Crux Unlocker V6 Free Download
Anna Pybus
I have beaten the main storyline, and now I'm looking to complete all the paradox endings. In order to do so, I need to activate my paradox scope at Serendipity. But, I can't seem to figure out how to get there. How do I navigate the Historia Crux to get there?
There are two ways to get there, this is the way most people will access serendipity when you complete the chapter 3 in sequential order (part 1 then part 2) you get there by opening the gate to the very south in node 12 Yaschas Massif AF01X.
From there you are in an alternate Historia crux. Enter the void beyond, there are a few items hidden around here. Then open the gate in the middle of the map to return to the regular Historia Crux and unlock Serendipity in the process.
The second way is if you completed chapter 3 out of sequence (part 2 then part 1.) then only difference is that you have to open a gate in node 13 Sunleth Waterscape AF300 but as I didn't do it this way I am not sure which gate it is.
Quick Background: As I am going back and redesigning some critical parts of an application, I keep wondering about locking and its impact on performance. The app has a large Tree style data structure which caches data/DTO from the database. Updates to the large tree can come about in two main ways: 1. user triggered commands, 2. auto updates from jobs that ran in the background.
When either operation type occurs (user/auto), I am locking down (explicitly locking) the data structure. I was running into consistency issues, so locking down everything seemed to make the most sense to protect the integrity of the data in the cache.
Question: Since many auto updates can occur at once I was thinking of implementing some kind of queue (JMS maybe) to handle instructions to the data structure, where any user driven updates get pushed to the top and handled first. When it comes to handling a bulk/unknown size set of auto "tasks", I am trying to figure out if I should let them run and lock individually or try and bulk them together by time and interact with locking once. The real crux of the problem is that any one of the tasks to update could affect the entire tree.
In terms of overall performance (general, nothing specific), is it more efficient to have many transactions locking potentially doing large updates, or try and combine to one massive bulk update and only lock once but for a lot longer? I know a lot of this probably hinges on the data, the type of updates, frequency, etc. I didn't know if there was a general rule of thumb of "smaller more frequent locks" or "one large potentially longer" lock.
The reason is, that other threads that may be waiting for the lock may get woken up and then uselessly sent back to sleep when the update thread quickly locks the resource again. Or the update is interrupted by another thread which is likely bad for cache utilization. Also there is a cost to locking which may be small compared to your update: pipelines may have to be flushed, memory accesses may not be freely reordered, etc.
If the thread spends some time between updates without having to lock the data structure, I would consider relocking for every update if it is expected that other threads can complete their transactions inbetween and contention is thereby reduced.
Note that when there are different priorities for different updates like I presume for your user updates versus the background updates, it may be a bad idea to lock down the data structure for a long time for lower priority updates if this could in any way prevent higher priority tasks from running.
Sealed CruxSealed CruxFeline Deity summonCategoryExceptionIn-game DescriptionLegend has it that, once a strong enemy is defeated, a sealed crux will be found, resonating with certain objects.Category BoostIs considered to be of any power item categorySourceBosses/Secret bossesUnlockComplete Ancient Chapters - Chapter of Soul
This item cannot be found normally from shops and special rooms, but will instead drop when you defeat a boss or secret boss after collecting at least one Ancient Item (Cursed Chain, Suffocating Sash or Cracked Armcuff). On its own, this item does nothing.
Category boost: The Sealed/Awoken Crux item counts for any other category boosts as one item with all categories, when equipped. (for example, it counts as one item af all required categories for Channeling Monkey category boost)
The repaired version of the item, obtained when equipping all four Ancient Items (Cursed Chain, Suffocating Sash, Cracked Armcuff and Sealed Crux) at once, or when equipping the Sealed Crux and Forgotten Relic together. The Awoken Crux will summon a white anthropomorphic cat deity that wears all the other Ancient Items at once. This cat will float near the player, and attack enemies the player attacks. To attack, it will first perform a teleporting punch towards the enemy attacked by the player, which deals 20 damage and is guaranteed to crit, then it will follow up with a flurry of claw swipes, dealing 15 damage each. The cat will only stop attacking when the player strays too far from the enemy in question, when that enemy dies, or if it has to do another animation. When the combo is over, it will do a final 30-damage punch at the enemy, also a guaranteed crit, then teleport back to the player's side. Its attacks can benefit from all the player's stats as well as trigger and benefit from items. If the player is inflicted with any negative debuff, the cat will stop attacking if it was doing its combo, then make a pose for 1 second, after which it will cure the debuff instantly. This move will go into cooldown for 3 seconds after being used.
This is a follow up blog to the Climate Tech Crux Move, published in January by Stafford Lloyd and Lea Simpson. Where we explored our shared theory that we already have the technical knowhow and financial resources to solve the climate crisis and reach net zero emissions. Exploring why, despite having all of that, so little was happening to get us to net zero.
Thank you to those who contributed, we received a total of 58 ideas from 22 people. Half came from climate tech innovators. Followed by advisors and then consultants as the second largest groups. Many of the responses came from those working on net zero in one form or another.
Unsurprisingly, there were many innovative tech solutions resulting from R&D investment. These included synthetic hydrocarbons for renewable energy storage and solutions focusing on carbon dioxide concentration in the oceans, such as giant kelp. Scaling out known solutions that promise incremental energy efficiency gains, like double glazed windows, and products that support existing renewable energy technologies were also highlighted.
The main theme revolved around creating new practices to disrupt the status quo. This included collaborating and coordinating with key stakeholders and engaging incumbent legacy blockers in the conversation. Co-designing policies with innovators from the start was also highlighted.
A war effort approach to reducing red tape around bringing low carbon innovations to market. Cutting through and accelerating innovation by insisting on collaboration (including landscape & peer review and sharing of data/learning) in return for incentives to enable faster commercialisation.
A wide range of provision crux solutions were identified. These ranged from capacity building on climate and tech literacy across sectors in the climate tech value chain (investors, innovators, users). To designing niche and innovative investment vehicles, such as funds that test solutions covering multiple parts of the system, and new financing mechanisms like bonds to incentivise bulk purchase agreements.
A clear theme emerged around connecting communities to solutions, making them more motivated to engage in their success either financially or by better understanding the solution. This could be achieved through community ownership models or co-implementation of solutions with communities.
Lea has pioneered approaches to solving systemic problems through CoLabs, where diverse groups are brought together to imagine radically better scenarios collectively (co) and then test them in the real world (lab).
This is the crux of his application for bail in his terrorism case, which his counsel S Selvam filed at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court Registry on Friday last week, immediately after a Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled as invalid Section 13 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 which barred a court from considering granting bail in security offence cases...
7fc3f7cf58