I love this concept; I had a friend from school viscerally defend SC: BW as superior to SC2 because in his words SC2 removed skill because of not having the unit select cap that BW did. That’s just less, as you put it, busywork, and then the player is more free to consider army compositions and positioning rather than drawing tons of rectangles. Removing more busywork in favor of actual strategy would be amazing.
There’s no micro in Chess, just strategy.
I used ext4 extensively in an HPC setting a few jobs ago (many petabytes). Some of the server clusters were in areas with very unreliable power grids like Indonesia. Using fsck.ext4 had become our bread and butter, but it was also nerve wracking because in the worst failures that involved power loss or failed RAID cards, we sometimes didn’t get clean fscks. Most often this resulted in loss of file metadata which was a pain to try to recover from. To its credit, as another quote in this thread mentioned, fsck.ext4 has a very high success rate, but honestly you shouldn’t need to manually intervene as a filesystem admin in an ideal world. That’s the sort of thing next gen filesystem attempt to provide.
They’ve used the Olympics as an opportunity to launch their territory grabs not once but three bloody times: Georgia, Crimea, and now Ukraine. If anything they’ll try and nab something else rather than agree to a ceasefire. Ridiculous.
They’ve used the Olympics as an opportunity to launch their territory grabs not once but three bloody times: Georgia, Crimea, and now Ukraine. If anything they’ll try and nab something else rather than agree to a ceasefire. Ridiculous.
The architectural inspiration for The Seventh Guest
Sure, but given that the poster said “would” the point is to bring additional awareness to how consumer-backing laws with actual teeth can bring about positive change, and perhaps to motivate citizens to support similar legislation and legislators who would write it.
Funny thing is… the nature of git repos is when you work on the code base the first step is cloning it. The more contributors you have the more clones. The process naturally propagates distributed backups, albeit some being liable to be more out of date than others. I’d be interested in learning how successful this actually is for the attackers over time. I expect most maintainers will simply take the lesson learned, update their repo’s security and access controls, and restore the code base from the most recent local clone.