teawrecks

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago

I don't see any of The Avalanches on there. All their stuff is good, but if you haven't listened to them, probably start with the original Since I Left You album.

For reference, I discovered J Dilla - Donuts when trying to find more stuff like The Avalanches.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Yeah, that QI clip came to mind when you mentioned it, but to your point the shape that we consider "fish-like" shows up a lot in water. Even whales and dolphins figured out a similar shape, despite them not being fish (though they might still be etymologically related if you go back far enough?)

Ok, I can buy that the shape of a crab is probably optimized for a certain lifestyle.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the science indicates all mammals have a common ancestor. Not certain about fish, but I think that's a similar case?

To me, the surprising part about carcinisation is that, the form of a crab seems oddly specific, but non-obvious. I mean, I look at the form of a fish and think, "yeah, it makes sense why that shape would be favored in water," but I look at a crab and think "guess that's just what worked out for your ancestors. Tough luck, buddy." But apparently it's not just bad luck, it's a common strategy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 18 hours ago

Oh yes, I was joking, that is definitely a talent outside of my wheelhouse.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That sounds less like a skill and more like a very unfortunate freak accident.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Or your OS* is doing something wrong 😆

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (4 children)

But if you're filling up all RAM and swap, either you needed to upgrade a while ago, or you're doing something wrong.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Or just the form of a crab in general! Carcinisation is so weird, but apparently evolution sometimes goes "Let's just do crab again, that shit was 👌".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

My post was talking about where I thought anti-cheat would need to end up in order to be effective without being invasive, not about the state of anti-cheat now. I gave VAC as an example of a cross-game platform for cheat detection, and thus where valve would most likely stick something like this.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

I was originally going to compare it to a social score, yes, but it differs in that it wouldn't be a rating that other players would have direct influence over.

If by "hire more people" you mean "train an AI", then yes, definitely!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (5 children)

Anti-cheat is an arms race. We just find ourselves at a point where the arms race has progressed to the point where the best known strategy for securing a play session means ostracising custom hw/kernel configurations.

But I have to think it's only a matter of time before even that's not enough, (since there already exist ways around kernel level anticheat, including AI-based techniques that are entirely undetectable).

My guess is the logical conclusion involves a universal reputation based system, where you have an account with some 3rd party system (maybe VAC) that persists across all games you play. It will watch your gameplay, and maintain a (probably hidden) "risk of cheating" score. Then matchmaking for each game will use this score to always pair you against other accounts with a similar score.

Actually, it might not be a "risk of cheating" score so much as a "fun to play with" score. From a gameplay perspective, it's just as fun to play against a highly skilled non-cheating human, as it is a bot that plays identically. But it's less fun to play against a bot that uses info or exploits that even the best non-cheating players don't have access to (ex. wallhacks). So really, the system could basically maintain some playstyle-profile for each player, and matchmaking wouldn't be skill-based, but rather it would attempt to maximize the "fun" of the match-up. If a player is constantly killing people unrealistically fast, or people who play with them tend to drop early, this would degrade their "fun" score and they would tend to be matched only with other unfun players.

I think this would be the only practical way to fight cheating without even more invasive methods that will involve just deanonymizing players (which I think some studio will inevitably try in the near future).

 

I'm curious what people's thoughts are about Matter. This is the first I'm hearing of it.

I've been trying to find a way to replace my old Chromecast Ultra (because Google), but I really like having that little cast button show up in apps, even on the phones of guests. But from what I can tell, Google killed this functionality on open alternatives (ex. Raspicast) with a lockdown to the Chromecast spec.

I'm hopeful that Matter could be a way to have my devices cast streams to each other in a standardized way that wouldn't require me to rely on Google/Apple/Amazon/etc. Maybe even Newpipe could get in on the action?

I don't know how it will work, or if this "Connected Standards Alliance" (which is apparently used to be the ZigBee Alliance, also news to me) will still have to greenlight specific devices despite it being "open", which would rule out Newpipe. I would assume the official YouTube apps will be particularly resistant to supporting Matter.

Anyone have any experience here? Has anyone else successfully replaced their media device with something open that also works with the casting button in apps?

 

I'm trying to wrap my head around the pipewire ecosystem. I think it's great that we're getting a fully featured audio system with all the upsides of pulseaudio and jack, and none of the downsides (that I know of), plus a bunch of completely new features. However, I can't help but think it could have used a little more vision in its interface (or maybe just qpwGraph).

From what I've read, my mental model is that pipewire holds the graph, while a "session manager" manipulates it (create/modify/remove new nodes/ports/links/etc). That's fine. I also understand that wireplumber is such a session manager, and despite having a really convoluted config syntax, it does its job (I assume).

As a simpleton, though, I'm drawn to the wysiwyg interface of qpwGraph, but it's not clear to me how it's supposed to fit into pipewire's vision or how it interacts with wireplumber. It seems to render the current pipewire graph as it is, it can create/remove links between ports, but also it's not a session manager (right?).

I suspect that whatever I can do in qpwGraph I could also do using just wireplumber via conf files and the cli. But dragging my mouse between nodes is so much easier than learning a new syntax. But then I also don't understand what "Active" and "Exclusive" mean. I'm guessing that if Active isn't checked, it won't do anything at all, but if Exclusive isn't checked then...maybe wireplumber can override it? Does that mean if Exclusive IS checked it's able to override wireplumber (look at me, I am the session manager now)? Is that why, if I have a qpwgraph active that links VLC to both OBS and my headset, I hear/see a delay of the link to my headset when a VLC process launches? First wireplumber decides where it should link, and then qpwGraph modifies it several ms after?

I feel like it's currently not clear what qpwGraph is in pipewire terms, but it's also clearly the most intuitive way for someone to use pipewire right now. I think it would be best if qpwGraph was either a standalone, fully featured session manager (not to be used in combination with wireplumber) or just a front end for wireplumber rather than talking to pipewire directly.

Thoughts? Anyone else confused? Am I missing a piece to the puzzle?

 
view more: next ›