As someone who has played a few hundred hours of the base civ6 game, I agree with the combat needing to be improved. The biggest flaw imo, is the AI makes terrible decisions. To overcome this, the harder difficulties give the AI a huge resource material advantage. This makes attacking early suicidal. Instead, the best strategy I have found is to turtle up until you unlock the bomber.
This bomber has a gigantic range. Forgot exactly what it is, but something like 15 tiles. Comboed with spies to give you vision of the enemy, and a few bombers utterly destroy everything. The solution to every problem becomes spies + bomber. The enemy close to getting a science victory? Put a spy in their city and bomb the spaceport. Going for a domination victory? Put a spy in their city and bomb all the units.
Civ 6 seems like a game where it would have been good for them to add hooks for people to add their own AIs easily.
I suspect the built in AI does okay if you place units in a limited area (which is likely how they tested it), but it struggles getting armies around the full game map with complex borders.
In my experience, the Civ 6 AI doesn't do combat well in limited areas either. And it hardly ever uses planes and bombers. I really hope Civ 7 will be focused on AI innovations.
The article you link did not mention the employees saying running the editorial made them "feel unsafe". Neither the word safe nor unsafe appears in the article. It says the article "reportedly elicited strong objections" from the staff.
Silence is not the opposite of violence. Peace is the opposite of violence.
I interpret the quote "silence is violence" to mean by not speaking out against violence, you implicitly support or contribute to it. People may disagree if this is true, but it certainly doesn't feel Orwellian.
Bezos has vastly more power than AOC. His decisions affect the lives of 840,000 direct employees and at least as many again - I'm not sure the figures even exist - "freelance" content suppliers, small businesses, and casual workers.
His tax avoidance policies have a significant impact on the budgets of the larger Western countries.
AOC has a media profile, but - so far - almost no influence at all on US policy. That may change in the future, but given that the Dem Establishment seem to consider her a dangerous extremist, it's possible she'll be sidelined into becoming her generation's powerless token left-leaning icon.
I said that different sorts of power were fungible. I did not say that a specific sum can be used to acquire a highly specific office by any particular individual. It's entirely possible to use vast wealth inefficiently and fail to acquire political power or influence.
It's possible to use the same wealth efficiently to pay individuals to study the problem of which individuals to contribute to in order to acquire increasing and undue influence.
Your argument is that you shot at someone five times and failed to injure them thus guns doing kill people.
He didn't, but with his donations to the DNC and the creation of Hawkfish, he'll have an inordinate amount of power in the direction of the party for years to come regardless because of his money.
Certainly in some ways. But AOC (with others) arguably shifted an entire mainstream party's platform. I think that the "hard power" that Bezos has is larger, but the "soft power" wielded by political and cultural elites is massive and easy to underestimate.
Coming from the east coast US, I didn't find the people snooty. They seemed friendlier than where I am from, I made way more friends here than I did back home. Back home you would get arrested for drinking beer in public, in sf you can have a beer in one hand, a joint in the other while playing kickball in golden gate park.
I liked the food a lot. I got giant, tasty, burritos in the mission for like $8. Of course you have to go to a side street, not something right on mission.
Didn't really go to bars so not sure about that.
To me the city is absolutely beautiful. Seeing the city from twin peaks, walking to the beach through golden gate park, or cycling across the golden gate bridge are all incredible experiences.
Simple problem to solve. Give them their 1000€ a month daily at 33€ a day. If they blow it all, they are hungry that day but eat the next. With a debit card it shouldn't be too hard.
I interviewed with one of the companies on that list a few years back (noredink). They gave a timed hackerrank style coding question as round one (so I guess technically not a whiteboard). I passed that, then I had an interview with an actual person.
He asked me vague question, like what is architecture, I started to reply with what design tradeoffs I made on the app I was working on. He literally laughed at me, and said that is not architecture. I was shocked that someone would laugh at a candidate but said ok, what does architecture mean to you? He responded, I ask the questions here not you. I immediately ended the interview. Worst interview I have ever had. Every time I see that company brought up, I think back to that experience.
I've had one such interview go really bad. I am normally a very trusting and confident person, but that interview destroyed me for days. This was for an internship on my first year of uni when I just started learning to code C and C++. The position was for a Junior programmer (which I was).
At some point the interviewer asks which I would choose in a project, C or C++ and reasons why. Basically answered that it depends on the project, but that both languages had their pros and cons, and it all depends. I told him I did not that many projects under my belt at the time.
Interviewer got somewhat pissed off and kept asking me about specific languages constructs which I was not yet familiar with. In a way felt like he was trying to ambush me and make me feel incompetent. I mentioned to him that I was not yet experienced enough to answer these questions, but was eager to learn. Well he did NOT like that either and ended the interview promptly.
It seems like the guy really did not like me (which is fine), but also wanted to turn this interview into some type of power trip ....
Had this been today, I would have politely declined and left. But I was a young and eager cub. Live and learn!
I rarely see it talked about just how much ego plays a part in interviewing. In fact, I'd wager it plays one of the biggest parts of the interview process. If you get even one interviewer that is bitter, unhappy, on a power trip, or otherwise a sociopath, you're not getting hired. Many folks hate interviewing candidates; it can put them in a bad mood. They're going to take it out on you because it's safe.
Ego issues sometimes apply to the interviewee as well. I once had to interview someone that clearly thought the interview process was beneath them. This person answered every question as if it was a stupid endeavor and we should just hire them since it was just obvious how great they were.
All jokes aside he was not foaming at the mouth or unpleasant when we first started the meeting, and I'm not the quickest one to pick up on subtle body language cues. So your guess is as good as mine.
Yeah, some interviewers enjoy the interviewee/interviewer power imbalance and like to play with it, as in this case in a sadistic way. I think that he wanted you to guess what he had in mind but when you put him on the spot to give you his definition of architecture he didn't have a solid answer or was afraid you could easily scrutinize him.
I had the same experience on some vague Postgres question for a Rails job when I was junior. I asked a similar question along the lines of: how often do you use this day to day here?
For many engineering candidates, we ask them to design the data schema for a calendar. I’m sure my employer and the question are not a secret. We have various follow-ons, like handling the wild number of ways meetings can be periodic, exceptions, and so on.
Nobody has ever asked me how often we need to build calendaring software, because I explain right up front that while this is a “toy” question, our core product functionality schedules people, and nearly every feature from a calendar app has some analogue to things we either do, or are asked to do but haven’t prioritized yet.
I think it’s ok to ask “toy” questions, but I also think that there should be a ready answer to the question “Does this have anything at all to do with the job?”
p.s. We don’t ask a question directly about scheduling, for a simple reason: Almost everybody understands the basic idea of a calendar, so it’s a more “level playing field” for candidates to think about calendars than schedules.
What does architecture mean to you? He responded, I ask the questions here not you. I immediately ended the interview.
Again, thanks so much for naming the guilty party (NoRedInk) in this case. So that we can firmly add them to our list of companies not to bother engaging with, if this is the kind of behavior we can expect from their interviewing team.
The above anecdotes speaks volumes about the mentality that drives companies like these -- and the "culture fit" they're apparently looking for.
This bomber has a gigantic range. Forgot exactly what it is, but something like 15 tiles. Comboed with spies to give you vision of the enemy, and a few bombers utterly destroy everything. The solution to every problem becomes spies + bomber. The enemy close to getting a science victory? Put a spy in their city and bomb the spaceport. Going for a domination victory? Put a spy in their city and bomb all the units.