00:12 |
rubenwardy |
unless for debugging |
| 00:15 |
|
__idiot__ joined #minetest-hub |
| 00:25 |
|
nukedclx27 joined #minetest-hub |
| 00:26 |
Sokomine |
IhrFussel: maybe contains_item can be of use for you? |
| 00:56 |
IhrFussel |
If I call contains-item() 5-10 times wouldn't it be much slower than calling string.find() 5-10 times? |
| 00:56 |
IhrFussel |
contains_item() |
| 00:56 |
|
ANAND joined #minetest-hub |
| 01:03 |
BillyS |
IhrFussel, I assume so, but dumping the table to a string might not be that fast either. |
| 01:16 |
|
luizrpgluiz joined #minetest-hub |
| 01:25 |
rubenwardy |
it would probably be slower |
| 01:29 |
|
luizrpgluiz left #minetest-hub |
| 03:04 |
|
breitenj4 joined #minetest-hub |
| 03:15 |
|
jfmcarreira21 joined #minetest-hub |
| 03:20 |
|
Nothing4You22 joined #minetest-hub |
| 03:36 |
|
Raven262 joined #minetest-hub |
| 03:59 |
|
lumberJ joined #minetest-hub |
| 04:39 |
|
Corvus_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 04:44 |
|
lumberJ joined #minetest-hub |
| 04:51 |
|
Raven262 joined #minetest-hub |
| 04:52 |
|
lisac joined #minetest-hub |
| 04:59 |
|
Simba10 joined #minetest-hub |
| 05:04 |
|
James_T9 joined #minetest-hub |
| 05:27 |
|
Stryyker29 joined #minetest-hub |
| 05:57 |
|
Corvus_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:15 |
|
Guest70182 joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:35 |
|
em joined #minetest-hub |
| 06:48 |
|
lumberJ joined #minetest-hub |
| 07:11 |
|
Dargod joined #minetest-hub |
| 07:21 |
|
red-001_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 07:22 |
|
Guest67823 joined #minetest-hub |
| 07:28 |
|
Thargoid joined #minetest-hub |
| 07:41 |
|
Melody\Concerto2 joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:05 |
|
justif29 joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:05 |
|
lumberJ joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:21 |
|
theWhisper_27 joined #minetest-hub |
| 08:25 |
|
jhesketh joined #minetest-hub |
| 09:19 |
IcyDiamond |
rubenwardy: woo! |
| 09:33 |
|
Shnaw12 joined #minetest-hub |
| 09:39 |
rubenwardy |
Fuck me https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=20621 |
| 09:41 |
xerox123_ |
Too right, I know what my next installed mod is |
| 09:46 |
IcyDiamond |
rubenwardy: https://i.lunasqu.ee/Screenshot_18-08-06-12:46:30.png thanks a lot <3 |
| 09:47 |
IcyDiamond |
https://i.lunasqu.ee/Screenshot_18-08-06-12:46:58.png also fluids |
| 10:03 |
|
jeblair joined #minetest-hub |
| 10:18 |
rubenwardy |
Nice |
| 10:18 |
rubenwardy |
IcyDiamond: Consider using minetest.colorize on them, could make them look sexy |
| 10:18 |
rubenwardy |
*even sexier |
| 10:33 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest-hub |
| 10:43 |
|
Raven262 joined #minetest-hub |
| 10:47 |
|
Raven262 joined #minetest-hub |
| 11:07 |
|
supercool23 joined #minetest-hub |
| 11:13 |
IcyDiamond |
rubenwardy: yeah ill see about that :P |
| 11:21 |
|
Krock joined #minetest-hub |
| 11:23 |
Krock |
!tell IhrFussel contains_item is faster than dumping & string find |
| 11:23 |
MinetestBot |
Krock: I'll pass that on when IhrFussel is around |
| 11:26 |
rubenwardy |
Definitely lol |
| 11:27 |
Krock |
just to make sure |
| 11:43 |
|
poxifide8 joined #minetest-hub |
| 11:49 |
|
dindon5 joined #minetest-hub |
| 12:17 |
|
sn0wmonster28 joined #minetest-hub |
| 12:17 |
|
TheMesquito2 joined #minetest-hub |
| 12:21 |
|
AndroBuilder joined #minetest-hub |
| 12:53 |
|
Fuchs joined #minetest-hub |
| 12:57 |
|
Fuchs joined #minetest-hub |
| 13:30 |
|
behalebabo joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:24 |
ANAND |
Is it possible to link more than two lists using listring[] to allow shift-clicking? |
| 14:25 |
|
rubywarden joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:26 |
|
sniper570 joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:35 |
Krock |
ANAND: yes but it's only one "list ring" |
| 14:36 |
Krock |
so you can allow to move multiple lists into a main one, but only move from the main one to another list |
| 14:36 |
ANAND |
Ah |
| 14:37 |
Krock |
IIRC, it will take the next ring item (inventory list info) after the one which was triggered by the shift-click call |
| 14:38 |
ANAND |
So multiple listrings for the main list won't result in unexpected behaviour? |
| 14:39 |
Krock |
code to confirm my "IIRC" https://github.com/minetest/minetest/blob/master/src/gui/guiFormSpecMenu.cpp#L3640-L3652 |
| 14:40 |
Krock |
to move something out of the main list, it will take the first occurrence of the main list and take the next item to move the items there |
| 14:40 |
Krock |
That behaviour is surely handled properly |
| 14:41 |
ANAND |
Alright, I'll give it a shot |
| 14:41 |
Krock |
but just calling listring[] probably won't do what you want, so specify parameters |
| 14:42 |
ANAND |
Thought so... :) |
| 14:44 |
ANAND |
Does the order of the listrings matter? |
| 14:45 |
Krock |
? Yes. Yes, it does. |
| 14:45 |
rubenwardy |
Yes |
| 14:45 |
ANAND |
The first is the origin, second the destination? |
| 14:46 |
Krock |
yes and no |
| 14:47 |
Krock |
imagine this: A B C. Shift click in C, and it'll be moved to A |
| 14:47 |
Krock |
shift click in A and it'll go to B |
| 14:47 |
Krock |
ofc is A defined first |
| 14:47 |
ANAND |
ohh! |
| 14:47 |
ANAND |
right |
| 14:47 |
ANAND |
that makes it very clear |
| 14:48 |
Krock |
!next |
| 14:48 |
MinetestBot |
Another satisfied customer. Next! |
| 14:48 |
ANAND |
Waaaaiiit! Not yet... |
| 14:49 |
ANAND |
Do I have to use one pair of listrings for AB, BC, and CA? |
| 14:49 |
ANAND |
i.e. 6 listrings in total? |
| 14:50 |
ANAND |
or just A->B->C (i.e. 3)? |
| 14:50 |
|
IhrFussel joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:50 |
MinetestBot |
IhrFussel: Aug-06 11:23 UTC <Krock> contains_item is faster than dumping & string find |
| 14:50 |
ANAND |
I'm guessing 6 |
| 14:50 |
Krock |
ANAND: no. specify one by one |
| 14:50 |
ANAND |
right, thanks |
| 14:50 |
Krock |
don't use listring[] without arguments when you have more than two lists |
| 14:50 |
Krock |
unless you know what you do |
| 14:50 |
IhrFussel |
Krock, are you sure that it#s still faster when I call it quite a few times? Isn't contains_item() a lookup every time? |
| 14:51 |
ANAND |
Understood |
| 14:51 |
Krock |
IhrFussel: ofc it is. but the lookup happens in C++ |
| 14:51 |
Krock |
so it's a simple function call, a hundred microseconds (roughly guessed) in C++ and then back to Lua |
| 14:54 |
IhrFussel |
Okay then^^ Also is this guy implying that banning users shouldn't be a thing? There are lots of cases where banning is necessary and there is no other solution than to ignore troublemakers and let them destroy your server https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7625#issuecomment-410674013 |
| 14:55 |
Krock |
No, they're suggesting that players must gain their interact&shout privs |
| 14:55 |
IhrFussel |
The question is if banning makes even sense in MT if all we have is the IP |
| 14:55 |
Krock |
so that the loss is higher |
| 14:55 |
Krock |
probably worth closing that issue. Privacy issue. |
| 14:56 |
IhrFussel |
You cannot make players gain their basic privs on every server... that depends fully on the gameplay you want to achieve |
| 14:57 |
rubenwardy |
You can usually protect against grieifing and such pretty easy |
| 14:57 |
Krock |
surely you can. It's as simple as an "I agree" button on join |
| 14:57 |
rubenwardy |
The problem is with chat offenses and other subjective interactions |
| 14:57 |
rubenwardy |
I agree doesn't mean they'll do it |
| 14:58 |
Krock |
that's for interact. you could let them unlock shout by buying it or registering an email |
| 14:58 |
|
rolig joined #minetest-hub |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
Every user on CTF has to click agree too |
| 14:58 |
IhrFussel |
I also don't see it as a privacy problem if we can only detect the device they play on...their device doesn't belong to them in that sense, it's just one of billions |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
It's also hashed |
| 14:58 |
Krock |
the issue is that a device is pretty much unique identifyable |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
The issue is that it's a tracking token |
| 14:58 |
rubenwardy |
And yes that |
| 14:59 |
rubenwardy |
It would be better to combine this with a central login system anyway |
| 14:59 |
rubenwardy |
Well, or not do this |
| 14:59 |
IhrFussel |
Just because you can detect a certain device doesn't mean you have access to any data...privacy is only about data |
| 14:59 |
Krock |
IhrFussel: no but you can track it |
| 15:00 |
IhrFussel |
Tracking only makes sense if you can associate the device with a profile which we can't |
| 15:00 |
Krock |
"makes sense" doesn't matter in the privacy rules |
| 15:01 |
Krock |
you can associate the device with nicknames, maybe on multiple servers if you centralize it |
| 15:01 |
Krock |
nevertheless can all this data be faked |
| 15:02 |
IhrFussel |
Lots of games give each device an ID and they don't face any lawsuits |
| 15:03 |
IhrFussel |
And just because we are OSS we have to accept troublemakers ruining our servers |
| 15:04 |
IhrFussel |
Some are THAT dedicated to trolling MT servers...you can ban their IP multiple times and they won't leave ... these people are wasting staff time and can (partly) destroy the gameplay |
| 15:05 |
Krock |
how about if you make the join procedure take more time? More effort? Require an email verification? |
| 15:05 |
Krock |
Let the staff ban them instead of wasting time |
| 15:06 |
Krock |
Using autocomplete it takes a few seconds to ban someone |
| 15:07 |
nerzhul |
warn about email verification, it's a personal data, GPDR is strict |
| 15:07 |
Krock |
oh right |
| 15:07 |
ANAND |
How would central login be implemented? Using email verification? |
| 15:08 |
Krock |
Eye and teeth scan |
| 15:08 |
Krock |
Or by SQL injection |
| 15:09 |
ANAND |
..... |
| 15:09 |
ANAND |
Forum accounts? |
| 15:11 |
|
Menche19 joined #minetest-hub |
| 15:14 |
nerzhul |
google or FB authenticatio n? :D |
| 15:17 |
ANAND |
lol |
| 15:17 |
|
zenguy- joined #minetest-hub |
| 15:17 |
rubenwardy |
My design would use its own accounts |
| 15:17 |
rubenwardy |
Probably move from cdb to a central system idk |
| 15:17 |
rubenwardy |
It would be based on certificates and stapling |
| 15:18 |
rubenwardy |
You could have xban on the central system as well |
| 15:18 |
rubenwardy |
Ie: a server code say, don't let this account or any associated IPs join my server |
| 15:18 |
rubenwardy |
Not entirely sure on the details of that yet |
| 15:19 |
rubenwardy |
It would have to be more similar to a password manager anyway |
| 15:19 |
rubenwardy |
:( |
| 15:19 |
IhrFussel |
I'd argue that my server already punishes troublemakers...at least if they played actively before cause they lose their level, their unlocked features (based on level), their protections, their stuff, their friends (ingame friend list) and more ... the real problem is just with those who join once and never again |
| 15:19 |
rubenwardy |
Like, usernames on a server are owned by a central user of not necessarily the same name |
| 15:21 |
nerzhul |
rubenwardy when the postgresql backend will come it can be easy to modify the pg code to implement a such thing and have a central db |
| 15:21 |
rubenwardy |
That sounds like a bad idea |
| 15:21 |
rubenwardy |
Let's not do that |
| 15:21 |
rubenwardy |
This is central as in minetest-wide and official |
| 15:21 |
rubenwardy |
Not as in shared by a few users |
| 15:21 |
nerzhul |
central auth for users ? |
| 15:22 |
nerzhul |
in MT coredev servers ? |
| 15:22 |
nerzhul |
on* |
| 15:22 |
rubenwardy |
No, all serverd |
| 15:22 |
nerzhul |
like minecraft then ? |
| 15:22 |
rubenwardy |
No |
| 15:22 |
rubenwardy |
Because this would work without the central database online |
| 15:22 |
Krock |
I'd prefer to have multiple central databases, run by people who actually run the servers |
| 15:22 |
nerzhul |
then if it's centralized per server network a central pg db is sufficient to have common auth. Now we have the new auth backend we can have common auth |
| 15:23 |
nerzhul |
Krock i'd prefer too, i justwanted to be clear :) |
| 15:23 |
rubenwardy |
Fragmentation |
| 15:23 |
Krock |
^ |
| 15:23 |
rubenwardy |
Also doesn't solve the issue |
| 15:23 |
rubenwardy |
This is pointless if every server has their own |
| 15:24 |
rubenwardy |
With my design, you could just have multiple CAs |
| 15:24 |
rubenwardy |
Then it would be federatised |
| 15:24 |
rubenwardy |
Or whatever the term is |
| 15:25 |
Calinou |
I've seen other open source/freeware games add centralized auth systems, it didn't always turn out well |
| 15:25 |
rubenwardy |
The important thing is the central server gives some sort of token, ideally a certificate, which is then used to login with untrusted servers |
| 15:25 |
Calinou |
most games ended up not requiring authenticated accounts anyway |
| 15:25 |
Calinou |
(i.e. they became optional) |
| 15:25 |
rubenwardy |
This would be opt out |
| 15:25 |
rubenwardy |
You can just fall back to SRP |
| 15:28 |
|
CBugDCoder joined #minetest-hub |
| 15:30 |
rubenwardy |
I have bigger priorities though |
| 15:30 |
rubenwardy |
Like actually having some QA |
| 15:30 |
rubenwardy |
And sane input bindings |
| 15:40 |
|
Bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 15:44 |
nerzhul |
rubenwardy: a certificate is too high security for a game like MT |
| 15:45 |
rubenwardy |
You could use tokens instead |
| 15:45 |
rubenwardy |
But it's less reliable if the central server goes down |
| 15:46 |
rubenwardy |
Plus the difficulty of issuing new tokens |
| 15:46 |
rubenwardy |
Alternatively you could just not worry about it going doqn |
| 15:46 |
rubenwardy |
Make it redundant |
| 15:48 |
rubenwardy |
There's no such thing as too high security |
| 15:48 |
rubenwardy |
There's only over engineering |
| 15:50 |
Krock |
well, certificates are surely never wrong but mostly too much effrot |
| 15:50 |
Krock |
*effort |
| 15:51 |
|
BWBellairs29 joined #minetest-hub |
| 15:52 |
rubenwardy |
Yeah |
| 15:52 |
rubenwardy |
This is low priority anyway |
| 15:52 |
rubenwardy |
Therefore probably not worth the effort |
| 15:56 |
Calinou |
Xonotic uses a public/private key system for authentication |
| 15:56 |
Calinou |
a lot of players end up losing their private key when moving over machines (they don't copy their private key files) :( |
| 15:58 |
sfan5 |
Calinou: xonotic doesn't really tell you that it has just generated an important file that you should totally™ not lose |
| 15:58 |
sfan5 |
neither does mumble IIRC |
| 15:59 |
Calinou |
Mumble does, but it's not prominent enough to my taste |
| 16:00 |
rubenwardy |
Doesn't matter if they lose there key |
| 16:01 |
rubenwardy |
The central server will issue them a new one |
| 16:01 |
Calinou |
yeah, but they will appear as separate players |
| 16:01 |
rubenwardy |
No |
| 16:02 |
Calinou |
http://stats.xonotic.org/search?fs=&nick=calinou&server_name=&map_name=&submit= once returned 5 entries, mind you :P |
| 16:02 |
Calinou |
I got all of them merged eventually |
| 16:02 |
Calinou |
and now I make sure to copy my key when installing a new PC |
| 16:02 |
rubenwardy |
The certificate just says that the central server vouches that they're actually foobar |
| 16:02 |
rubenwardy |
I'm talking about minetest |
| 16:02 |
rubenwardy |
Or my proposal |
| 16:02 |
rubenwardy |
The purpose of the certificate is to allow logging in when the central server isn't available |
| 16:02 |
rubenwardy |
Which is one of the big criticism |
| 16:03 |
rubenwardy |
Actually |
| 16:03 |
rubenwardy |
A much simpler way would be to generate a load of one time passwords to login with. Less secure, but no certs |
| 16:05 |
|
DI3HARD139 joined #minetest-hub |
| 16:18 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-hub |
| 16:47 |
|
twoelk joined #minetest-hub |
| 17:18 |
|
bwarden joined #minetest-hub |
| 17:31 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 17:31 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 17:34 |
|
garywhite2 joined #minetest-hub |
| 17:57 |
|
Corvus_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:00 |
|
Bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:00 |
|
Bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:11 |
|
icywiz28 joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:18 |
|
Kirito joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:18 |
|
Krock joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:43 |
|
AndroBuilder joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:46 |
|
Krock joined #minetest-hub |
| 18:51 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:09 |
|
AlwaysHigh0 joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:23 |
|
CBugDCoder joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:50 |
|
AndroBuilder joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:52 |
|
was joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:53 |
|
Mr_Pardison joined #minetest-hub |
| 19:55 |
|
Yes_ma`am joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:14 |
|
trqx21 joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:17 |
|
CBugDCoder joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:17 |
|
milky9 joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:23 |
|
CalebDavis joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:24 |
|
CalebDavis joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:24 |
|
Mr_Pardison joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:26 |
|
ynyounuo joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:28 |
|
CBugDCoder joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:29 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:29 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:34 |
|
CBugDCoder joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:41 |
|
Erenzie4 joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:42 |
|
luizrpgluiz joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:43 |
|
luizrpgluiz left #minetest-hub |
| 20:47 |
|
Erenzie27 joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:47 |
|
Mr_Pardison joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:51 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:51 |
|
garywhite joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:59 |
|
Bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 20:59 |
|
Bobr joined #minetest-hub |
| 21:03 |
|
tacocat14 joined #minetest-hub |
| 21:04 |
|
Guest89349 joined #minetest-hub |
| 21:13 |
|
Elwell_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 21:27 |
Fixer |
HEY, LITTLE DRUM! |
| 21:29 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-hub |
| 21:49 |
|
NSCLRP-1 joined #minetest-hub |
| 21:56 |
|
Zoddo17 joined #minetest-hub |
| 22:05 |
|
barjac_22 joined #minetest-hub |
| 22:51 |
|
Bobr_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 22:51 |
|
Bobr_ joined #minetest-hub |
| 23:16 |
|
ANAND joined #minetest-hub |
| 23:17 |
|
benrob0329 joined #minetest-hub |
| 23:47 |
|
ChickeNES joined #minetest-hub |
