JoeSchmuckatelli

Miley Cyrus' New Year special... ...is actually good. Just had David Byrne singing David Bowie and Dolly is coming up next.

Pork tenderloin in a spicy mustard /balsamic & rosemary glaze. Smoked. Cheese grits. Baked. Naptime!

Perhaps a certain old man Kabaev might pick up all his toys and go home to work on himself for a while? Would be nice. Also, for KSP 2 to live up to expectations. (Just to keep this game related)

I think I'm getting from this that there isn't much a gamer can do on their end? (And yeah, I'm starting to see why network engineers get paid well!)

Hey thanks very much for this! You've nailed the part I was missing. Going back to my brain-state at the time of the question (prior to the excellent descriptions of plasmas above) I'd have to say I thought a plasma was composed of the separate atomic parts - which was why I kept asking about recombination and coherence. That may have been spurred by the description of the Tokamak using escaping neutrons to heat the blanket. Hard to imagine how you can break something down enough to free neutrons and that it can recombine as anything but hydrogen. Seeing that the Tokamak analogously is a chemical reaction, it now makes sense how the process works with neutrons being a waste product of the combination of different elements as opposed to a plasma which I imagined as an element broken down into the constituent parts and contained in a cloud via magnetic fields. (I recognize as I write this phrase that it's atomic rather than chemical, but because I took chemistry in college and remember that chemistry allows for the exchange of electrons and the combination of elements and waste /byproducts... it's an analogy that makes sense) I guess this is an example of 'a little education is a dangerous thing'. I was blind to how weak my understanding of nuclear /plasma physics was until the instant discussion! Great question! - and I'd have quipped that yeah, it's a thing... But then you want credibility... And my 'source' would be an internet article I read a while ago. My memory hints that there might be a Scientific American piece from years ago - but memory is faulty

I used that only as a representation of the PC host as server system that existed long ago. Sorry for the confusion. The game in question is a modern shooter where the devs are located in a region where IPv4 is the norm.

The problem (as I laid out in the Science Question thread) is that people are claiming that Game Developer from IPv4 Region's netcode is borked for people with Clients in IPv6 Region... and Developer prioritizes IPv4 folks because that's what's common in Developer's country of origin (despite plenty of customers from around the world) - creating lag, desync and dropped connections/packets for people using IPv6 internet. The search is for if and whether there's anything that can be done on the Client side... or do they have to wait for the Dev team to 'mature' their code?

I'd bet money on it! In this one, they found water! (These plants are not the life you are looking for)

Art? Is this one of those AI things or has someone played around with actual photos? That falls into the 'seriously - we just found that NOW!?!' category. Very 'wow' research

Is this normal now? I know it used to be common (Rainbow Six, 1998) - but now?

That is interesting and not wholly inconsistent with what others are describing as the problem. So... If you assume an independent Dev studio - publishing from a region where IPv4 is the norm and IPv6 region customers are incedental (secondary customers) would you expect to see problems reported by the IPv6 people that are not experienced by those in the primary market? (I have seen maps that IPv6 is only common in North America, parts of Europe, a couple of places in SA and Africa - leaving vast swaths of the planet still using IPv4 as the primary protocol) Is there anything that a user can do? --- - - - - - - Related question from something you wrote: ... in the old days of gaming, players computers' were the server(host) as I understand it. Now, studios rent (or provide) servers in various parts of different regions. I assume that this means that when I hit 'join battle' in the old days (Rainbow Six, 1998) that the game would link me to a host and that host was someone else's PC. But today I assume that when I hit join battle that I'm linking up with other players on a dedicated server that might be in a node like DC, Chicago or San Francisco - and that all players PC's are just clients. If the Dev studio (today) writes a net code they are familiar with (IPv4) and puts the game on a server in DC, an IPv6 region - the IPv6 should accommodate legacy protocols, right? Or does the studio need to adjust the net code for the game in a way that ports it to the different regions' protocols? (is any of that right?) So again if the problem is correctly identified... Is there anything that can be done on the client side (IPv6 client to IPv6 server running code written for IPv4) to reduce or eliminate desync and lag or other connectivity problems? Edit - my wife started yammering at me about 'post-Christmas-clean-up' as if I had some responsibility in her pet project. (grin!) Forgot to ask; in modern games... is it common to have a player's PC be the host today?

No. I'm going to have to dance with the forum rules - but my response requires it. I have a sister who is a doctor. A very good one. Her resume includes three prestigious universities you and anyone mildly familiar with America will be familiar with and acknowledge as top end. Sometime in the early years of her practice she met a nice guy who works in computer science and whose whole family life revolves around his church. They married and she joined the church. For context, she and I were raised in a household where we claimed a religion but did not participate in any particular organization of the faith. Once married, my sister's life became very involved with the church she joined - not just 'church on Sunday' (an insult, btw) but 'living the Word'. The Arabic word 'Islam' means 'submitting to God.' This would be a good description for what participants of this very mainstream Christian Church expect of members of their community. 'Faith' is in effect an obligation and the 'Word' is a mystery and when you find something in conflict with 'The Word' it is your burden to resolve the problem in favor of the interpretation given by the Church. They also expect you to Live the Word publicly - which means you talk about it a lot and try to share your thoughts with everyone. (Effectively self-policing but also creates communal expectations). So where her faith is not in conflict with the science she's learned - there is no problem. But any 'tie-goes-to-the-runner' situation is always resolved in favor of the Church. This is enormously common across the US. Further, the US has a historical cultural participation in religiosity that is unique and distinct from other nations. The gamut is broad. Now - take a slice of the population that is already predisposed to prioritize beliefs over facts - and then make facts difficult to acquire (like hiding them behind the gates of a University and degree programs) and have the educated conditioned to use inaccessible words when describing 'science'? The result should not be that surprising. Further compound this with the way the human brain works - where it is constantly trying to create patterns out of perceptions and 'a world view' where things are predictable - and let that person have an experience they don't comprehend... They know they had it - but it is outside of their faith and knowledge - and someone explains 'Space Aliens' to them (and that someone else with power and money knows the truth and is hiding it)... Suddenly, that 'makes sense'. That person will honestly and earnestly express their truth to people around them and others will believe and support them. None of which is in conflict with the science they know. Internal combustion engine (science) just works, so it's not a problem. They don't 'deny' it out of hand as science = evil. But because so much of 'science' is behind pay-walls and not part of the common experience... Effectively anyone believing in Science is asking everyone else around them to have faith in their education and knowledge. So... Since the good Reverend Doctor (Ph.D) is saying one thing and the Professor Doctor (Ph.D) is saying another... Which expert do you believe? Whose faith do you have confidence in? Next- take a smaller slice of people (still, millions) who are not part of a mainstream Church that functions across society (one where their faith and science are not too much in conflict) and if those people also haven't had the benefit of a good education? Then, expose them to the internet. They are going to find communities of people who believe all kinds of stuff and be drawn into those who have similar interests and experiences. Without recognizing it they soon find themselves in a self-reinforced echo chamber of things other people might label as weird, but that make sense to them and their internet friends. ... So - some perspective: I've been labeled as a denier because I don't toe the line on the doctrine of GW and LCDM (keeping an open mind and asking questions = heresy). I seriously doubt that the label applies - but the accusation has been leveled - and earnestly. Thus, to my mind, the phrase 'science denial' paints with a very broad brush. Do I, who have studied not only science but the history of Christianity, find my sister (the MD) 'science denying' in some of the things she now espouses since immersing herself in her faith? Sure. Is she objectively 'science denying'? No. So - back to your question: Does 'a “partial” rejection of science constitute a rejection of science as a whole' - and I think you have to look at 'science denialism' as a spectrum - or perhaps take it on a point-by-point basis. Oddly - I have to accept that a flat earther or an Area 51 conspirist is on the same spectra as someone who doubts GW is going to kill us all in the next 100 years: there are things of science both accept (internal combustion, computer science) and things they don't (the earth is round, the worst-case scenario is guaranteed and soon).

Huh. The people complaining about the net code of a certain game seem convinced that is the issue. I'd never heard anything like that. The alternative explanation includes CGNAT on IPv6 'closing the hole' in the firewall and the gamer's client losing connection with the server... Which would not happen in Ipv4. All this is Martian to me - but I am starting to see shapes in the mist (to mix metaphors)

Can anyone here answer questions about how IPV4 server might impact gaming from a region where IPV6 is the standard?

If a game company is still writing their net (&server) code for IPV 4, how does that affect lag and desync for people in countries where IPV 6 has been implemented?

@StrandedonEarth Keep it up and see what happens

Back when Hubble (the astronomer) was doing his work, negatives were the norm. http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/images/m33hub.jpg Here is one of Hubble's photographic plates of the center of M33, with Cepheid variables marked. If you look closely (and if the original resolution has been preserved from plate to journal to scanner to web page to your computer), you will see that the gray "nebulosity" is broken up into little specks that are individual stars. (The plate is a negative, as was the convention for publishing results -- the stars look black and the sky white) (From ApJ, 63, 236, 1926)

Yeah - that is a cool image - and evocative of the light between galaxies. Thanks! Interestingly - I'm pretty sure it's the same image - but with a different artistic impression. Old astronomy stills used to look like that. Pretty sure Webb is only sending data and the team can create an image from the data, but the whole thing is a lot more complex than just capturing an image on a CCD or CMOS

Dear God! My eyes!

No - although it's cool - the black on white (which has design elements of an actual astronomy still... But apparently some colorization elements from NASA (at least according to the complaints comments.)) When I click on it I get a pdf

Pretty amazing picture - but I can't figure out how to imbed it. content://media/external/downloads/6990 "In clusters of galaxies, there is a fraction of stars that wander off into intergalactic space because they are pulled out by huge tidal forces generated between the galaxies in the cluster. The light emitted by these stars is called the intracluster light (ICL) and is extremely faint. Its brightness is less than 1% of the brightness of the darkest sky we can observe from Earth. This is one reason why images taken from space are very valuable for analyzing it." https://www.google.com/amp/s/scitechdaily.com/james-webb-telescopes-unparalleled-view-of-the-ghostly-light-in-galaxy-clusters/amp/

Thanks! I found the link from a guy on an astronomy board who regularly posts 'LCDM-Questioning' articles. It was just timely to my sense that things are going to be interesting - but I also try to keep my eye open for bias. It seems like the JWST data / articles we are seeing is the limited set that is part of an early open release policy. The 'private' data that specific researchers have scheduled time for won't start coming out for a while yet (guessing). Many of them will have very specific goals - like atmosphere of exoplanets and BH behavior that won't directly relate to the SMofCosmology or DM... But there are many pre-launch articles claiming that a big part of the expectation is a focus for JWST research confirming or expanding our knowledge of DM and expansion. So it's interesting to see early work in tension with that expectation. I don't know what a reasonable lag time is between good data gathering and publishing in this space - but I'm keeping an open eye for the heavy lifting articles I hope will start coming out this year. https://www.stsci.edu/files/live/sites/www/files/home/jwst/science-execution/observing-schedules/_documents/2236205f01_report_20221228.txt This suggests that a LOT of high redshift galaxies and clusters are priority targets

@tateris correct in that for most Covid is just like a flu or other respiratory infection. For the generally healthy, it's an inconvenience. The problem is for people already carrying a load of other health issues - like my grandmother. It became the proverbial 'straw'.

The game is on: 3-theta-r-log.eps (arxiv.org) I'm not familiar with any of the researchers. Perhaps our Russian members could comment on whether these guys are on the level?

Grin!