I think to have any chance of making this work, you’d need to have a community of players in a tournament. Everybody gets to issue some number of challenges, and the winner is the person who accumulates the most points over the course of the tournament. I think you should only get points based on the length of games you win.
Then the game at least has a chance to develop some mechanics. Players who delayed longer have a chance at winning more points. They also might be challenged more…
Virtual machines aren't the solution for day-to-day computing though. You're missing out on the graphics acceleration, being able to plug things in that just work, and so on.
> This was on my work computer. I expect to similarly modify future work computers, and I would be happy to help you modify yours if you need a little encouragement.
I don’t understand the actual decision but I appreciate the gusto with which it was made.
The main reason to consider resale value is 1-2 years later you may want to upgrade and selling it to another person typically yields you more money than trading it in with Apple. Doing something like this may decrease how much you could sell it for later.
If you’re not planning on doing that then it’s not really a factor for you.
I’m kind of surprised there isn’t a CFD setup for PC builders yet. We could model all the parts and run some simulations, as the last hurrah for our old systems. Manufactures could show off their cred by making increasingly detailed models of their parts. It would all be very fun.
I do CFD in my day job, though not for electronics cooling. I don't think this is as easy as you imagine. It's relatively easy to make pretty pictures, but just because the picture is pretty doesn't mean that it's physical accurate or mathematically correct. Lack of resolution could be an issue, but there are plenty of more subtle problems as well. Jet impingement is known to cause problems with turbulence models, though some models claim to solve the issue. Plus, turbulence modeling isn't always predictive, and might require a certain amount of calibration any time a model is used in a new scenario. Add on top of that the fact that the computational cost of these simulations often is extremely high, even with turbulence models. Maybe people building PCs have plenty of unused CPUs and GPUs, though.
Unfortunately, I don't think CFD and turbulence modeling are things that you can just start doing well without learning a lot before starting.
You are probably right, my only exposure to CFD was through listening in at conferences, haha. It seems neat, though. They always had the coolest pictures.
I wonder, could there be any play in the fact that PC cases tend to be a little bit less general than just, like, any 3D model? There are only so many cases. Plus most of the parts are rectangular, and most of the surfaces are aligned the same set of axes.
I like git, it works perfectly fine on my command line.
I do wonder, though, if it would have been designed differently if the whole “code forge” sort of application (or whatever GitHub and the like are called) was envisioned at the time. Pull requests aren’t even a concept in git proper, right?
It seems like a kind of important type of tool. Even though git is awesome, we don’t need a monoculture.
Generates a pretty email requesting someone to pull commits from your online repository. It's really meant for Linus to pull a whole bunch of already-reviewed changes from a maintainer's integration branch.
The rough equivalent to GitHub's "pull request" is the "patch series", produced by:
Which lets you provide a "cover letter" (PR description), and formats each commit as a diff that can be quoted inline in an email reply for code review.
> I do wonder, though, if it would have been designed differently if the whole “code forge” sort of application (or whatever GitHub and the like are called) was envisioned at the time.
I would argue that it was purposefully designed in contrast against that model.
You can follow, star, favourite and comment on things, you get a feed where recent updates on stuff/people you've interacted are listed, you can customise your profile page with snippets about yourself, a photo, a status, contact info and add whatever else you want (including more photos, images, charts etc) in markdown. It now has discussions which are essentially a forum.
It's as much a social network/collaboration tool as it is place to store your code these days.
To the degree that it emphasizes communication between individuals over being a dumb database, yes, a bugtracker can be a social network. Bugzilla is a bit too close to the "database" side of the spectrum, whereas GitHub is at the other end; Jira sits somewhat in the middle.
Sorceforge predates git by about 11 years. As do several other projects like google code. Its not a new idea. Or basically most source control systems. Git, actually, is the more unique idea, of a DVCS... versus a cVCS...
git is not a new idea, various features of git existed in various SCMs for decades. The distributed aspect existed in Bitkeeper too, for example.
But it took a big brain with a systemic view of the problem and solutions space to bring them all together - in a lighting fast implementation to boot.
I don't think technical features were the key to git's success. What really made the difference was:
1. it was free;
2. it was sponsored by the most fashionable project of the time (Linux);
3. it did not require a server;
4. because it was FOSS, people could extend it without asking anyone's permission; and...
5. ...once GitHub appeared, simplifying the PR process, the network effect did its thing.
Git was hard to use and to understand. It did not win on technical features alone, as you said there were plenty of alternatives. It won because of community and network effects.
There’s really nothing resembling a “pull request” that’s used by 99.999% of git users. We have merge requests. But we call them pull requests for some dumb reason.
Indeed they're not; they live on the 'user layer' rather than the 'application layer'. That's not to say many git-frontends (IntelliJ, Sourcetree, Github desktop) don't support them, but "git pullrequest" isn't a thing.
Edit: see "git request-pull" as mentioned below (file:///C:/Program%20Files/Git/mingw64/share/doc/git-doc/git-request-pull.html) but what it does is write "a pretty email" (the other poster's words) to STDOUT.
Sorry. For some reason I used to get `git help ...` redirect me to the (URL of) the actual website.
I think the file:/// is so that you can fire off "[cmd /c] start FILEPATH" to load the default browser, while also not having to worry about spaces in the path.
Perforce had change sets and there were lots of tools for code reviews that worked a lot like GitHub before GitHub (review board, phabricator, another one I can’t remember).
"Pull requests" are part of git though since it was originally a DCVS it meant you would pull from an individuals git repo ... services like github etc centralized the concept
Jeff Geerling made a $3000 raspberry pi cluster and shared the linpack scores, so I looked at when it’d hit different spots in the top500 list. He’d have won from ‘93 to June ‘96, and then been knocked out of the top 10 in November ‘97.
That’s with a pretty substantial constraint, making it out of raspberry pi’s, and a lower budget. With $5000, and your pick of chips… I bet you could hit the turn of the century…
I think they just want to be a winner in the “next thing.” They hit social networking, but missed mobile operating systems and didn’t compellingly win at social media. Eventually an ambitious person with a bazillion dollars wants a clear win, right?
Then the game at least has a chance to develop some mechanics. Players who delayed longer have a chance at winning more points. They also might be challenged more…
reply