I don't have a massive math brain but I have a hard time considering those funny equations, I'm not seeing complicated integrals anywhere, which I would expect considering the game simulation happens over time, and in 3D.
It feels like an easy way to either make it seem like the difference is small because the resulting number is small, or the difference is huge because number is huge.
Even the difference in volume is not properly evocative if you forget/don't know how volumes scale.

If you really cared to have a good measurement, I think Pheaa's got the right idea about it: "I would love for someone to create a plugin that checks if an iron bomber pipe that hit would have hit if it had the stock hitbox."
However, you could only easily find which default-sized pipes would have collided if they were IB-sized, so either with the resize feature already enabled, or by checking non-IB pipes (which may skew your data, as people mention that IB pipes are harder to spot mid-air, so harder to dodge). This is potentially a resource hog.
You could find the opposite if you managed to simulate the game as if IB-sized pipes were actually default-sized, and check whether they would still collide over their lifespan. This is pretty much only feasible as post-processing analysis of demos, and a huge amount of work.

At this point though, it feels like we're doing a lot to find whether a bugfix should be applied or not, is this the right criteria for inclusion?

Obviously, can't do anything about pubs (do you really practice in pubs?), but for MGE and DM, this is something that can be fixed, if it's not already fixed, talk to the owners.
This is the only point you manage to make in all of this post.

This sentence especially sucks considering you hardly manage to put into words what you actually think. I don't deny that you have more experience and understanding of the game, but extracting any of that through your posts is literally impossible, they critically lack any substance. That was also the case when giving feedback about the medic attach speed tests/season!

No hard feelings, but you can do better.

ANN: v1.13.0 of tf2-comp-fixes introduces a cvar to inhibit `extendfreeze`, I invite league admins to consider adding it to their configs. The update has been deployed to serveme.

Here's a demonstration of the info leak, at 6:10

https://youtu.be/WHGVAJgHMX8?t=371

Thanks to JackyLegs for bringing this up to me

There's a lot of variable settings that leagues make use of and I don't see complaints about it?

I'm not sure if this is established in the current conversation but it might be worth mentioning:
The plugin allows overriding the dimension of the hitbox (which is forced to be a cube) to any value, 4.0 being the one of default pipes, buffing all pipe launchers to be as big as IB is a possibility, so is finding a middle ground

Now that I think about it, the cvar should be called `sm_override_pipe_dimension` :(
(IB pipes are over 9 times bigger in terms of volume hehe)

Would you make the point that using this feature introduces potential differences between regions? I don't buy that, banning a weapon has the exact same effect, the difference is that the plugin lets you play with the weapon, which is a positive in my book

GitHub user bodolaz146 did implement this actually, but yeah it was ready for ETF2L S40

the only thing ur holding is this fat L

those build tools are all dog shit.

Here is an update for tf2-comp-fixes, v1.11.1 is probably very broken
https://github.com/ldesgoui/tf2-comp-fixes/releases/tag/v1.11.2

Sorry for the delay

TOTP will not protect your account in this situation, the hashed password would
TOTP relies on a secret key to be shared between the authenticator (the app on your phone) and the validator (the twitch servers), both use that key to run the algorithm (described in RFC 4226 and 6238), because of that, the secret key must be accessible in some lossless way by the twitch servers, and in the case of a compromise, you have to assume that this secret key has been compromised. Hashed passwords remain safe for a finite period of time after a compromise because the actual password isn't stored anywhere, and the only way to get in is to crack it using a large amount of computer power.

field                       sum
ad_share_gross              2488615.89
sub_share_gross             25591.69
bits_share_gross            3923.25
bits_developer_share_gross  0
bits_extension_share_gross  69.96
prime_sub_share_gross       48650.59
bit_share_ad_gross          25.56
fuel_rev_gross              0
bb_rev_gross                0

what's her name

i dont see the logic linking "pyro can take skill" and "hate against playing pyro is not warranted", the reason why people vent that out is because pyro has the ability to inhibit the mechanical freedom you have and the choices you can make during an encounter, which is not fun. calling out people who enjoy this position of privilege is fine, because it's just that, a call out (assuming you don't start harassing them or whatever)

Here, you attribute value that you don't define to a hypothetical anti-cheat that does not exist
To my knowledge, there are no anti-cheat solutions that do not rely on security by obscurity, there are also no open source games that manage (or even attempt) to combat cheaters via anti-cheat
Yes, in this case, it is absolutely the fault of making a game open source that makes it impossible to defend using anti-cheat solutions

Ignoring that you conflate cheaters and cheat makers, here you fail to understand that providing users with the 4 freedoms ascribed by the libre software movement removes guarantees that anti-cheat solutions build upon: when any player can run their own build of the game (as per freedom 1), a specific build *cannot* be established as authentic, and any anti-cheat therefore cannot compare against it to detect illegal behavior
Even if we make the assumption that you did not mean to talk about the libre software movement, giving access to the source code enables a much wider toolset when developing cheats: running static analysis, building the game and debugging it, seeing commits over time. It is simply impossible to argue that the quality of cheats would not raise sharply with that.
It's incredibly bizarre to try gatekeeping cheat making when you're clearly not in any position to talk about that at all

You should read the Wikipedia article you linked earlier until you understand that "libre software is when i can read the source code" is not true.

"I was merely pretending"

Please stop posting misinformation! Thank you

Good one patching a client-side exploit when I can just run my own build of the game, I guess
Anti-cheat development is an uphill battle in any case, and providing access to the sources help cheat makers way more than it helps anyone else, the majority of anti-cheat solutions depend massively on security by obscurity
You're also generalizing the contrived example of TF2 where the developers gave up on the game, us wanting access to the source is a truly desperate measure because the game is just not maintained, it does not apply to any other popular games

[ citation needed ]

you realize open source makes it easier to write cheats for, right?