dbrueck

Not when talking about geometry - the idea is a 4th spatial dimension.

Interesting! It's worth noting though that HTTP actually works very well for reliably downloading large immutable files.

And since this proposed protocol operates over TCP, there's relatively little that can be done to achieve the performance goals vs what you can already do with HTTP.

And because "everything" already speaks HTTP, you can get pretty close to max performance just via client side intelligence talking to existing backend infrastructure, so there's no need to try to get people to adopt a new protocol. Modern CDNs have gobs of endpoints worldwide.

A relatively simple client can do enough range requests in parallel to saturate typical last-mile pipes, and more intelligent clients can do fancy things to get max performance.

For example, some clients will do range requests against all IPs returned from DNS resolution to detect which servers are "closer" or less busy, and for really large downloads, they'll repeat this throughout the download to constantly meander towards the fastest sources. Another variation (which might be less common these days), is if the initial response is a redirect, it may imply redirects are being used as a load distribution mechanism, so again clients can ask again throughout the download to see if a different set of servers gets offered up as potentially faster sources. Again, all of this works today with plain old HTTP.

Sorry for not being more clear, I was referring to the advertising or promotion that comes via the elite players. Take Valorant, for example. Riot Games leveraged their League of Legends user base and gave early access to high-end players and that apparently played a big part in helping its popularity take off. Now it has a robust presence in eSports, again helped by the high-end players.

It's not uncommon now for popular professional streamers to get early access to new features/modes because the game companies know that those players can help build or retain the player base.

Relevancy filtering is more for network traffic optimization, it doesn't really help with cheating in most cases. In a FPS, for example, the actors the cheater most wants to know about are almost always also network relevant.

But taking a step back, for fast games (like an FPS), the latency requirements drive you to send semi-secret info to the client (like the positions of other players), and so that's where things start to break down. But the traffic in the other direction is a problem too, as you have all of the scenarios in which the messages to the server (e.g. aim info, timing of weapon of firing) can be spoofed or engineered.

The motivation for the client-side anti-cheat systems is to extend as far as possible the envelope of what is considered trustworthy - i.e. if they can't solve the latency problem, then they try to make the client more trusted.

It's impossible to completely solve the problem, so it's about finding a solution that solves as much of the problem as possible. Unfortunately the main thing going for kernel anti-cheat is that most users don't care that they have to let someone root their machines to play a game, though the tide would likely turn if there were a high publicity exploit.

Hmm... isn't Blizzard's main FPS title Overwatch though? Cheating seems pretty common in that game (and there are tons of forum threads where people are complaining about it).

I appreciate the feedback - I've edited the comment to hopefully do better. Thank you for taking the time!

The anti-cheat problem is long-running and complicated. If you choose not to run anti-cheat because you understand that these are opaque rootkits, good for you! That's a totally, 100% valid choice. But please keep in mind:

  - you are a tiny minority and not the target customer
  - online multiplayer games are an absurdly big business (i.e. there are huge incentives here)
  - no, you can't completely solve this server side
  - elite players are insanely good - they are by definition outliers, so looking for statistical outliers is not in itself a solution
  - game companies are highly incentivized to work with (or at least not antagonize) the elite players (so just throwing them in matches with cheaters is not a solution)
  - the stakes are high both for the devs and their users, so "pretty good" anti-cheat is usually insufficient

You can sum things up by saying that kernel-level anti-cheat DRM is the worst solution, except for all of the other solutions.

I hope to see more discussion on possible solutions and tradeoffs - this is a challenging technical problem whose solution (if there is one) is fairly valuable.

[edit: hopefully fixed the tone, per feedback]

It's fun to experiment and try out ideas - kudos to the author for doing this and sharing the results with the community, I love that.

As far as the results go, though, I don't see any realistic scenario where this is a net win vs a symlink. :)

Amit Patel has been my hero since Solar Realms Elite.

Not the OP, but the appeal of languages like JS has a lot to do with developer productivity. I write gobs of JS and Python code and the finished programs and libraries can be strongly and statically typed end-to-end. I just don't want to be forced to do it in cases when it doesn't really make a difference, and I don't want to waste time on it when I'm still figuring out the design.

My hope is one of the Next Big Things in programming languages is the widespread adoption of incremental typing systems.

So during the early stages of dev you get the productivity benefits of dynamic and loose/duck typing as much as you want, and then as the code matures - as the design firms up - you begin layering in the type information on different parts of the program (and hopefully the toolset gives you a jump start by suggesting a lot of this type info for you, or maybe you specify it only in places where the type info can't be deduced).

Then those parts of the program (and hopefully eventually the entire program) are strongly and statically typed, and you get all of the associated goodies.

We don't run node servers.

I agree with this recommendation - they work great with Wireguard. And if you're travelling, some of the features like handling captive portals are handy.

> Honestly this feels like an indictment of privatizing space travel

NASA has involved the private sector for over half a century. Taking that out of the equation leaves you with SpaceX absolutely killing it and Boeing bumbling along despite getting bigger contracts from the government, so it's hard for me to draw this same conclusion.

> a benefactor with unbelievable wealth being able to hoard the best engineers

Hmm.. the implication here doesn't ring true at all. "Oh how I wish I could work at Boeing where all the real innovation happens, but here I am stuck at SpaceX due to these darn golden handcuffs". I hope SpaceX people get paid a lot, but I suspect the draw for most is what they are doing and the speed at which they are doing it.