New Article: Disjointed Thoughts
This commit is contained in:
parent
e625b866aa
commit
0e84bd4efa
1 changed files with 190 additions and 0 deletions
190
_posts/2016-03-11-Random-Thoughts-1.html
Normal file
190
_posts/2016-03-11-Random-Thoughts-1.html
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
layout: default
|
||||
tabtitle: Random Thoughts
|
||||
title: Random Thoughts 1
|
||||
tags: technology, gaming
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<article>
|
||||
<h1>Disjointed Thoughts</h1>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>I'm on vacation this week, which is pretty grand. Thus far I've
|
||||
accomplished one of the 4 rather meager goals I set for myself, played
|
||||
plenty of games, caught up on some reading and videos and feeds, and slept
|
||||
in far later than I should have. In doing the reading, primarily an article
|
||||
on 'Wait, But Why' about Elon Musk [
|
||||
<a
|
||||
href="http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/11/the-cook-and-the-chef-musks-secret-sauce.html">link</a>
|
||||
], I found my mind wandering across a few different thoughts, that I felt
|
||||
were worth jotting down, though I couldn't imagine dedicating an entire
|
||||
post to; paragraph-worthy thoughts. So, let's just throw them all
|
||||
together!</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h2>Thought 1: Chef and Automation</h2>
|
||||
<p>The aforementioned article speaks a lot of the idea of a chef versus a
|
||||
cook, and how we should all aspire to be chefs. This coincides mostly in
|
||||
name alone, but also by proxy with Chef, the configuration management
|
||||
software. We've been implementing Chef at work, and I dabbled in it a bit
|
||||
here and there. Actually, the primary impetus behind learning Ruby was
|
||||
Chef. A solution Chef was supposed to provide was the opportunity for
|
||||
automation. On the surface, I was onboard. Once I learned more, I cannot
|
||||
agree with Chef being the proper tool. I should preface any
|
||||
computer-related topics I discuss with the disclaimer that I find the Unix
|
||||
Philosophy very appealing, that I believe that efficient tools don't need
|
||||
fancy GUIs or complicated philosophies or use cases, and that the terminal
|
||||
is a very beautiful place. Chef's use is as configuration management:
|
||||
ensuring that all hosts managed by it are kept synchronized. With respect
|
||||
to automation, this means Chef is ideal for placing the automation files
|
||||
onto hosts, ensuring they're current, and accessible. However, when it
|
||||
comes to automation, I think a different tool is required. My initial
|
||||
thought is using SSH to run the remote commands. I've got a bit of a crush
|
||||
on SSH. I think it's an incredible and powerful tool. I think the
|
||||
combination of Chef for configuration deployment and SSH for remote
|
||||
execution is a pretty dang good couple.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h2>Thought 2: Ayn Rand and Objectivism</h2>
|
||||
<p>I have taken an unfair and rather ignorant position against Rand and her
|
||||
objectivism. I can all but blame my father for the position, since as an
|
||||
angsty teenager, hearing him support something, however slightly, meant I
|
||||
had to disagree with it. That being said, my experience of Rand is probably
|
||||
the same as many other Americans: I read a few of her works in high-school,
|
||||
promptly forgot about it, and then learned via blog posts and Wikipedia
|
||||
what she was all about. Even writing this I have a bit of a sour taste,
|
||||
formed by biases developed in ignorance. I have decided to test my
|
||||
assumptions, by reading and analysing Rand's works and philosophy
|
||||
first-hand. Look forward (or don't) to a post specifically on Rand, her
|
||||
works, and her philosophy. Just... don't wait up for it. This one will take
|
||||
me a while...</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h2>Thought 3: Developments</h2>
|
||||
<p>A few projects I've been working on that have excited me.</p>
|
||||
<h3>IRC Bot</h3>
|
||||
<p>I love IRC. I think it's still the most powerful chat service available,
|
||||
and doubly so for technical chat needs. I can certainly understand why
|
||||
HipChat or Slack is chosen over IRC, but I can't agree with the decision.
|
||||
Regardless of that battlefield, to better make use of IRC, I am creating a
|
||||
bot. Thus far I've built it using Cinch [ <a
|
||||
href="https://github.com/cinchrb/cinch">link</a> ], but I think in the
|
||||
future the goal will be to refactor Cinch out in favor of my own code.
|
||||
Nothing against Cinch, but the fewer dependencies the better. The one
|
||||
unavoidable dependency is Gearman, which is a distributed job system.
|
||||
Gearman allows me to have a bot written in Ruby, but execute shell scripts
|
||||
natively without exposing a shell, and without tying up resources. This is
|
||||
very useful considering the purpose of the bot is mostly for operational
|
||||
information, such as host health, network quality, and even automation.
|
||||
It's been a very fun process thus far, and I look forward to continuing to
|
||||
expand and consider functionality.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Dotfiles</h3>
|
||||
<p>My dotfiles are like a beautiful garden secluded from the world: fun to
|
||||
work on, but generally fruitless. In a continuing effort to remove any
|
||||
unnecessary dependencies, I have resumed my investigation into using Make
|
||||
to manage my dotfiles. I found a fantastic article detailing
|
||||
self-documented Makefiles [ <a
|
||||
href="http://marmelab.com/blog/2016/02/29/auto-documented-makefile.html">link</a>
|
||||
] and some assorted sources of others using Makefiles to manage their
|
||||
dotfiles. I'm quite excited about this development, because it means my
|
||||
dotfiles should be deployable across any Unix platform.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Documentation</h3>
|
||||
<p>I find myself writing a decent amount of documentation at work. While
|
||||
speaking with co-workers about this, and pondering why documentation is
|
||||
often so lacking, I've decided on the following conclusions: documentation
|
||||
is tedious; and documentation is hard. I've been mulling over the idea of a
|
||||
documentation engine build on git and leveraging GitHub technology. When I
|
||||
think about documentation, I like comparing it to programming:
|
||||
documentation is just code in English. If you follow my premise, then it's
|
||||
perfectly reasonable to expect the same services for documentation as we
|
||||
have for code: linters, style guides, builders, automated deployments, pull
|
||||
requests, etc. Git (and GitHub) already provide version control, which
|
||||
should be essential for any documentation engine. Build on top of that
|
||||
services which hook into the repositories, and I think documentation could
|
||||
be made significantly less tedious, while considerably more standardized,
|
||||
accessible, and useful.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h2>Thought 4: Guild Wars 2</h2>
|
||||
<p>I really enjoy Guild Wars 2. However, one unfortunate thing is the state
|
||||
of my favorite class, warrior, in the standardized player-versus-player
|
||||
format (sPvP). I've been thinking a bit about how to improve warrior, and I
|
||||
think I've come up with some interesting ideas. On the off-chance that
|
||||
someone from ANet finds this post, let me here and now give you full
|
||||
permission to use any and all ideas related to GW2 as you see fit;
|
||||
considering it in the public domain. My favorite warrior, WilsonStorm, once
|
||||
quipped that warriors don't have any fancy magic to do their stuff with,
|
||||
they just hit things. I like this summary: the warrior is a martial master,
|
||||
who relies on pure physical capabilities and eschews any magical help. With
|
||||
that in mind, I would propose the following 3 major changes:</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p><ul>
|
||||
<li style="font-weight: bold">Embrace the Adrenaline</li>
|
||||
<li style="font-weight: bold">Make Stances Like Attunements</li>
|
||||
<li style="font-weight: bold">Make Banners Like Spirit Weapons</li>
|
||||
</ul></p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Embrace the Adrenaline</h3>
|
||||
<p>I would like to see more functionality provided by default from
|
||||
adrenaline. An example would be decreasing weapon-skill cooldown based on
|
||||
the level of adrenaline, 1 second less per level of adrenaline. I like
|
||||
keeping some functionality in traits, though, because it encourages build
|
||||
diversity and can force critical decisions.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Make Stances Like Attunements</h3>
|
||||
<p>Not as in they become F1-F4, but in the following sense: Only one stance
|
||||
can be active at a time, activating stances provides an ongoing lesser
|
||||
benefit, and activating the stance again provides a temporary significant
|
||||
benefit but ends the stance. Let's take Berserker Stance as an example. In
|
||||
its current iteration, it gives you adrenaline every second, and resistance
|
||||
every 3 seconds, for the duration of the stance. In my revised iteration,
|
||||
you would activate a stance, and have a passive benefit plus a new active
|
||||
option. So, you activate Berserker Stance and start gaining adrenaline
|
||||
every second (while in combat). Then you can activate it again to gain
|
||||
resistance (say, 3 stacks every 3 seconds for 6 seconds). This would remove
|
||||
the passive benefit of Berserker Stance, and put it onto cooldown. However,
|
||||
you can only have one stance active at a time! So, say you were in
|
||||
Berserker Stance, and suddenly you wanted to be in Balanced Stance. By
|
||||
activating Balanced Stance, you would deactivate Berserker Stance without
|
||||
using it's active ability, putting it onto a shorter cooldown than normal.
|
||||
As part of this change, I would probably revisit what each stance does as
|
||||
well, since some wouldn't properly fit into the new format.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Make Banners Like Spirit Weapons</h3>
|
||||
<p>Again, not exactly like Spirit Weapons, but drawing similarities. First,
|
||||
instead of banners being bundles summoned at a location, they would provide
|
||||
an aura around the warrior when activated. This would be visually apparent
|
||||
by the warrior literally having a banner on their back. Each aura would do
|
||||
what the current banners do, but would be centered on the warrior. After
|
||||
being activated, the banner skill will flip to a secondary skill similar to
|
||||
how Spirit Weapons flip after being summoned. This would be the previous
|
||||
on-summon ability. So, when you activate Battle Standard, you start
|
||||
eminating the passives to everyone around you for the entire duration.
|
||||
After being activated, Battle Standard flips to a secondary skill that is
|
||||
the AoE revive. Unlike stances (and just like spirit weapons), multiple
|
||||
banners can be active at once, so the passives could need adjustment, but
|
||||
probably not much. The only downfall to this is the loss of the banner as a
|
||||
bundle/weapon, but I can't imagine many people actually use it as such.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>I think the really excited thing about these changes would be the build
|
||||
potential. Consider a build that uses a stance and a banner! There's
|
||||
suddenly actual use for banners outside of niche builds or one-off uses in
|
||||
dungeons! Stances and banners actually require planning and tactical usage
|
||||
rather than reactionary button-mashing to break stuns or revive team mates!
|
||||
And warriors gain much-needed viability in a team, due to providing buffs
|
||||
to team mates, and better damage output.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<br /><h4>[Bill Niblock][2016-03-11][Gaming, Technology]</h4>
|
||||
|
||||
</article>
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- ================================= -->
|
||||
<!-- ================================= -->
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- Notes
|
||||
|
||||
Sources:
|
||||
http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/11/the-cook-and-the-chef-musks-secret-sauce.html
|
||||
|
||||
-->
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- ================================= -->
|
||||
<!-- ================================= -->
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue