| 00:01:44 | | nothere joins |
| 00:36:19 | | Meli quits [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] |
| 00:38:45 | | Meli (Meli) joins |
| 01:00:11 | | nepeat quits [Client Quit] |
| 01:03:08 | | nepeat (nepeat) joins |
| 01:09:59 | | TastyWiener95 (TastyWiener95) joins |
| 01:48:48 | <Ryz> | Question, say that the virtual hard drive via VirtualBox balloons enough that I have to do something about it (more likely delete it via VirtualBox and reimport it); does deleting it also lose leaderboard tracking if I reinstall it virtually and put in the same name? |
| 02:02:35 | <TheTechRobo> | Ryz: I don't think so, otherwise how would you have multiple warriors on the same leaderboard slot? |
| 02:08:02 | <Ryz> | Might need more opinions~ |
| 02:15:23 | <tech234a> | I believe that leaderboard tracking is just by username |
| 02:16:55 | <tech234a> | I remember looking through some seesaw-kit code and seeing something related to getting ID numbers for warriors (not standalone scripts) but I don't think that is actually used for anything other than the (partially broken) map at https://warriorhq.archiveteam.org/ (could be wrong on this part though) |
| 02:18:29 | <@JAA> | Correct, the leaderboard is entirely tracker-side and based on the username. |
| 02:22:16 | <Ryz> | So I can have another VM but on another computer, have it named 'Ryz' for the leaderboard, and it would contribute to said name right? |
| 02:26:46 | <@JAA> | Yes |
| 02:27:07 | <@JAA> | That's how basically everyone at the top of every project's leaderboard does it (except with containers rather than the VM, usually). |
| 02:34:24 | <Ryz> | Can multiple people put in the same name, like 'Anonymous' and contribute under there? |
| 02:35:46 | <@JAA> | Yeah, can happen. If people do it deliberately and it gets discovered, they get banned. |
| 02:55:00 | <Ryz> | Ah, I see, I now have two machines doing this stuff now >#<; |
| 07:13:38 | <@Sanqui> | that said, it *would* be nice to be able to submit both username and machine name, so that you could e.g. see how well each of your machines is doing |
| 07:14:16 | <@Sanqui> | but we have more important things anyway |
| 07:41:30 | | nepeat quits [Client Quit] |
| 07:42:45 | | nepeat (nepeat) joins |
| 10:01:16 | <@OrIdow6> | And perhaps team names as well |
| 10:01:19 | <@OrIdow6> | But yeah |
| 11:19:54 | | TastyWiener95 quits [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] |
| 16:43:03 | | kdqep (kdqep) joins |
| 18:33:44 | <myself> | Is there a reason for capping the warrior at 6 jobs while on some projects, 20 seems fine with the docker? I'll blow my foot off with docker, but I'd love to be able to crank my warrior up to use more of my connection. I could just run 3 warriors but... that seems silly, hence the question. |
| 18:35:14 | | kdqep quits [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] |
| 18:35:25 | | Meli quits [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] |
| 18:36:50 | <@JAA> | myself: Warriors are meant as a 'set it up once and forget about it' thing. It's a sane concurrency that should usually work fine even with rate limiting from the target site or very large items (e.g. archiving videos). |
| 18:37:18 | | Meli (Meli) joins |
| 18:38:25 | <myself> | Hmm. I feel like a "recommended concurrency for this project" would be a neat thing to have as a per-project parameter and then the default could be to just use that value, and that would solve the same sanity constraint in a more adaptable way |
| 18:38:51 | <myself> | like if you're set to AT's Choice, that would be the default, say |
| 18:39:53 | <myself> | but it makes sense, I gotcha. I'll just spin up a few more copies while attempting to get my head around docker.. |
| 18:39:53 | <@JAA> | Yeah, that would be neat. |
| 18:58:35 | | LeGoupil joins |
| 19:19:07 | | LeGoupil quits [Client Quit] |
| 19:33:01 | | Craigle quits [Quit: The Lounge - https://thelounge.chat] |
| 19:34:39 | | Craigle (Craigle) joins |
| 19:46:55 | | qwertyasdfuiopghjkl quits [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] |
| 19:49:19 | | qwertyasdfuiopghjkl (qwertyasdfuiopghjkl) joins |
| 21:26:42 | | Minkafighter7225 quits [Quit: The Lounge - https://thelounge.chat] |
| 21:28:53 | | Minkafighter7225 joins |
| 22:15:45 | | BearFortress quits [Read error: Connection reset by peer] |
| 22:15:58 | | TheTechRobo quits [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] |
| 22:48:41 | | TheTechRobo (TheTechRobo) joins |
| 22:50:23 | | TheTechRobo quits [Read error: Connection reset by peer] |
| 22:50:35 | | qwertyasdfuiopghjkl quits [Client Quit] |
| 22:58:22 | | TheTechRobo (TheTechRobo) joins |
| 22:59:36 | | TheTechRobo quits [Read error: Connection reset by peer] |
| 23:09:38 | | TheTechRobo (TheTechRobo) joins |
| 23:11:46 | | TheTechRobo quits [Remote host closed the connection] |
| 23:13:18 | | qwertyasdfuiopghjkl (qwertyasdfuiopghjkl) joins |
| 23:13:21 | | TheTechRobo (TheTechRobo) joins |
| 23:19:24 | | TheTechRobo quits [Excess Flood] |
| 23:21:57 | | TheTechRobo (TheTechRobo) joins |
| 23:27:49 | | BearFortress joins |