The new story is not meant to be a continuation of the Skywalker Saga, the name of the overall arc of the popular and pop culture-dominating Star Wars movies known as Episodes 1 through 9. The intent here is to have brand new characters and a new story, and not have it be a continuation, sources tell The Hollywood Reporter.
The first movie will 100% start on Tatooine.
They are probably an experienced team members that are needed on ME5, and management decided that they can't distract them. And these new devs would spend a lot of time figuring out a completely unfamiliar codebase (also creating a proper remaster would also necessitate a lot of low-level changes to the engine which will make it much harder). So it's a business decision, not technical one.
One has absolutely no connection with another. It's been 13 years since BioWare last used Origins' engine. Few people in software development stay in one company for that long (especially programmers who would feel no personal connection to company's IP, unlike writers or artists).
Its recommended specs are very low actually, so it's possible that it will run well without "ultra" graphics features.
Qualcomm uses their own Adreno GPUs, they are different from ARM's Mali which are even worse.
Government-funded manned spaceflight programs aren't done for pure science either. It's a cool kids club where money is allocated for political reasons ("nation prestige" or some other bullshit). NASA didn't land on the moon because American senators were fans of science, they were tasked with it to "beat" USSR.
Science-based space exploration should use automatic probes only, anything else is a waste of money.
I remember that space is completely unforgiving and we just aren't up to the task for anything more than a token selfie by the best dozen humans we can possibly produce with great effort and training.
Astronauts aren't superhumans and there is nothing "special" about their training. They are just pilots with stricter physical requirements. The reason why there aren't many of them is because there is no need for more. Our technology is not there yet for cheap and "boring" space travel beyond low Earth orbit (and probably won't be for a century at least). And there isn't anything worthwhile for humanity out there anyway. At least at the current stage in our "evolution". So for now manned spaceflight programmes are just vanity projects funded by politicians (for "national pride" or whatever) or some billionaire celebrities like Musk.
Also I don't think that world peace would be necessary for space colonization. It could be born out of conflict or for economic reasons, like colonization of Americas. It's simply that it will take centuries for us to reach a point when the prospect of leaving Earth will become attractive for regular people (if we survive that much of course).
They don't even need to force it. Every ISP in Russia has government-managed DPI hardware that filters all use traffic performs such blocking. No cooperation from ISPs is necessary.
Todd Howard already said that they aim to be as ambiguous as possible and not canonize any of player's choices. It will probably be "yeah there was a big trouble here a couple of decades back but it's all ancient history now so who cares". And the town's leader will be some schmuck who hasn't even heard of Mr. House.
That's the problem of most general-use languages out there, including "safe" ones like Java or Go. They all require manual synchronization for shared mutable state.
Utility is for poors. People who don't count money want something shiny or whatever their peers have. They can easily replace it if it breaks.
Well the author claims that it's not possible for std::unordered_map to get close to other implementations because of constraints that the standard imposes on it. I.e. faster implementations simply behave slightly differently (in ways that are not important to most users).
tl;dr:
std::unordered_map is one of the worst ones, boost::unordered_flat_map and absl::flat_hash_map are one of the best.
A comparative, extendible benchmarking suite for C and C++ hash-table libraries.
They are trying to make money to stay afloat. Postmarketos is a community project so it's not comparable. And neither Purism nor Pine64 seem to be huge commercial successes just like Jolla, though they seem to be doing a bit better.
They have been owned by a Russian state-owned telecom corporation for a few years until recent events (Russia currently tries to push Sailfish OS fork as its "russian-made" mobile OS). Original Finnish management has split off to a new independent company with the same name last year, and this looks like their last ditch attempt to continue existing. I don't expect they will last much longer (the reason why they were bought by Russia in the first place was that Jolla failed as a business).
Because that's not an investment, it's a donation.
It's not ready yet.
The protocol for apps/games to make use of it is not yet finalized.
Gconf was text though (well XML actually but not binary).
In the context of the KDE desktop version 6 major release we looked into a series of D-Bus services using Polkit for authentication. This led to a couple of interesting findings and insights.