Search found 7 matches
Search found 7 matches • Page 1 of 1
I voted no because I've seen this before, and it will not at all have the effect you all think it will. It will just add more work for Austin. It won't make people work on the distro. Anyone who has actually RUN a shard knows that running it takes time away from developing it.
- Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:34 am
- Forum: Bug Reports (097)
- Topic: randomint 'problem'
- Replies: 12
- Views: 3961
You are absolutely correct; The random generator in POL is likely very deterministic - meaning it probably does literally give the same series of values every time. You mentioned a 'seed'. A typical non-cryptographic random generator typically takes a 'seed' number, and then it produces an EXACT, pr...
when i've seen it, i begin to read the website and i've seen another thing (i'm seeing a lot haha)... There were some weeks i've read but, if I recal right, this library requires, if you'll use it, you releasing the source code of the program you're making... so if in 098 you people of core develop...
Contact me via IM and I will do my best to help you. Yes - it may be difficult or complex, but the problem CAN be tackled. I have experience handling small-scale attacks such as this on servers and networks.
I'll try to help if I can. Some questions for you... How do you know you are being attacked? What type of attack is it? There are lots of different kinds of DOS attacks. Some are trivial to block, some are complex to block. Also, the more systems involved, the harder it will be to block. But that's ...
- Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:08 am
- Forum: Contributed Scripts & Packages
- Topic: Party System
- Replies: 46
- Views: 13595
You should do some simple packet capturing, because this looks recursive to me. This is the reason: sending_stat :=1; packet.SendPacket(member); You're sending the same packet back out, which causes the same packet hook to again be called - and they work critical. If it weren't for the maximum call ...