r34

Would be great to be able to reconstruct the whole story in the style of the images as a comic book or animation. Might be a nice job for the generative models of the future.

I thought we are talking about PHP8.5:)

Your version includes 4 variables. Pipes don't create those intermediate variables, so they are more memory efficient.

Readability is mostly matter of habit. One reads easily what he/she is used to read.

Good point. I would refer to another (similar) metric, which could be called "IDE-search-ability): it extends greppability, by adding some more conventions which work well with your (your company's) IDE.

There is a huge difference between game theoretic optimal strategy and actual profitable strategy due to the human nature of the players. I imagine a professional poker player as someone who certainly knows the odds (math of the poker game in general), but is also very good in interpreting his opponents behavior (which would minimize the information revealed by them, but could they do it completely?). There are so many biases which even professional players have to overcome, that in my opinion poker is strongly psychological game. Also because of that I think that online poker and live poker are slightly different games.

I will take a look, thanks :)

Well, what came to my head pretty quickly when reading this was "there should be separate tables";) Thank you for the article, I didn't know about the statistic configuration in postgres. I can use your lesson straight away, as I'm desining a database for online gaming platform and now I'm sure that there should be separate tables for currently running and finished games:)

Also: very clear and easy to follow language, props to the author. Cheers.

lovely

But "mutation" includes adding genes (or extending a gene) as well, doesn't it?

I don't understand something: I was taught that mutations are random, not even predictable (the latter comes from Stuart A. Kauffman book that I've read recently). How did they construct the set of "all possible mutations"? Do we even know enough on chemistry / physics level to make such claims?

Yup, something like that came to my mind first: create a physical representation (like a map) of the graph you want to solve and use physics to determine the shortest path. Once you have it you could easily compute the winning path's length etc.

As a complete amateur I was wondering if it could be possible to use that property of light ("to always choose the most optimal route") to solve the traveling salesman problem (and the whole class of those problems as a consequence). Maybe not with an algorithmic approach, but rather some smart implementation of the machine itself.

That's why I use to claim that for me everything is a priori natural. Additionally I disagree every time I hear that "culture is the opposite of nature" (not sure where it comes from, but seems to be a well-grounded philosophical concept). For me it can't be so by the rules of logic alone.

On the other side: we have a lot of taboos in the language/culture and not all of them are bad in terms of social well-being or happiness of individuals (the very simple example is that we sometimes lie to our kids). And I think that what we hide behind those taboos tends to emerge as "unnatural" or rather usually "supernatural". I also usually don't agree that we don't need a revolution in physics, but I understand it is so successful in creating all those working machines and we have to maintain them... ;)

It could be a great introduction to the metaverse. Imagine adding the interior spaces by making the doors and windows openable. Then allow for more and more interactions. A lot could be done by algorithms (image recognition, etc.), but I think a lot of users would be interested in "building this new world". Adding procedurally generated spaces through portals would be a great next step. We are not far away from being able to "create a castle described by X in Y mixing painting style of Z and sculpture style of Ź". Maybe transforming between these styles and others in time.

I think it's a good time to introduce a new button to the browser interface, as the gap between the original "take me back to the previous document" and some new concepts like the one presented here is getting bigger and bigger. But maybe I'm just old?;)

That's something that I've been thinking about yesterday, while writing my code in PHPStorm. I thought how much easier those modern tools make programmer life, how intuitive they are and how hard it must have been to get to the current state of art. Thanks for that, creators!

What make it difficult for me very often are bad examples. The set of standard examples for introducing concepts of class, object, inheritance etc (animals, geometric figures, cars) makes things harder in some aspects in my opinion. That was at the beginning. Some time ago I was learning design patterns and again - after understanding the concept I usually understood how bad were the examples. I've never read a good explanation of SOLID principles.

When I work somewhere for a longer period of time I gradually work less and less, but it's not due to laziness, but due to splitting my time between learning and actual work. After few months I'm usually just more familiar with technologies used than the rest of the team. My record was reduction to just 2h/day. But I measure time and work the hours that I intend to work, so I don't have that notion of f**g around for the whole day. Then I reduce time spent on learning and spend more time on meditation and physical activity. But in general i try to keep 8h of self development during week days.

It doesn't forget - it's stated in the article (close to the end).

I've built a cheat detection system for chess few years ago. Our client paid for creating a chess portal to play chess for money (not an idea I'd put my money into - and it's been dead after few months). Anticheat engine has worked like that:

- simulate a game using stockfish

- for each move (except few moves at the beginning) compare the move made by player with the list suggested by engine - if the move chosen by player is on the list generated by engine, than give that player some points (depending on the position of the move on the list)

- do some math considering player's ELO and some other stuff (I can't remember exactly).

Definitely not an ideal solution, but also open for improvements. Btw it wasn't my idea - chess players provided the exact algorithm, so it must have been known.

I'm not an expert in history, but I think that Poland should reappear in 1918, but it's missing few more years on the map.

I predict ML models predicting how will the Earth look like in the future:) loads of fun!

More and more I'm convinced that in the set of all possible search spaces, the most important is the pleasure-driven search space. But some well constructed knowledge skeleton let's one explore it (starting) at a higher level.

That's how I see it: to build the scaffolding on ratio, and start flying from there. But it's always important to be able to land back and not to get lost completely - because the outer space is simply uncomfortably unknown.

That's why amongst all the writers (or more generally - creators) I enjoy most those who have both solid knowledge and brave imagination.

Maybe food has sth to do with decrease of testosterone, but I think it's rather cultural issue.

1. Lifestyle. Less sport, more cars etc.

2. Politics. Testosterone behaviors are less and less rewarded (or even directly punished). Adaptive strategy is to produce it less.

All kinds of abandonware sites. I used to download games and record them on CDs in internet cafés, even before I had my first computer:)

I'm working on a Polish dictionary. There are already professional dictionaries online but I miss one feature: to be able to search in definitions. It's also scrabble oriented, so words come with anagrams and so on.

I was just about to write a comment stating that Quanta (and Nautilus as well) have amazing art in almost every article. One of the best visualisations I encounter.

I had similar problem few days ago. No threat for life but serious threat for my car - the route suggested was full of very deep holes.

I've just tried to suggest a change, but as it happens often with Google documentation - the description of what to click matches nothing (there's no menu item labelled with the phrase from documentation - I use Polish version).

Edit: found it, but docs are misleading.

Funny, because I've seen just one talk in 2020 and it was that one :) I'm not too much into talks and conference stuff, mostly because almost all the time I find the subjects of talks completely irrelevant, to specific, too general etc. That one was really entertaining and I was looking for something similar, but haven't found anything.

Very cool.

And it can be extended further by adding videos from exploring the website itself ;))