359 karma · joined August 7, 2013
>likelihood of failure is statistically higher because of the higher number of components
Yes, absolutely true, but resiliency for a distributed system is not necessarily like your example of data stripped without parity, unless we're specifically talking about distributed storage.
Do you have a social activity that you've neglected with the lack of available friends? Or one that you're interested in but never had the chance to get involved with? This is perhaps mundane advice, but check if there's a group that does that activity and try to become a regular. They're always very welcoming to newcomers and you'll find yourself well established in the group after a few returns.
https://www.rbi.com/English/news/news-details/2014/Worlds-Th...
> 3G Capital to own approximately 51% of new company
You're correct that people have been conflating the kernel and the operating system as the same thing for a long time, but it's not technically correct to call "Linux", for example, an operating system. Stallman would appreciate that people stop doing that ;)
It's just logical inference. Your point of view shallowly considers everyone as consumers without thinking about the fact that if "things get cheaper", that means that labour has also gotten cheaper. You assert that people won't "sit there" while employers reduce their wages, but that's exactly what would HAVE to happen in this system. Otherwise the company would go under because their product or service gets cheaper each year, but labour stays the same or increases in cost. Especially under capitalism which demands constant growth.
It simply would not make sense to pay someone the same price for a bushel of wheat when the cost of bread has reduced to a fraction of its original price. I don't know why you say that it is propaganda to acknowledge this extremely simple logical inference.
In an inflationary currency, the rich invest in assets that aren't affected by inflation. Inflation is not the problem in this scenario. Hoarding wealth is. This would be increased with a deflationary currency.
I get that people will be really sad that they don't get to look at your AI generated 1860s white family because Google has made it illegal for all AIs to create images of white people. However I'll do you a solid: I happen to know a couple white families and I'll get them to pose for your short story. Just PM me the description and I'll hook you up.
I use git 99% in the terminal, and 1% in some git tool for visualization, but I find that a lot of people use it in the opposite way and have problems working with others that use a very slightly different workflow. You don't need to memorize hundreds of commands and flags, honestly a dozen or two gets you to expert status in most respects.
TBH, I don't consider the glitch list that you shared to be a list of flaws. I played the original pokemon games a lot, and heard all of the rumours about the game. Very rarely if ever did I encounter a glitch without seeking it out. Honestly the existence of missingno and the rare candy duplication glitch were enhancements to the experience when I had already played the game exhaustively.
> This actually makes it a little fun to go back and play those games because some mons are just broken
I agree! I really don't consider lack of competitive balance to be a significant flaw for the first games, since the game design was based around the single player experience. If all of the pokemon were balanced, I would consider it a detriment to the game. Half of the joy of finding new pokemon and discovering evolutions was to find these imbalances and use them to destroy the elite four, or show off to your friends.
As far as flaws, I was mostly asking from a game design or implementation perspective, because hard to replicate glitches that reveal hidden secrets and 150 monsters to uncover with some being ultra powerful was literally exactly what I wanted as a kid. It's also good game design, even if not 100% of it was intentional.