It wasn't until CentOS 6.0 was delayed beyond reasonable expectation did I find out CentOS was managed by a very small, closed group. The closed part was a little unnerving considering the open source nature of the project.
Yeah, I switched to Scientific Linux because of the better KVM support. CentOS served me well for many years, but I can't recommend it to anyone at this point:/
Starcraft plays very similar to chess. So before a game starts you should have a game plan. You should think about what kind of unit composition you'd like in the late game, then figure out what mid game strategy will help you get to the late game. With a general concept of what you'd like the mid game to look like you then pick an early game build that will help you get to the mid game. Of course the game might deviate from your original game plan, but using it as a guide is very helpful.
It's a bit interesting that you picked TA (I love TA) over Starcraft in terms of tactical gameplay, because Starcraft is much more micro oriented than TA. If you'd like to see some very top level tactical decision making take a look at SeleCT and qxc's replays. There's actually a huge amount of tactical decision making in Starcraft. So if we take for instance a hellion attempting to harass the natural's drone line the "terrain" becomes relatively complex. If the hellion comes in for the harass and the queen is right next to the hatchery then we might be able to scoot around the outside of the mineral patch to roast a few drones and then run up into the main to continue the economic damage, before the queen and zerglings can close in on the hellion. A lot of "terrains" can simply just shut down your harass such as a queen blocking the ramp with speedlings in play or a well positioned spine crawler. I don't think I've done the concept of hellion harass nearly enough justice, but hopefully I've expressed some flavor of the situational complexities that can occur with relatively few units, let alone 200 supply armies. Starcraft is much more of a deterministic game than TA, which lends itself to e-sports. Oh, if you really like TA take a look at the Spring Engine.
The reason these individuals were not fired is because it's a merit-based organization. A meritocracy penalizes failure and rewards success. By penalizing honest mistakes the people who end up on top may not be those with the most merit, but those who hide their mistakes the best. This has the added detriment of not allowing the organization to learn from its failures.
I was looking at their site and I can't tell what they actually have completed. It looks like they have a framework that they'd like to implement, but then what was the robot using? Was it a proof of concept that the robot could identify the situation and request code from a server?
Most rely on the decades-old supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) software, written in an era when the "open source" tag was more important than security, said Jeff Vail, a former counterterrorism and intelligence analyst with the U.S. Interior Department.
From the article: "It is unfortunate that under the current copyright law, the most accurate predictions about prospective cases usually come from borrowing from the branch of academia known as legal realism. Legal realism is a cynical interpretive strategy that sees all law in terms of political power structures; the reasoning behind individual decisions is nothing more than window dressing for underlying political biases and power struggles.
Under a legal realist analysis, any use of copyrighted material that was objectionable or questionable would be struck down as infringing. Nonobjectionable use of copyrighted material would be allowed only if the political and economic interests in support of the use were more powerful than the political and economic interests against the use. Unfortunately, this is, in my opinion, the best guide to the outcome of any future copyright case."
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't until CentOS 6.0 was delayed beyond reasonable expectation did I find out CentOS was managed by a very small, closed group. The closed part was a little unnerving considering the open source nature of the project.
On the same page no less.
This is one of the most accurate summaries I've seen on Slashdot for quite some time :)
Yeah, I switched to Scientific Linux because of the better KVM support. CentOS served me well for many years, but I can't recommend it to anyone at this point :/
How difficult/expensive is it to pull methane out of the water in a treatment plant?
Starcraft plays very similar to chess. So before a game starts you should have a game plan. You should think about what kind of unit composition you'd like in the late game, then figure out what mid game strategy will help you get to the late game. With a general concept of what you'd like the mid game to look like you then pick an early game build that will help you get to the mid game. Of course the game might deviate from your original game plan, but using it as a guide is very helpful.
It's a bit interesting that you picked TA (I love TA) over Starcraft in terms of tactical gameplay, because Starcraft is much more micro oriented than TA. If you'd like to see some very top level tactical decision making take a look at SeleCT and qxc's replays. There's actually a huge amount of tactical decision making in Starcraft. So if we take for instance a hellion attempting to harass the natural's drone line the "terrain" becomes relatively complex. If the hellion comes in for the harass and the queen is right next to the hatchery then we might be able to scoot around the outside of the mineral patch to roast a few drones and then run up into the main to continue the economic damage, before the queen and zerglings can close in on the hellion. A lot of "terrains" can simply just shut down your harass such as a queen blocking the ramp with speedlings in play or a well positioned spine crawler. I don't think I've done the concept of hellion harass nearly enough justice, but hopefully I've expressed some flavor of the situational complexities that can occur with relatively few units, let alone 200 supply armies. Starcraft is much more of a deterministic game than TA, which lends itself to e-sports. Oh, if you really like TA take a look at the Spring Engine.
The reason these individuals were not fired is because it's a merit-based organization. A meritocracy penalizes failure and rewards success. By penalizing honest mistakes the people who end up on top may not be those with the most merit, but those who hide their mistakes the best. This has the added detriment of not allowing the organization to learn from its failures.
I was looking at their site and I can't tell what they actually have completed. It looks like they have a framework that they'd like to implement, but then what was the robot using? Was it a proof of concept that the robot could identify the situation and request code from a server?
Go Go CentOS Team!
I guess cheering isn't quite as effective as contributing.
Dopefish Lives!
Most rely on the decades-old supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) software, written in an era when the "open source" tag was more important than security, said Jeff Vail, a former counterterrorism and intelligence analyst with the U.S. Interior Department.
Sex and God are not even on the list.
We're always saying "Vote with your wallet" here. I'm glad I did.
From the article:
"It is unfortunate that under the current copyright law, the most accurate predictions about prospective cases usually come from borrowing from the branch of academia known as legal realism. Legal realism is a cynical interpretive strategy that sees all law in terms of political power structures; the reasoning behind individual decisions is nothing more than window dressing for underlying political biases and power struggles.
Under a legal realist analysis, any use of copyrighted material that was objectionable or questionable would be struck down as infringing. Nonobjectionable use of copyrighted material would be allowed only if the political and economic interests in support of the use were more powerful than the political and economic interests against the use. Unfortunately, this is, in my opinion, the best guide to the outcome of any future copyright case."