embix

airline tycoon game could be a game on it’s own … Sounds fun

It, is - or was. Not a “serious” tycoon game, but certainly fun.

Unfortunately they kinda dropped the ball with the successor. If they made another one, I’d probably buy it anyways.

Yea, an Airline Tycoon mod/dlc would have been nice.

tunefind when I hear something I like while binge watching, and occasionally to see what others seem to enjoy these days (although that only matches in say 10-15% of the cases).

I loaned a colleague’s son my copy of a very introductory Unity book for a school project. Instead of a 2D game (most of the book), they ended up making a 3D version. Now he has an apprenticeship with a game company where they use Unreal.

Unity has other pros: With a decompiler you can check some of the Unity games you already own and add features you missed. Only for yourself, or in case your friends are curious, maybe release them as mods.

wipe or fake SMART data

My guess would be that it’s stored in some kind of non-volatile memory, i.e. EEPROM. Not sure if anyone ever tried that, but with the dedication of some hardware hackers that seems at least feasible. Reverse engineering / overriding the HDD’s firmware would be another approach to return fake or manipulated values.

I haven’t seen something like that in the wild so far. What I have seen are manipulated USB sticks though: advertising the wrong size (could be tested with h2testw) or worse.

4-5 times now. When confronted with more than a hundred commits between latest known working version and the one you’ve observed the bug (which was not catched by any of the unit tests) it can save some time to find the fishy commit.

In such a case I create a testcase on top to reproduce the bug. Then bisect and for each stage add the testcase, build, run tests. FYI: this only works if all (or at least most) of the commits in the chain are compilable - if you’ve done a big messy refactoring with several commits breaking the build, bisect can get you only so far.

https://feddit.de/comment/527050

First thing to do is check SMART data to see if there are any fails. Then looking at usage hours, spin ups, pre-fails / old-age to get a general idea how worn the drive is and for how long you could make use of it depending on risk acceptance.

If there are already several clusters relocated and multiple spin up fails, I’d probably return the drive.

Apart from all the reliability stuff: I’d check the content of the drive (with a safe machine) - if it wasn’t wiped you might want to notify the previous owner, so she can change her passwords or notify customers about the leak (in compliance to local regulations) etc. - even if you don’t exploit that data, the merchants/dealers in the chain might already have.

Nice, I only knew the ones from The Practical Dev on github.

It’s ::1, but also fe80::d00f:foo5