| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:27 |
|
sparky4 joined #minetest |
| 01:13 |
|
appguru joined #minetest |
| 01:21 |
|
smk joined #minetest |
| 01:30 |
|
appguru joined #minetest |
| 02:07 |
|
fling joined #minetest |
| 04:04 |
|
sparky4 joined #minetest |
| 04:14 |
|
Trifton joined #minetest |
| 04:15 |
|
Trifton joined #minetest |
| 04:33 |
|
Trifton joined #minetest |
| 04:37 |
|
Trifton joined #minetest |
| 04:48 |
|
lemonzest joined #minetest |
| 04:56 |
|
Miner_48er joined #minetest |
| 04:59 |
|
Trifton joined #minetest |
| 05:00 |
|
MTDiscord joined #minetest |
| 05:38 |
|
YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest |
| 05:43 |
|
Trifton joined #minetest |
| 09:06 |
|
definitelya joined #minetest |
| 09:08 |
|
xBarkDog joined #minetest |
| 09:25 |
|
Alnotz joined #minetest |
| 09:48 |
|
YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest |
| 09:51 |
|
Talkless joined #minetest |
| 09:56 |
|
Talkless joined #minetest |
| 10:32 |
|
jaca122 joined #minetest |
| 11:09 |
jonadab |
Honestly, I still consider IPv6 to be a solution in search of a problem. Not specifically regarding Minetest, but _in general_ |
| 11:12 |
jonadab |
What they actually needed to do, was just have ICANN charge a small fee per IPv4 address, and the regionals pass that along, etc. ISPs could decide whether to bundle the cost into their service or charge customers for it outright. But this would mean organizations sitting on huge blocks of unused addresses would be paying for that privilege. |
| 11:27 |
|
s20 joined #minetest |
| 11:31 |
Ingar |
weren't the IPv4 addresses sold out already ? |
| 11:37 |
MTDiscord |
<jordan4ibanez> I bought them all off of aliexpress, very sorry about that. They were on sale |
| 11:39 |
MTDiscord |
<jordan4ibanez> Happened in ?2015? apparently https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv4_address_exhaustion |
| 12:16 |
|
mrkubax10 joined #minetest |
| 12:26 |
|
TomTom_ joined #minetest |
| 12:27 |
|
sparky4 joined #minetest |
| 12:31 |
|
cation joined #minetest |
| 12:36 |
|
appguru joined #minetest |
| 12:49 |
|
s20 joined #minetest |
| 12:56 |
|
fling joined #minetest |
| 13:18 |
sfan5 |
jonadab: that doesn't fix there being less IP adresses than humans |
| 13:22 |
|
imi joined #minetest |
| 13:49 |
|
Niklp joined #minetest |
| 14:20 |
|
Sobinec joined #minetest |
| 14:38 |
|
pantaker joined #minetest |
| 14:42 |
|
pantaker joined #minetest |
| 15:13 |
|
appguru joined #minetest |
| 15:17 |
|
Sobinec joined #minetest |
| 16:25 |
|
Sobinec joined #minetest |
| 16:51 |
|
Desour joined #minetest |
| 17:20 |
|
Talkless joined #minetest |
| 17:20 |
|
Sobinec joined #minetest |
| 17:31 |
|
appguru joined #minetest |
| 17:50 |
|
definitelya joined #minetest |
| 17:55 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> We don't need an address per human, we need one per device. Luckily we've got 48 bits to play with, given that we've got port numbers too, thanks to NAT. NAT was the solution we actually chose, for better and/or for worse, for the problem IPv6 was supposed to fix. |
| 17:57 |
|
mrkubax10 joined #minetest |
| 18:12 |
|
json joined #minetest |
| 18:13 |
sfan5 |
who decides who is allowed to host a http server on port 443 and who isn't? |
| 18:13 |
sfan5 |
pay to win or first come first served? |
| 18:14 |
json |
I wonder when it will be announced which game won GameJam? |
| 18:19 |
json |
it just seems like it should have been announced already |
| 18:21 |
rubenwardy |
I think warr's point is that you don't need a IP address per person, as people can share IP addresses using NAT. But you do need one per service |
| 18:22 |
sfan5 |
I know |
| 18:23 |
sfan5 |
I'm bringing in a new assumption, which is "every human should be able to run a service on its default port", which is not solved |
| 18:24 |
sfan5 |
hence NAT is not a "solution" that could replace IPv6 |
| 18:39 |
sfan5 |
cool project idea: minimal minetest-compatible server written from scratch with just enough to get a few nodes on the screen |
| 18:40 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> IPv6 doesn't need to be replaced. Replacement is when you have a thing already deployed and need to remove it to put something in its place. There is nothing in IPv6's place right now, especially not IPv6 itself. NAT is a shitty works around that we're using for right now just because the official solution is apparently not up to the task. |
| 18:40 |
rubenwardy |
sfan5: I think jordan is doing that right now |
| 18:42 |
sfan5 |
I thought he wanted to rewrite everything (eventually)? |
| 18:46 |
|
jaca122 joined #minetest |
| 18:52 |
sfan5 |
approaching it with the intent to make a minimum viable product probably has a different result than planning to build the whole thing and taking the snapshot when you have the minimal features working |
| 18:53 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> Only if your approach to planning to build the whole thing is wrong enough. |
| 18:53 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> which, granted, it usually is. |
| 18:54 |
sfan5 |
well, maybe |
| 18:54 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> (using the generic everybody "you" there, not specifically calling out sfan5 or something 😆) |
| 18:55 |
sfan5 |
doing what gets you results quickest and iterating from there is a valid project strategy |
| 18:55 |
sfan5 |
as opposed to doing lots of things and the lights only go on once you put all finished parts together |
| 18:56 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> There's a lot of risk in letting untested work pile up, so getting something that "works" quickly is generally really valuable. |
| 19:01 |
|
HumanG33k joined #minetest |
| 20:44 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> Anyone remember that "entities disappear when shaders are turned off" bug? IIRC it was traced to some lighting calc issue and fixed in like 5.6 or something ... anyway, it's back again (or some form of it). Turn off shaders and all the entities in Citadel disappear. |
| 20:47 |
sfan5 |
easy fix: drop non-shader support |
| 20:49 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> If you can do that without performance loss, that could work. |
| 20:49 |
Krock |
today's conclusions: 1. drop Windows support, 2. require shaders ON |
| 20:49 |
Krock |
sounds like a perfect new year plan |
| 20:51 |
MTDiscord |
<warr1024> It looks like it's a problem with use_texture_alpha=true. Which, apparently, as of 5.8.0 is still the way it's defined for entities, rather than supporting blend/clip. |
| 20:53 |
MTDiscord |
<jordan4ibanez> You had me at drop windows support |
| 20:53 |
MTDiscord |
<jordan4ibanez> Nah I'm just kidding, but why would we do that? |
| 21:01 |
MTDiscord |
<jordan4ibanez> Hello yes, I finally lost my mind and started rebuilding the entire game engine from scratch |
| 21:03 |
MTDiscord |
<jordan4ibanez> It took a week, but I figured out a sane way to implement the infrastructure of the engine. You can actually break it off into two separate projects the way I wrote it pretty easily if you so wish, it's one in the same, but completely uncoupled besides the master game struct optionally holding both of them |
| 21:16 |
|
Thelie joined #minetest |
| 21:24 |
|
Niklp left #minetest |
| 21:30 |
|
grorp joined #minetest |
| 21:50 |
MinetestBot |
[git] sfence -> minetest/minetest: Method add_pos for object/player (#14126) d0753dd https://github.com/minetest/minetest/commit/d0753dddb112f717f5b636d194b2d7c3917ff0a8 (2024-01-01T21:48:56Z) |
| 21:50 |
MinetestBot |
[git] appgurueu -> minetest/minetest: Comply with base64 license terms (#14199) 2c44620 https://github.com/minetest/minetest/commit/2c44620e5e344ca2b4acaaaa5408502332ca5aff (2024-01-01T21:49:12Z) |
| 21:59 |
|
Thelie joined #minetest |
| 22:07 |
|
Thelie joined #minetest |
| 22:10 |
|
Desour joined #minetest |
| 22:24 |
|
Boingus joined #minetest |
| 22:53 |
|
Thelie joined #minetest |
| 23:13 |
|
Thelie joined #minetest |
| 23:36 |
|
panwolfram joined #minetest |
