I can't believe that the toll will actually be paid - it would turn Iran into an INSANELY wealthy superpower and easily give them the funds to hugely increase their availability to fund groups like hezbollah etc.
In demoscene nomenclature, an "intro" is a demo with a sizelimit. This was entered in the demo compo, ergo "no size limit".
With file size, most democoders go all the way, both ways. By that I mean that if they choose a sizelimit category, they squeeze out every last byte, and if they don't, most don't care about filesize at all. There's demos these days that are many times bigger than an acceptable video recording would be because nobody bothered to eg compress the assets, it includes an entire game engine, etc. Like 800MB for a 3 minute audiovisual show. Kinda ridiculous but it's just.. well, call it either laziness or focused pragmatism :-) Gotta get that prod out before the deadline!
The Razor1911 zip[1] is 30MB, which actually is very much on the small side for a current-day demo.
> The Razor1911 zip[1] is 30MB, which actually is very much on the small side for a current-day demo.
> and music is probably a significant fraction?
For the Razor1911.exe in the ZIP which ends up being 31MB on disk, which is almost entirely made out of a compressed 145MB executable, whose size is mostly 48 PNG files (11MB), 69MB of zeros (nice?), 329 compiled DirectX shader blobs (DXBC) totaling 6MB, One large MP3 of about 17MB and finally like 34MB of what seems to be other types of runtime data like asset tables, font and UI data,
Seems about right then, my guess was about a third for music, classic 128kbps mp3's are at about a meg a minute (960kb/m) so this is at a slightly higher bitrate. Not sure how compressible those parts are but between half and a third in the end depending on the final compressor checks out.
This came up in the Discord party chat, basically there isn't a size limit in the rules[1], but going beyond 2GB would be concerning that it's not a real-time demo but instead just playback of animation.
The main thing I don't like is type-ability. Even now I type in 192.168.1.14 to connect to my mates computer to play satisfactory. No way in heck am I trying in an ip6!
I wish I had your problems. :D . Problems that are really only a mild inconvenience, and can be solved with a single line in hosts file.
My biggest and possibly only problem preventing me from going IPV6-only is that Github doesn't support it, and there's just too much darn software I need to needs Github. (Yes, I know NAT64 exist - it's just extra complexity for something that is not even my problem in the first place).
I never have to debug why my dhcp server isn't handing out ipv4 addresses or deal with conflicts, but if I did, it'd break mdns too. mdns is an extra moving part to deal with.
By debugging I mean just checking if you have not blocked broadcast packets at the firewall or some similar misconfiguration. I doubt it’s actual bugs when it doesn’t work. On your second point, it’s actually more resilient than DHCP because it works with IPv6 too.
Idk, just checked my LAN-connected Mac's arp tables now and none of the hostnames are there, even after I ping the multicast. Haven't messed with any settings.
Yeah they respond. `ping mdns.mcast.net`, shows responses from ip addresses I recognize on my LAN, `arp -a`, still no hostnames. Tried all the other suggestions online too. Tried on my Mac and Rpi, same network, just a single ethernet LAN.
Router is all default except that I port-forwarded something. Funny enough, it sees the hostnames. I'm guessing it's some problem with both my computers, but no real need to fix this because I memorized the addrs already.
I've had numerous issues with dhcp servers over the years and clients not understanding their responses. Acting like they never have issues is just burying your head in the sand. mDNS often works just fine on most common OSes, if you don't explicitly block them.
> Why not just expect your OS's DNS setup to actually just work?
Maybe use an OS or DNS stack that isn't terrible?
Incredible asking for a not-broken DNS and IP stack is just too far out there when it seems most of the closed source OS platforms seem to manage just fine.
Or let me guess, you've specifically configured it to not "leak" such useful information?
I understand there is a position of "we've always done it this way, so we keep doing it this way"
And.
"we need to move with the times and use new tech!".
But surely there is some happy middle ground that doesn't end up with a entire js runtime in the damn start menu?
I'm a fairly casual dev compared to faang folk, but surely even they realised this was an awful choice?
I read the first two paragraphs, found a bunch of fairly glaring errors, and got put off.
>It has type hints, which are optional, which means they’re not there.
I mean it is there, and it works.
I've also not had an AI make a dict key error in a while, but mostly as I use objects - haven't magic strings in code been bad for a while now?
Also llms are bad at architecture, not things like typing or keys. I'm really struggling with even opus having an absolute atrocious abstraction approach, and has made implementing business logic incredibly difficult. Borderline having to throw out days of work.
>>It has type hints, which are optional, which means they’re not there.
>I mean it is there, and it works.
The argument is that developers will avoid using things if they don't have to, especially if they're not used to it. But this isn't every developer nor an universal truth, just a jab at things.
Google is paying Mozilla to be the default search engine. Google is only paying Mozilla because Firefox has users, regardless if they use the default search engine or not. So, indirectly everyone is the 'product'.
I'm sure if 95% of people did swap to ddg, then google may change their mind.
Also I believe there is the possibility Google also pays Mozilla to offer competition so Chrome isn't considered a monopoly (but maybe Edge has changed that to some extent?)
Wouldn't having a warrant, with the purpose redacted - if that's the concern, be a good balance of "proof of legitimacy" but also keeping some presumably sensitive information private?
I feel even if the models are stagnating, the tooling around them, and the integrations and harnesses they have are getting significantly more capable (if not always 'better' - the recent vscode update really handicapped them for some reason). Things like the new agent from booking.com or whatever, if it could integrate with all hotels, activities, mapping tools, flight system, etc could be hugely powerful.
Assuming we get no better than opus 4.6, they're very capable. Even if they make up nonsense 5% of the time!
reply