I didn't know of the existence of SNI and thought that all traffic through TLS was encrypted. SNI sounds like a terrible idea: it should be obvious that leaking domain names will be abused and makes a mockery of any little cute icon in the browser (your government, police, ISP, airline knows what sites you visit). It would have been better to have a secure (ignoring DNS) inconvenient technology stack than a convenient somewhat-secure stack.
SNI is used extensively by the Russian government for censorship. All DPI circumvention tools are based on mangling the ClientHello enough to confuse the DPI box but not enough for the destination server to notice anything.
Alone this looks like a reasonable use of auto. In a real codebase, there may be two (or twenty) different connection-like things, multiple of which may be reasonably to call in this context.
The "Hungarian notation" comment is correct - it's not strictly Hungarian notation, but annotating function (or variable) names when the language has a type system representing this same information is the same idea with the same problems as Hungarian notation.
> This isn’t Gunnar’s fault. The problem was whomever stored ordered data in a hash file.
Yes. Even if it were, I don't think it needs to be mentioned in the commit message. Gunnar improved something, which triggered problems with old broken code. For his efforts he gets:
> Gunnar, I like you, but please don't make me go through this again. :^)
If the smiley face and the commit message's tone didn't make it clear that it's
a joke, TFA explicitly ends with this:
> Gunnar in particular was the one who uncovered this bug, and despite my
satirical jab in the commit message helped uncover this very interesting bug,
so he’s the one who made this post possible.
Gunnar is also credited right in the same commit message for help:
> Credits to Andrew Kaster, bgianf, CxByte and Gunnar for the debugging help.
And judging from how the author of the actually broken code in question is
(reasonably) not investigated or publicized, it seems quite obvious to me that
the article's author is not trying to play the blame game.
From my armchair I'll add that throwing away the KSP1 engine and replacing it with, based upon the number of bugs, a new implementation of the same basic idea seems like a terrible idea. My understanding is that most of the original Squad team (i.e. the only people in the world with experience building a successful orbital mechanics game) weren't kept on for KSP2. Take Two should have done everything possible to keep them as core KSP2 developers.
All that said, I don't think the game will be left unfinished. All costs are sunk and Take Two has a (reportedly) somewhat functional, nicer looking copy of KSP1 with, presumably, at least base elements of interstellar travel and colony systems in place. It's probably worthwhile trying to get the project over the last few hurdles, as it's a potential goldmine if they can pull it off.
> blatant disregard of traffic laws by the many cyclists
Enforcement of traffic law for cyclists would be good, but blatant disregard of traffic laws (e.g. running yellow/red lights, not yielding at crossings, stopping on bike paths before roundabouts etc.) by many motorists also exists, and typically is much more dangerous for others than the actions of cyclists (who typically only endanger themselves)
> Helmets on the road should also be required just as it is for bikers
Why? Cyclists don't usually fall off or hit their heads. The costs of mandatory helmets outweigh the benefits.
If wealthy companies should pay French pensions, simply because they can, do you think that wealthy westerners should pay for, say, pensions or services in Africa?
Raising taxes on wealthy companies to cover pensions seems arbitrary and unfair (by which I don't mean that taxes shouldn't necessarily be raised).
> do you think that wealthy westerners should pay for, say, pensions or services in Africa?
If they have business interests in Africa, absolutely.
The world's biggest corporations are profiting massively from having access to the French market. But that access is not a given, it is being granted by the French people, and can be taken away at any time for any reason the French people consider valid.
Sad to see the early reviews being so poor and the game being in a such an incomplete state. From a software development perspective it would be very interesting to see inside and know what went wrong. From the outside looking in, it seems the larger decisions were disastrous.
* Take Two buys KSP
* Releases two well received DLCs and gets the game to a very good state
* Starts (from scratch, apparently) on KSP2 with a new team (Star Theory), throwing away working code and experienced developers who worked on the first game
* Drama and disruption as Take Two starts another team (Intercept Games) to develop KSP2 and hires (according to Wikipedia) one third of Star Theory - more knowledge lost
* Releases no new DLC for the first game during development of the sequel (mods show what can be done with the first game. There were plenty of things [new planets, new parts, resource system, life-support system, other solar systems, ...] that could have been developed which would have been successful
* Pushes the second game back and back only to finally release a buggy, resource hungry mess that has fewer features than its predecessor
If her focus is on playing tennis, then interviews etc. are just a distraction. She may be contractually obligated to partake in interviews, but does she have another option if she wants to play at top events?
In my opinion there is too much hype and nonsense around professional sport and I would much prefer if sportsmen/women could focus solely on their sport without joining the circus.
I too, as a regular cyclist, would like to see more cyclists fined when they run red lights, cycle on footpaths, cycle in the wrong direction etc., but enforcement is also lacking for motorists who run red lights, speed, or drive while on the phone. A critical difference is that motorists ignoring traffic law put others at risk, whereas cyclists usually only endanger themselves, if at all.
I don't see how licensing, registering, mandatory insurance etc. will change anything, but make cycling less popular.
Per my understanding, road infrastructure is typically paid from general taxes (obviously depending on country). As cyclists require less road space, cause less road wear and have practically no environmental burden compared to motorists it's probably the case that we pay a disproportionately high percentage of infrastcuture costs.
I've used Arch for the last six+ months and I don't want this to happen.
I switched as I couldn't get VFIO to work with Debian (presumably due to outdated kernel/qemu/libs). In my time with Arch I have had no problems. It has just worked and stayed out of my way. My experience with Debian is that it mostly works, but often uses much older software than one wants. Arch, in my limited experience, is an excellent distribution.
That is the "curse" of Linux I always had difficulty to understand: something does not work at all or the way I like it - switch the god-damn OS (= distro) where it works instead biting the bullet and trying to fix it. It's insane...
This is only personal observation, not direct remark to your case. I've just seen similar scenarios too many times.
On the other hand - I've played with Arch since early beginnings, but last time more than 10 years ago. Although minimal, simple and straightforward, I have never been able to grope that rolling-release core philosophy.
