Search Results

Search found 66 results on 3 pages for 'avoidance'.

Page 1/3 | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • Dynamic obstacles avoidance in navigation mesh system

    - by Variable
    I've built my path finding system with unreal engine, somehow the path finding part works just fine while i can't find a proper way to solve dynamic obstacles avoidance problem. My characters are walking allover the map and collide with each other while they moving. I try to steering them when collision occurs, but this doesn't work well. For example, two characters block on the road while the third one's path is right in the middle of them and he'll get stuck. Can someone tell me the most popular way of doing dynamic avoidance? Thanks a lot.

    Read the article

  • Moving objects colliding when using unalligned collision avoidance (steering)

    - by James Bedford
    I'm having trouble with unaligned collision avoidance for what I think is a rare case. I have set two objects to move towards each other but with a slight offset, so one of the objects is moving slightly upwards, and one of the objects is moving slightly downwards. In my unaligned collision avoidance steering algorithm I'm finding the points on the object's forward line and the other object's forward line where these two lines are the closest. If these closest points are within a collision avoidance distance, and if the distance between them is smaller than the two radii of the two object's bounding spheres, then the objects should steer away in the appropriate direction. The problem is that for my case, the closest points on the lines are calculated to be really far away from the actual collision point. This is because the two forward lines for each object are moving away from each other as the objects pass. The problem is that because of this, no steering takes place, and the two objects partially collide. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can correctly calculate the point of collision? Perhaps by somehow taking into account the size of the two objects?

    Read the article

  • Wall avoidance steering

    - by Vodemki
    I making a small steering simulator using the reynolds boid algorythm. Now I want to add a wall avoidance feature. My walls are in 3D and defined using two points like that: ---------. P2 | | P1 .--------- My agents have a velocity, a position, etc... Could you tell me how to make avoidance with my agents ? Vector2D ReynoldsSteeringModel::repulsionFromWalls() { Vector2D force; vector<Wall *> wallsList = walls(); Point2D pos = self()->position(); Vector2D velocity = self()->velocity(); for (unsigned i=0; i<wallsList.size(); i++) { //TODO } return force; } Then I use all the forces returned by my boid functions and I apply it to my agent. I just need to know how to do that with my walls ? Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Web standards or risk avoidance?

    - by Junior Dev
    My company is building an App Engine application. The app encounters a bug (possibly due to an issue with App Engine itself, as per our research) on IE9, but it cannot be reliably reproduced and is experienced by a small percentage of users. The workaround is to force IE9 to use IE8 mode. As a lazy front end developer (who doesn't like CSS hacks, shims and polyfills) I think it's OK to at least try going back to IE9 mode and see what happens, while we're still in private beta. The senior engineer (being more pragmatic) would rather that we continue forcing IE9 users to use the older IE8 mode. Who is right?

    Read the article

  • Overload Avoidance

    - by mikef
    A little under a year ago, Matt Simmons wrote a rather reflective article about his terrifying brush with stress-induced ill health. SysAdmins and DBAs have always been prime victims of work-related stress, but I wonder if that predilection is perhaps getting worse, despite the best efforts of Matt and his trusty side-kick, HR. The constant pressure from share-holders and CFOs to 'streamline' the workforce is partially to blame, but the more recent culprit is technology itself. I can't deny that the rise of technologies like virtualization, PowerCLI, PowerShell, and a host of others has been a tremendous boon. As a result, individual IT professionals are now able to handle more and more tasks and manage increasingly large and complex environments. But, without a doubt, this is a two-edged sword; The reward for competence is invariably more work. Unfortunately, SysAdmins play such a pivotal role in modern business that it's easy to see how they can very quickly become swamped in conflicting demands coming from different directions. However, that doesn't justify the ridiculous hours many are asked (or volunteer) to devote to their work. Admirably though their commitment is, it isn't healthy for them, it sets a dangerous expectation, and eventually something will snap. There are times when everyone needs to step up to the plate outside of 'normal' work hours, but that time isn't all the time. Naturally, with all that lovely technology, you can automate more and more of those tricky tasks to keep on top of the workload, but you are still only human. Clever though you may be, there is a very real limit to how far technology can take you. I'm not suggesting that you avoid these technologies, or deliberately aim for mediocrity; I'm just saying that you need to be more than just technically skilled (and Wesley Nonapeptide riffs on and around this topic in his excellent 'Telepathic Robot Drones' blog post). You need to be able to manage expectations, not just Exchange. Specifically, that means your own expectations of what you are capable of, because those come before everyone else's. After all, how can you keep your work-life balance under control, if you're the one setting the bar way too high? Talking to your manager, or discussing issues with your users, is only going to be productive if you have some facts to work with. "Know Thyself" is the first law of managing work overload, and this is obviously a skill which people develop over time; the fact that veteran Sysadmins exist at all is testament to this. I'd just love to know how you get to that point. Personally, I'm using RescueTime to keep myself honest, but I'm open to recommendations for better methods. Do you track your own time, do you have an intuitive sense of what is possible, or do you just rely on someone else to handle that all for you? Cheers, Michael

    Read the article

  • Obstacle Avoidance steering behavior: how can an entity avoid an obstacle while other forces are acting on the entity?

    - by Prog
    I'm trying to implement the Obstacle Avoidance steering behavior in my 2D game. Currently my approach is to apply a force on the entity, in the direction of the normal of the heading, scaled by a number that gets bigger the closer we are to the obstacle. This is supposed to push the entity to the side and avoid the obstacle that blocks it's way. However, in the same time that my entity tries to avoid an obstacle, it Seeks to a point more or less behind the obstacle (which is the reason it needs to avoid the obstacle in the first place). The Seek algorithm constantly applies a force on the entity that pushes it (more or less) in the direction of the obstacle, while the Obstacle Avoidance algorithm constantly applies a force that pushes the entity away (more accurately, to the side) of the obstacle. The result is that sometimes the entity succesfully avoids the obstacle, and sometimes it collides with it, depending on the strength of the avoidance force I'm applying. How can I make sure that a force will succeed in steering the entity in some direction, while other forces are currently acting on the entity? (And while still looking natural). I can't allow entities to collide with obstacles when realistically they should be able to easily avoid them, doesn't matter what they're currently doing. Also, the Obstacle Avoidance algorithm is made exactly for the case where another force is acting on the entity. Otherwise it wouldn't be moving and there would be no need to avoid anything. So maybe I'm missing something. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Algorithm for spreading labels in a visually appealing and intuitive way

    - by mac
    Short version Is there a design pattern for distributing vehicle labels in a non-overlapping fashion, placing them as close as possible to the vehicle they refer to? If not, is any of the method I suggest viable? How would you implement this yourself? Extended version In the game I'm writing I have a bird-eye vision of my airborne vehicles. I also have next to each of the vehicles a small label with key-data about the vehicle. This is an actual screenshot: Now, since the vehicles could be flying at different altitudes, their icons could overlap. However I would like to never have their labels overlapping (or a label from vehicle 'A' overlap the icon of vehicle 'B'). Currently, I can detect collisions between sprites and I simply push away the offending label in a direction opposite to the otherwise-overlapped sprite. This works in most situations, but when the airspace get crowded, the label can get pushed very far away from its vehicle, even if there was an alternate "smarter" alternative. For example I get: B - label A -----------label C - label where it would be better (= label closer to the vehicle) to get: B - label label - A C - label EDIT: It also has to be considered that beside the overlapping vehicles case, there might be other configurations in which vehicles'labels could overlap (the ASCII-art examples show for example three very close vehicles in which the label of A would overlap the icon of B and C). I have two ideas on how to improve the present situation, but before spending time implementing them, I thought to turn to the community for advice (after all it seems like a "common enough problem" that a design pattern for it could exist). For what it's worth, here's the two ideas I was thinking to: Slot-isation of label space In this scenario I would divide all the screen into "slots" for the labels. Then, each vehicle would always have its label placed in the closest empty one (empty = no other sprites at that location. Spiralling search From the location of the vehicle on the screen, I would try to place the label at increasing angles and then at increasing radiuses, until a non-overlapping location is found. Something down the line of: try 0°, 10px try 10°, 10px try 20°, 10px ... try 350°, 10px try 0°, 20px try 10°, 20px ...

    Read the article

  • How to make it so units don't stack up in one location?

    - by Daggio
    So I'm making a game in AS3, it's a strategy DotA-like game (for flash game equivalent, there's UDE) so far so good, I have the A* pathfinding algorithm all sorted out and the minion units move to the desired location as I want them to be. The problem a rise when a unit stops in a node that has already occupied by another friendly unit. Both (or more than two) of them stacks up in one location, it looks like they're one unit. I want to add collision detection so when they collide they don't stack up together. But now they stop when they collide on they way to a node. This isn't good because they won't move at all midway (they won't respond to enemy attacks like that). I've added a deltatime so they only stopped for 2 seconds before they move again to their designated designation. This moves them again but they flicker. Not how I want it. So, like the title said. How to make more than one units don't stack up in a node? And if possible, how to make them not flicker while moving (it's good if they can tell other friendly units on the way and avoid them accordingly)?

    Read the article

  • what is the best way to add avoidance behaviour to an AI framework?

    - by SirYakalot
    I have a small AI framework for a shooting based game. Although this is rarely needed, as when agents are close to each other they are usually fighting, I would none the less like some way of implementing avoidance behaviour. For example, if in the future I wanted to take away their weapons and have many of them wonder around in a crowd, how would I make them not hit / pass through each other, but instead avoid each other? two ideas I had would be to add steering behaviour and allow that to deviate from their path, or to use a dynamic pathfinding technique. Are there better ways? What is the more respected practice?

    Read the article

  • DTracing TCP congestion control

    - by user12820842
    In a previous post, I showed how we can use DTrace to probe TCP receive and send window events. TCP receive and send windows are in effect both about flow-controlling how much data can be received - the receive window reflects how much data the local TCP is prepared to receive, while the send window simply reflects the size of the receive window of the peer TCP. Both then represent flow control as imposed by the receiver. However, consider that without the sender imposing flow control, and a slow link to a peer, TCP will simply fill up it's window with sent segments. Dealing with multiple TCP implementations filling their peer TCP's receive windows in this manner, busy intermediate routers may drop some of these segments, leading to timeout and retransmission, which may again lead to drops. This is termed congestion, and TCP has multiple congestion control strategies. We can see that in this example, we need to have some way of adjusting how much data we send depending on how quickly we receive acknowledgement - if we get ACKs quickly, we can safely send more segments, but if acknowledgements come slowly, we should proceed with more caution. More generally, we need to implement flow control on the send side also. Slow Start and Congestion Avoidance From RFC2581, let's examine the relevant variables: "The congestion window (cwnd) is a sender-side limit on the amount of data the sender can transmit into the network before receiving an acknowledgment (ACK). Another state variable, the slow start threshold (ssthresh), is used to determine whether the slow start or congestion avoidance algorithm is used to control data transmission" Slow start is used to probe the network's ability to handle transmission bursts both when a connection is first created and when retransmission timers fire. The latter case is important, as the fact that we have effectively lost TCP data acts as a motivator for re-probing how much data the network can handle from the sending TCP. The congestion window (cwnd) is initialized to a relatively small value, generally a low multiple of the sending maximum segment size. When slow start kicks in, we will only send that number of bytes before waiting for acknowledgement. When acknowledgements are received, the congestion window is increased in size until cwnd reaches the slow start threshold ssthresh value. For most congestion control algorithms the window increases exponentially under slow start, assuming we receive acknowledgements. We send 1 segment, receive an ACK, increase the cwnd by 1 MSS to 2*MSS, send 2 segments, receive 2 ACKs, increase the cwnd by 2*MSS to 4*MSS, send 4 segments etc. When the congestion window exceeds the slow start threshold, congestion avoidance is used instead of slow start. During congestion avoidance, the congestion window is generally updated by one MSS for each round-trip-time as opposed to each ACK, and so cwnd growth is linear instead of exponential (we may receive multiple ACKs within a single RTT). This continues until congestion is detected. If a retransmit timer fires, congestion is assumed and the ssthresh value is reset. It is reset to a fraction of the number of bytes outstanding (unacknowledged) in the network. At the same time the congestion window is reset to a single max segment size. Thus, we initiate slow start until we start receiving acknowledgements again, at which point we can eventually flip over to congestion avoidance when cwnd ssthresh. Congestion control algorithms differ most in how they handle the other indication of congestion - duplicate ACKs. A duplicate ACK is a strong indication that data has been lost, since they often come from a receiver explicitly asking for a retransmission. In some cases, a duplicate ACK may be generated at the receiver as a result of packets arriving out-of-order, so it is sensible to wait for multiple duplicate ACKs before assuming packet loss rather than out-of-order delivery. This is termed fast retransmit (i.e. retransmit without waiting for the retransmission timer to expire). Note that on Oracle Solaris 11, the congestion control method used can be customized. See here for more details. In general, 3 or more duplicate ACKs indicate packet loss and should trigger fast retransmit . It's best not to revert to slow start in this case, as the fact that the receiver knew it was missing data suggests it has received data with a higher sequence number, so we know traffic is still flowing. Falling back to slow start would be excessive therefore, so fast recovery is used instead. Observing slow start and congestion avoidance The following script counts TCP segments sent when under slow start (cwnd ssthresh). #!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s #pragma D option quiet tcp:::connect-request / start[args[1]-cs_cid] == 0/ { start[args[1]-cs_cid] = 1; } tcp:::send / start[args[1]-cs_cid] == 1 && args[3]-tcps_cwnd tcps_cwnd_ssthresh / { @c["Slow start", args[2]-ip_daddr, args[4]-tcp_dport] = count(); } tcp:::send / start[args[1]-cs_cid] == 1 && args[3]-tcps_cwnd args[3]-tcps_cwnd_ssthresh / { @c["Congestion avoidance", args[2]-ip_daddr, args[4]-tcp_dport] = count(); } As we can see the script only works on connections initiated since it is started (using the start[] associative array with the connection ID as index to set whether it's a new connection (start[cid] = 1). From there we simply differentiate send events where cwnd ssthresh (congestion avoidance). Here's the output taken when I accessed a YouTube video (where rport is 80) and from an FTP session where I put a large file onto a remote system. # dtrace -s tcp_slow_start.d ^C ALGORITHM RADDR RPORT #SEG Slow start 10.153.125.222 20 6 Slow start 138.3.237.7 80 14 Slow start 10.153.125.222 21 18 Congestion avoidance 10.153.125.222 20 1164 We see that in the case of the YouTube video, slow start was exclusively used. Most of the segments we sent in that case were likely ACKs. Compare this case - where 14 segments were sent using slow start - to the FTP case, where only 6 segments were sent before we switched to congestion avoidance for 1164 segments. In the case of the FTP session, the FTP data on port 20 was predominantly sent with congestion avoidance in operation, while the FTP session relied exclusively on slow start. For the default congestion control algorithm - "newreno" - on Solaris 11, slow start will increase the cwnd by 1 MSS for every acknowledgement received, and by 1 MSS for each RTT in congestion avoidance mode. Different pluggable congestion control algorithms operate slightly differently. For example "highspeed" will update the slow start cwnd by the number of bytes ACKed rather than the MSS. And to finish, here's a neat oneliner to visually display the distribution of congestion window values for all TCP connections to a given remote port using a quantization. In this example, only port 80 is in use and we see the majority of cwnd values for that port are in the 4096-8191 range. # dtrace -n 'tcp:::send { @q[args[4]-tcp_dport] = quantize(args[3]-tcps_cwnd); }' dtrace: description 'tcp:::send ' matched 10 probes ^C 80 value ------------- Distribution ------------- count -1 | 0 0 |@@@@@@ 5 1 | 0 2 | 0 4 | 0 8 | 0 16 | 0 32 | 0 64 | 0 128 | 0 256 | 0 512 | 0 1024 | 0 2048 |@@@@@@@@@ 8 4096 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 23 8192 | 0

    Read the article

  • How to create anroid to send to work in my place?

    - by aj-sin-dhal
    Hi I would like to create a life like android/robot to send to work in my place. Requirements 1) People should not be able to tell the difference between me and the android. My first attempt may not be perfect but I can tell people that its my twin that was dropped on its head while we were growing up. 2) Should have the same weight as me so it won't crush small children if it falls over. By small children I mean those above 7 years old. Those below 7 can easily be crushed by a normal human adult so it is not important to consider that special case. 3) Should run on linux. I have a tight budget and cannot afford to pay for any propreitary operating system. Will consider writing my own operating system if this is the best way to go. I am reading "The design of the unix operating system" by Maurice J. Bach currently. That should be useful. I also have an old copy of the dragon book. What other books should I read? I would like to finish this by monday if possible. I don't like working on mondays. I have made a start and have picked some clothes and shoes for my android worker. Any help will be appreciated. This is a serious question. AJ

    Read the article

  • .NET: Avoidance of custom exceptions by utilising existing types, but which?

    - by Mr. Disappointment
    Consider the following code (ASP.NET/C#): private void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (!SetupHelper.SetUp()) { throw new ShitHitFanException(); } } I've never been too hesitant to simply roll my own exception type, basically because I have found (bad practice, or not) that mostly a reasonable descriptive type name gives us enough as developers to go by in order to know what happened and why something might have happened. Sometimes the existing .NET exception types even accommodate these needs - regardless of the message. In this particular scenario, for demonstration purposes only, the application should die a horrible, disgraceful death should SetUp not complete properly (as dictated by its return value), but I can't find an already existing exception type in .NET which would seem to suffice; though, I'm sure one will be there and I simply don't know about it. Brad Abrams posted this article that lists some of the available exception types. I say some because the article is from 2005, and, although I try to keep up to date, it's a more than plausible assumption that more have been added to future framework versions that I am still unaware of. Of course, Visual Studio gives you a nicely formatted, scrollable list of exceptions via Intellisense - but even on analysing those, I find none which would seem to suffice for this situation... ApplicationException: ...when a non-fatal application error occurs The name seems reasonable, but the error is very definitely fatal - the app is dead. ExecutionEngineException: ...when there is an internal error in the execution engine of the CLR Again, sounds reasonable, superficially; but this has a very definite purpose and to help me out here certainly isn't it. HttpApplicationException: ...when there is an error processing an HTTP request Well, we're running an ASP.NET application! But we're also just pulling at straws here. InvalidOperationException: ...when a call is invalid for the current state of an instance This isn't right but I'm adding it to the list of 'possible should you put a gun to my head, yes'. OperationCanceledException: ...upon cancellation of an operation the thread was executing Maybe I wouldn't feel so bad using this one, but I'd still be hijacking the damn thing with little right. You might even ask why on earth I would want to raise an exception here but the idea is to find out that if I were to do so then do you know of an appropriate exception for such a scenario? And basically, to what extent can we piggy-back on .NET while keeping in line with rationality?

    Read the article

  • RTS Movement + Navigation + Destination

    - by Oliver Jones
    I'm looking into building my own simple RTS game, and I'm trying to get my head around the movement of single, and multi selected units. (Developing in Unity) After much research, I now know that its a bigger task than I thought. So I need to break it down. I already have an A* navigation system with static obstacles taken into account. I don't want to worry about dynamic local avoidance right now. So I guess my first break down question would be: How would I go about moving mutli units to the same location. Right now - my units move to the location, but because they're all told to go to the same location, they start to 'fight' over one another to get there. I think theres two paths to go down: 1) Give each individual unit a separate destination point that is close to the 'master' destination point - and get the units to move to that. 2) Group my selected units in a flock formation, and move that entire flock group towards the destination point. Question about each path: 1a) How can I go about finding a suitable destination point that is close to the master destination? What happens if there isn't a suitable destination point? 1b) Would this be more CPU heavy? As it has to compute a path for each unit? (40 unit count). 2a) Is this a good idea? Not giving the units themselves a destination, but instead the flock (which holds the units within). The units within the flock could then maintain a formation (local avoidance) - though, again local avoidance is not an issue at this current time. 2b) Not sure what results I would get if I have a flock of 5 units, or a flock of 40 units, as the radius would be greater - which might mess up my A* navigation system. In other words: A flock of 2 units will be able to move down an alleyway, but a flock of 40 wont. But my nav system won't take that into account. I would appreciate any feedback. Kind regards, Ollie Jones

    Read the article

  • CSMA/CD and CSMA/CA

    - by Zia ur Rahman
    CSMA/CD is used in wired LANs, CSMA means that the computers on the network sense the medium if the medium is idle, the computer transmits otherwise it defers sending.CD refers to collision detection. I don’t want to write about CD because its not related to my Question. Now in case of wireless LANs we use CSMA/CA , here CSMA refers to carrier sensing , the Question is how carrier sensing is done in case of wireless LANs? the collision avoidance is done by sending the control message to the intended receipient.

    Read the article

  • What's the safest online password system?

    - by Darian Miller
    It's so difficult to track dozens of passwords in different locations. Syncing fails from time to time and you end up with collision correction avoidance syndrome. Is there a single source of safe, online, commercial password storage anywhere? One that will be around for years to come and one that is truly safe enough to ensure protection?

    Read the article

  • Storage and BackUp Strategies

    - by Chandra Vennapoosa
    Many of us are familiar with backing up our data.  While it sounds pretty simple, the fact is that most of the computer users do not backup their data. Some of the excuses which they often make involve how long it takes, how slow it is, or how many DVDs or disks they need. However, once disaster strikes, the loss that you will suffer by not having your data backed up can be very severe. Topics Introduction What is an Online Back Up? Online Back Up Strategies Implementing Disaster Avoidance Implementation and Storage Security Issues to Consider Reader complete article : Storage and BackUp Strategies

    Read the article

  • Do Not Track Plus Stops Web Sites from Tracking You

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Do Not Track Plus is a Firefox extension that combines the do-non’t-track header with protection lists for comprehensive tracking avoidance while surfing the web. Unlike all-or-nothing no tracking flags, the Do Not Track Plus extension for Firefox allows you to set white and black lists for websites you would prefer to be tracked or not tracked by. You may, for example, want a shopping site you get benefits from or a news site that gives you customized articles to be allowed to track you. The tool also preserves anti-tracking cookies even when you wipe the rest of the cookies in your browser’s cache; effectively stopping you from accidentally rescinding your opt out cookies from anti-tracking sites. Do Not Track Plus [Abine via Wired] How to Enable Google Chrome’s Secret Gold IconHTG Explains: What’s the Difference Between the Windows 7 HomeGroups and XP-style Networking?Internet Explorer 9 Released: Here’s What You Need To Know

    Read the article

  • List of eCommerce sites that use end-to-end SSL?

    - by Jon Schneider
    My development team is considering implementing an eCommerce site using end-to-end SSL -- that is, every page on the site is accessed via an https:// URL -- rather than the more traditional "mixed mode" where most pages are accessed via http:// and only "secure" pages such as login and credit card entry are redirected to https://. Pros of doing such a "pure SSL" approach include avoidance of some session-hijacking attacks such as Firesheep; cons include performance considerations. My question is: Is anyone aware of a list of eCommerce websites (especially USA-based sites), or even specific websites, that use this end-to-end SSL approach? I'm especially interested in "regular" eCommerce sites rather than banks or other "financial" sites.

    Read the article

  • Rules of Holes #5: Seek Help to Get Out of the Hole

    - by ArnieRowland
    You are moving along, doing good work, maintaining a steady pace. All seems to be going well for you. Then BAM!, a Hole just grabbed you. How the heck did that happen? What went wrong? How did you fall into a Hole? Definitely, you will want to do a post-mortem and try to tease out what misteps led you into the Hole. Certainly you will want to use this opportunity to enhance your Hole avoidance skills. But your first priority is to get out of this Hole right NOW.. Consider the Fifth Rule of Holes...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Rules of Holes #5: Seek Help to Get Out of the Hole

    - by ArnieRowland
    You are moving along, doing good work, maintaining a steady pace. All seems to be going well for you. Then BAM!, a Hole just grabbed you. How the heck did that happen? What went wrong? How did you fall into a Hole? Definitely, you will want to do a post-mortem and try to tease out what misteps led you into the Hole. Certainly you will want to use this opportunity to enhance your Hole avoidance skills. But your first priority is to get out of this Hole right NOW.. Consider the Fifth Rule of Holes...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Rules of Holes #2: You Are Still in a Hole

    - by ArnieRowland
    OK. So you followed the First Rule of Holes -you stopped digging yourself in deeper. But now what? You are still in a Hole. Your situation has not changed much, but at least you are no longer making it worse. You need to redirect the digging effort into escape and avoidance efforts. The Hole has a singular purpose -consuming all of your time and effort. AND it has succeeded! But now you are going to redirect your efforts for your own survival. You have encountered the Second Rule of Holes: When you...(read more)

    Read the article

1 2 3  | Next Page >