addie

It's extremely easy to fuck up cryptography code; you require both extraordinary mathematical insight and the programming skills to defend against every known and future side-channel attack. I would suggest instead trusting software where you can read the source yourself, and which has been openly reviewed by a selection of experts in the field.

"Also, be sure not to hallucinate and don't make any mistakes."

Man alive, that's gutting. I also haven't bought a Bethesda game since F4. Was hoping they might have doubled-down on the improvements between F3 and F:NV, but what they came out with was no kind of RPG at all, a shocking disappointment.

Means I missed out on F76 and Starfield, which is no kind of hardship at all. And I'm whatever the opposite of "hyped" is for ES6 - looking forward more to booting up Morrowind again.

Scientific method and all that. Any conjecture is okay.

Now, what's the hypothesis that you can make out of it? We've plenty of observations that don't match theory, which we believe to be on account of dark matter - galaxy rotation speeds, what happens in the core of a type 2 supernova, and so on. Does this hypothesis explain those problems better than what we have?

If it does, keep it. If it doesn't, discard it. Repeat, until we've solved all the mysteries of the universe by banging our heads against them.

This strikes me as the kind of conjecture that has no predictive power, and therefore must be discarded, but I'm no PhD-level theoretical physicist.

Our forever-DM is all-in on AI generation of stuff. Which I understand; it's a role that requires a lot of thankless prep, and he wants all of the in-game maps and character artwork to look fancy. But on the other hand, I play D+D for the human interaction of it, and actually prefer the 'theatre of the mind' way of playing it. Dry-wipe pens on a whiteboard, there's your adventure map. Now get roleplaying. If I wanted to play a computer game, then I'd play a computer game.

My wife used to work for a company that manufactured the glass for solar panels in the UK, but there was just no way that they could compete with Chinese prices. They would have had to have sold it below cost to match, let alone make any profit. It's not the most labour-intensive of industries, but the energy costs are massive to melt all the glass. China has made massive investments in hydro and has a lot of cheap power for industry, which ironically means that making solar panels for green power is easier too.

It's a slow burn, and it undoubtedly sags in the middle - the massive empty spaces tip over from 'epic' into 'time wasting'. But it benefits hugely from telling a very personal drama with a lot of character development, and it has one of the darkest stories of any Zelda game. The Gamecube version has much sharper controls than the Wii version, so is the much better choice to reimplement. Hope you enjoy - I'm a big fan of this game, and set this up to play last night, it's really smooth.

If your system is all-AMD, then it's amazing how well Linux just works. Turn it on, hardware accelerated everything.

If you've got NVidia anywhere near it, that's not so much the case. If Mint is being a bit dodgy, then I would have used to recommend trying it with Pop!, since that has pretty good driver support out of the box. Probably outdated advice, something like Bazzite might make more sense now, but I've not used it first hand. Partly because my system is all-AMD and just works, but also because I run Arch btw.

Well, on the one hand, that just looks like a graphics upgrade from the first game. On the other hand, you wouldn't expect the EA trailer to give too much away, there's no evidence of the snowfox or the spy pengling in it, and the original is one of the finest games ever made so why mess? So I'm thinking that's mostly positive. Will need to go and reinstall the original now I've seen this, too.

An interesting assertion. A full install of 3.11 was about 8 MB or so, and all of the 8086 / -186 / -286 / -386 code will have been thrown away a long time ago. I doubt there's much of PROGMAN left, and all the fonts and art assets are long superseded. So in terms of total code, it can't be much. But on the other hand, the code that you write for an event loop or to handle driver interrupts hasn't changed conceptually very much in that time. Most programmers would reimplement the basics in a very similar way, so there's not much point in redoing it.

When I used to work in the water industry, we still had programmable logic controllers (PLCs) controlling pumpsets from the 1950s. The last person that could have modified them had retired and since died more than 30 years before. But deciding which pumps to run in order to best fill a reservoir is not logic that needs updating every day, not even every decade. Still working fine, don't touch it. So I still laugh at my colleagues that can't touch code that was written a few years ago in an unfashionable library. That's not tech debt. Try, written by your grandparents for CPUs that had stopped being made before you were born.

And I remember 3.11 being perfectly good enough at the time, anyway. Wasn't any Linux at that point.

Six legs, and a tail split into two for what looks to me like flight. I think you'll find that's a beautiful Butterfly Cat.