Tranus

joined 1 year ago
[–] Tranus@programming.dev 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They're probably picturing the typical American grocery store: giant warehouse-like building, massive parking lot, tons of people coming and going. It would be a bad idea to put one of those in the middle of a neighborhood.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 13 points 7 months ago

For a while I just couldn't play souls-likes. The enemy attacks were blatantly undodgeable. Like, even if you move at the maximum possible speed, in any direction, at the very start of an animation, you can't get out of the way. Then I realized you're not really supposed to get out of the way, you're supposed to abuse the immunity frames from the roll to "dodge" straight through the attacks. Basically the opposite of what I had been doing.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 3 points 9 months ago

It annoys me that people keep saying "figuratively" is what they mean instead of "literally". "Figuratively" may be the opposite, and technically correct, but the use of the word "literally" in this way is to strengthen a statement. A more appropriate correction would be "actually" or "seriously", which holds the intended meaning. "Figuratively" is the last thing it should be replaced with.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 39 points 10 months ago

I think you're missing the point of the -porn suffix. Its not supposed to convey "the study of" or "images of". Its meant to convey that viewing it is satisfying in some primitive/emotional/aesthetic way. NaturePorn isn't just "pictures of nature", it's "pictures of nature that suck me in and make me want to see more". In that regard, the comparison to sex is intentional.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I doubt you want to. Its probably at least a terabyte.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

If that was pretentious, I must be some kind of stuck up asshole

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 7 points 10 months ago

That's still best achieved with SBMM (just a less strict version). With random matchmaking, you are only equally likely to see better/worse players if you are in the 50th percentile.

Also, each player is independently selected (when random). This means there will probably be a mix of high skilled and noob players in every game. You would not see a team of mostly noobs or mostly pros. For a player in the 50th percentile, with a team of 6, the chance of being better than every player on the other team team is only 1.5%. For the 25th percentile, it is 0.02%. So a very significant number of players would (almost) never experience an "insane spee on noobs". However, the chance of having at least one player in the 75th percentile on the opposing team is 82%. So they would frequently encounter situations in which they feel hopelessly outmatched.

The only way to solve this is to use matchmaking that attempts to take skill into account.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The Chinese room argument doesn't have anything to do with usefulness. Its about whether or not a computer that passes the turing test is conscious. Besides, the argument is a ridiculous one to begin with. It assumes that if a subcomponent of a system (ie the human) lacks "understanding", then the system itself (the human + the room + the program) lacks understanding.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Well I guess I'm one of the 2 then

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

That sounds nice and all, but is useless as a definition. The way I see it used, wisdom is knowledge and intuition that is gained from experience, whereas intelligence is a property of a person that allows them to learn quickly.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 25 points 10 months ago

In the first couple panels I can't stop seeing her mouth like a mustache

view more: next ›