Comment Re:Great potential (Score 1) 404
You will also need to tell the compiler that every element of list is a unique object.
A = bunny()
list = [A, A]
for bunny in list:
bunny.hop()
You will also need to tell the compiler that every element of list is a unique object.
A = bunny()
list = [A, A]
for bunny in list:
bunny.hop()
ArenaNet has now taught people, if you see something that is too good to be true, it probably is and should be reported.
The players have been taught to fear ArenaNet. They should put that on the box. I've never seen a game with "fear us" as a unique selling point.
The basic idea of buy low, sell high has been a staple of gaming for as long as I can remember. In fact, there are many games where the primary mechanic is to buy and sell items for a profit from NPC vendors (as early as Taipei and, most recently, Port Royale 3).
So the people that did this knew that something was possibly wrong (or greatly in their favor) and abused to get ahead in the game.
I'll try to remember to never do anything that is greatly in my favor when I play an ArenaNet game.
I really don't care what I do in a game. It's a game. I've murdered people that never did anything to me (pretty much every CRPG ever made). I've razed entire villages just to loot their bent copper pieces and loaves of bread (Morrowind). Every MMO game I have ever played (with the exception of ATITD) has treated me as a hired killer, "no questions asked", and I've never had a problem with that. Buying items on the cheap from an NPC vendor isn't even on my morality meter. Hell, in multiple games I have slaughted every NPC vendor in town and took everything they had as soon as their corpses hit the ground (Ultima I, II and III and nethack).
Looks like it's time to change my password to "password1".
I know this is just a joke, but we really need to stop propagating the idea that memorable passwords are weak.
The brute force search space of "password1" is 486 times larger than "password" (36^9 versus 26^8). Increasing the length of a password is one of the best ways to strengthen it. Intuitively, a randomized string is better than a structured one. This is correct, but only when the strings have equal length. Humans cannot remember long randomized strings. A lengthy, structured password is stronger against computerized attacks since the search space is significantly larger.
According to Princeton's WordNet there are at least 117,000 English nouns. A memorable four-noun phrase has a search space 2600 times larger than a randomized 7-bit ASCII eight-character password (117000^4 versus 128^8).
An obligatory XKCD with discussion can be found here.
*sarcasm on*
Well, everything looks to be in order. I say he wins. The only question now is how much to award him. Zuckerberg is getting $5 billion for creating a single company (that creates nothing). So, for creating the entire multimedia Internet
*sarcasm off*
Sorry, guys. Our global financial system is broken.
Interesting post. However, this method relies on units being differentiable. In short, it uses "hit points" to model unit health. Modern warfare doesn't work like that. Disabling an advanced military unit is mostly about getting an effective hit. You don't half disable planes. A single effective hit puts it out of action.
Give me 50 planes/tanks and you can have 100 planes/tanks. I'll command my units to fire the first volley at 50 of your planes/tanks. Feel free to have all of your units concentrate fire on a small subset of my units. I'm confident that I'll make a good showing.
When combat is all about getting an effective hit, then Lanchester's Laws do not apply. He only models offensive firepower and ignores defensive capability. Therefore, the model is only effective for unarmored troops. This is mentioned in the link you provided.
Warhammer's hit/no-hit methodology may be a better game system than Starcraft for studying armored/advanced unit tactics.
What do you do when your cloud fails? The answer is: the same thing that happens when any hosting solution fails.
Clouds are for hosting data, not storing it. Data storage is an old problem that was well solved a long time ago. The current incarnation of cloud computing exists to solve the hosting problem, not the storing problem.
If you're storing data in a cloud, then you're doing it wrong.
Your cloud hosting fail-over procedure is to mirror the files on another host and redirect connections to the new host. That's pretty much the standard procedure for any hosting solution.
Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin