SW is not just SF, but it also is a warfare movie in many aspects and the warfare is done wrong. Noticeable flaws:
- In the world of sentient robots bombers and fighters are manned
- The bombers are slow, big and manned. With these characteristics there is no chance for bomber or crew to survive a mission. Each mission for a bomber crew is the last one. I can imagine there are better ways to deliver explosives to the enemy.
- FTL-equipped fighters do not kamikaze-hit star destroyers, do not FTL out of battle
- Walking robots are still used despite of their slowness and instability
- Walking robots have terrible fire precision
- All the stationery weapons have terrible precision. Auto-cannons miss, fighter miss. In the world with sentient robotics I expect to have sentient never-miss cannons
- Captain’s bridge is located on outer hull where it gets destroyed with a single rocket, not in the very most secure inside of the ship.
- Snoke’s guard is equipped with melee weapons only. No drones, no blasters.
- Dreadnought gives terribly lot of time while being attacked instead of giving full firepower to both Rebel Cruiser and the bas at the same time. The entire rebel fleet could be destroyed in a matter of seconds
- Jedi’s never use blasters. Why? Imagine laser blaster equilibrium-style gun katta with occasional light-saber close combat
- Snoke is too easy too kill for all-powerful guy
- Rebel’s escort ships which ran out of fuel just drifted to be destroyed. With no personnel transfer to mothership. No kamikaze attack on enemy. No FTL leap of faith. Ship sacrifice is the worst thing to do in this situation
- Empire never unleashes full firepower on approaching enemy (last planet fight with junk vehicles) and even allows Finn to almost sacrifice himself. This is unbelievable with the empire firepower on site
- Nobody expects kamikaze attacks regardless to their possibility and threat. No Star Destroyer covers Snoke mothership before it gets mauled with the rebel cruiser.
I believe there is more combat flaws I didn’t notice.
While MacBook Pro has a fingerprint sensor, no external Apple keyboard has. So I’m force to type my password to login every time. Keep your product line consistent, Apple!
The first ever online course I have started and finished is about startups. It took 3 years on and off. I think i can name the approach as lazy persistence.
А ещё есть потери. На спутнике — это 5% от погоды запросто. Какие-то пакеты застревают в тумане, некоторые не проходят через снежинки, а большой и толстый пакет может обогатить информацией голубя. Или ворону, прилетевшую склёвывать плёнку с транспондера (правда, к счастью, на больших телепортах они быстро закипают и соскальзывают с зеркала)
https://habrahabr.ru/company/croc/blog/327720
В сети случайно наткнулся на прекрасный олдскульный сайт о погоде в Петрозаводске с еще более прекрасной и олдскульной историей его создания. История захватывает и погружает во времена ностальгии по началу цифровых времен, которые я еще не застал ввиду молодости. Чем-то напоминает записки тестировщика, но без распиздяйства, безответственности и алкоголизма.
Приложу скрин, пока сайт не потерялся в пучине времен, все-таки старенький, уже 20 лет почти. В интернете мало что так долго живет.
I have 13′ with touch bar. It’s slow at times. It’s mostly visible when switching between virtual desktops or doing Expose effect. This frame skipping really kills the experience of a fast PC, especially if you switched from a decent Windows 10 machine.
I was suspecting it’s because Intel Iris video card. Then I decided to test other MacBooks. I tried MacBook Pro 2017 15′, iMac, Mac Pro. Guess what. they all are slow. They all skip frames on Expose and virtual desktops switching.
It’s surely not a hardware limitation but somehow a software one. Was it the case in Pre-Sierra MACs?
I live in the most scary epoch ever. All historical data, pictures, footages are at my fingertips. Since the era of photography started, humanity have pretty much documented the entire 20th century and uploaded it online. Two clicks away from the curious me.
Every time I see a photo from 19xxs, I try to understand where it stands compared to my lifetime. Ok, this is 1993’s coup on Moscow. Happened during my lifetime, I was very young. These Star Wars behind on stage photos were taken in 197os, when my mom and dad were as young as I am now. 2 lifetimes of mine ago. The actors look so young in the photos but they’re old or dead now. Or look at these WWII soldiers, they all have died of age by now. What about these SR71 pilots, who are practically space pioneers. Most likely all dead of finishing their lives.
Ability to compare and to visualise individual’s history constantly reminds me how really short my active lifespan is. It’s feels like the best years are between my 20s and 40s where half of 20s perished. Time after 40 feels like slowing down and less valuable compared young decades. Youth, energy and beauty seem to be no longer there even for Hollywood start in their 40s. Sadly, there are only 2 young decades when you have your body not declining.
It’s easy not to pay attention to this given that you are not reminded about how short other people lives are. I believe it was easier before the information era, because there was at least less information available for an average individual, thus less reminders. I think it was easier to live your life back then. When the shortness of life was less obvious.
I have learned a new term
Screen scraping – analyzing CLI outputs and responses via script connected to the CLI
Some processes have a long cycle of approvals which are delaying the final task execution. The delay is disturbing, while some people might miss an approval which restarts the process from the start. It complicates and delays execution dramatically.
The wrong part is that an approver has no any accountability on giving or not giving an approval.
The correct way to collect approvals is approvals by default. If an approver or substitute fails to review a task and give the approval within a pre-agreed period of time (1 BD is fine for most of the cases), the task is approved by default and the process moves forward. If any damage caused by giving approval by default, the approver who failed to review a task, assumes full accountability for the damage.
This way forces every an approver to be personally interested in giving the approval while keeping process execution quick.
