This made me laugh out loud.

"Click or tap on all pictures of ARMED INSURGENTS TAKING COVER IN RUINED BUILDINGS until no more are left."

In both cases the trading value of the currency has almost nothing to do with who originated it, and almost everything to do with how the general public feels about it.

Just like crypto, most "government" currencies are worth what they're worth only because everyone agrees that they are. That's called "fiat" currency. And that's why fiat currency exchange markets exist. The US Dollar hasn't been "convertible" (redeemable for a fixed amount of precious metal) since 1971, and many other world currencies were already backed in some way by the US Dollar at that time.

The real difference is in the supply.

Government fiat currency is difficult to counterfeit, although the government (or reserve bank) can always make more whenever they want. We trust them not to print more money, increasing the money supply and devaluing the currency. However, this is exactly what has happened sometimes in the past, and no doubt will happen again in the future.

Crypto currency is virtually impossible to counterfeit, and IIRC there's a finite (but not precisely known) amount of it that can be made, no matter who you are.

Personally, I still use physical fiat currency and no crypto. I'd like to use crypto, but regulation in my country makes it very difficult to use without registering your details with a central authority. And although everyone's pushing e-money options which are similarly tracked, thankfully I still have the option of using anonymous cash.

I don't do anything bad or illegal. I just believe that government and big business don't deserve to know everything I do in my life simply because they want to.

Private members aren't actively blocked from external access; they're passively marked "Access prohibited".

That means that rather than being unable to find the members of a class, C programmers simply can't pick up on the signals telling them that they're not wanted.

(Fellow C programmers: I'm joking. :D)

When you use any piece of Internet-enabled software, any and all data that passes through it can theoretically be copied and siphoned off back to the authors of the software.

Should they do it? No. Can they do it? Yes.

Does Mozilla do it? They say they don't, and I'm inclined to trust them. Do other major browsers do it? Absolutely.

As regards your physical location, geoIP databases can get pretty close these days.

So this is a list of responses given by AI when you correct it? My guess was "Things you will never hear from a client when you politely point out a logical inconsistency, an incorrect assumption, or a wild over/underestimation in their project plan." 'Cause in my experience the response you will get, 99% of the time, is "That won't happen."

TL;DR: The clock oscillator for the sound chip (separate from the main CPU clock, which does not have this issue) appears to be speeding up over time as it ages. Games from that era use video signal synchronization to regulate their overall speed, so this will not affect game times. It may cause audio glitches or crashes, but it won't make games run faster. However, it has the potential to cause (and probably has caused) desynchronization issues with tool-assisted speedruns on original hardware.

(I looked into this a bit for another post of this same article.)

Many special editions of the Dreamcast were released over the years, in a variety of different colours. However, every special edition Dreamcast that I've seen has had some other visual change besides just the colour.

Looking at the pictures, I suspect that your console has just been put into a replacement aftermarket shell. However, if the bottom half of the console is solid grey, and there's a pale yellow limited edition number sticker on the back, then you have a quite rare Code: Veronica (Claire version) console. I'm guessing that if the sticker was there, though, you wouldn't be here asking about it, as it's a real giveaway.

That being said, it still looks cool, but I don't think it's going to command an especially high price or anything. The controllers were always available in a wide range of colours, although it's funny that the beige controller on the right has the blue European swirl. I guess someone got a deal.

When I go to that URL on a stock, direct FF install, I still see that notice.

As a half-joking response to this half-joking admission, I got started with the Usborne programming books as a kid, and they laid some excellent foundations for my later study. They're all available online for free these days, so grab an emulator and user manual for your 80s 8-bit home computer of choice, and dive in!

Whatever it may have become in later years, Alan Kay, who is often called "The Father of Object-oriented Programming", outlined the message-passing idea as the main concept he was driving at, originally.

He also says that he probably misnamed it.

Here's a discussion in which the man himself makes a (small) appearance: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/46592/so-what-did-alan-kay-really-mean-by-the-term-object-oriented

Some of the things you mentioned seem to belong more properly in the development environment (e.g. code editor), and there are plenty of those that offer all kinds of customization and extensibilty. Some other things are kind of core to the language, and you'd really be better off switching languages than trying to shoehorn something in where it doesn't fit.

As for the rest, GCC (and most C/C++ compilers) generates intermediate files at each of the steps that you mentioned. You can also have it perform those steps atomically. So, if you wanted to perform some extra processing at any point, you could create your own program to do so by working with those intermediate files, and automate the whole thing with a makefile.

You could be on to something here, but few people seem to take advantage of the possibilities that already exist, and combining that with the fact that most newer languages/compilers deliberately remove these intermediate steps, this suggests to me that whatever problems this situation causes may have other, existing solutions.

I don't know much about them myself, but have you read about the LLVM toolchain or compiler-compilers like yacc? If you haven't, it might answer some questions.

It really depends on your expectations. Once you clarified that you meant parity with current consoles, I understood why you wrote what you did.

I'm almost the exact opposite of the PC princesses who can say with a straight face that running a new AAA release at anything less than high settings at 4K/120fps is "unplayable". I stopped watching/reading a lot of PC gaming content online because it kept making me feel bad about my system even though I'm very happy with its performance.

Like a lot of patient gamers, I'm also an older gamer, and I grew up with NES, C64, and ancient DOS games. I'm satisfied with medium settings at 1080/60fps, and anything more is gravy to me. I don't even own a 4K display. I'm happy to play on low settings at 720/30fps if the actual game is good. The parts in my system range from 13 to 5 years old, much of it bought secondhand.

The advantage of this compared to a console is that I can still try to run any PC game on my system, and I might be satisfied with the result; no-one can play a PS5 game on a PS3.

Starfield is the first game to be released that (looking at online performance videos) I consider probably not being worth trying to play on my setup. It'll run, but the performance will be miserable. If I was really keen to play it I might try to put up with it, but fortunately I'm not.

You could build a similar system to mine from secondhand parts for dirt cheap (under US$300, possibly even under US$200) although these days the price/performance sweet spot would be a few years newer.