Xinti

And that worked well against google right? Get over yourselves. You are fucked and just don't want to admit it. Think about this I'm Google: I have literally more money than you, I can hire 10 lawyers for each of yours looking for every technicality, loophole, stalling tactic, and typo in anything any of you do.

Guess who wins? Not John and Jane Schmoe. So yeah enjoy being bent over, and just ask for lube first.

And we aren't those countries.

Or in this case make sure I don't help the PLA get more of a leg up on deluded hopes of world domination. Then I can avoid them :)

Solve it with an SAT solver, or solve it with a random heuristic—either way, you’re dealing with a trivial belt-laying puzzle that any standard constraint tool can handle. The fact that you found a 34-lane weave is neat, but it’s basically a re-skin of solving simple combinatorial constraints. Sure, it proves Factorio can be used for demonstrations of off-the-shelf solvers, but it hardly reflects a ‘deep’ puzzle worthy of computational bragging rights. The real irony is that these same SAT-based methods can also optimize bin-packing, scheduling, or any other standard NP problem with more interesting constraints. Factorio’s belt weaving doesn’t add enough genuine complexity to stand out—it’s basically the same problem in a different costume.

https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.theatla...

That's a hard no.

"So many ordinary objects and experiences have become technologized—made dependent on computers, sensors, and other apparatuses meant to improve them—that they have also ceased to work in their usual manner. It’s common to think of such defects as matters of bad design. That’s true, in part. But technology is also more precarious than it once was. Unstable, and unpredictable. At least from the perspective of human users. From the vantage point of technology, if it can be said to have a vantage point, it's evolving separately from human use."

So basically: "You're too stupid to figure out how to use things, you think they are badly designed because they require thinking apart from a heuristic that you use, and then therefore in a word 'stupid' "

Sorry Charlie. That's not a defect. That's someone not wanting to deal with something well shitty (no one flushing because they are (also no pun intended) a piece of shit.

That's why automatic flush was invented.

Now if they didn't make toilets for your 3 year old (they do but that's a specialist thing and in a public area normally not a high priority outside of an elementary school) doesn't mean that the object is badly designed.

What is the complete garbage is that?

Yeah after reading this article I'm vastly not impressed with these "projects" unless you think that doing things just to do things is important. Web assembly? Uhhh yeah no thanks. Ohhh json formatter. Not like there are probably 10 of those already. How about rewriting tensorflow in java?