ybird

No good deed goes unpunished.

Good is good. Evil is evil. The only way for there to be more good is to do more good. If you do good and others do evil, you have still done good. If you do not do good and others do evil, there will be more evil than good. If you do good and others do not do evil, there will be only good done.

As a German in WWII, Stigler was a modern Samaritan- spit on for their acts, Nazis acts were and are despicable- just like the Samaritans were to the Jews 2000 years ago.

Using the following dataset of year to max drive size in bytes per year [1a][1b]: {1956,5.00E+06},{1979,5.71E+08},{1980,1.00E+09},{1991,1.00E+09},{1992,2.10E+09},{1997,1.68E+10},{2003,3.70E+10},{2005,4.00E+10},{2006,1.60E+11},{2006,7.50E+11},{2016,5.00E+12}

Linear regression provides the equation: year = 4.222874399 ln(numBytes) + 1896.534826

Assuming the average bits required to represent a board state is 160 [2], then: 2^155 positions x 160 bits = 9.13e47 bytes

4.222874399 ln(9.13e47) + 1896.534826 = 2362.87979

So, a projection shows that by year 2362, we could have a single storage drive holding every permutation of a board state, so it would be less than 2 drives to store the states along with the move to make for that board. Add more drives and you pull that date in.

References:

1a. http://www.pcworld.com/article/127105/article.html 1b. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2473980/data-storage-so... 2. http://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/19397/smallest-c...

The assumption that the answer to everything lies in achieving your dreams and ambitions through your possession and redirection of money.

Studies have shown that the ratio of overall happiness per dollar in salary decreases after you hit a certain level, and it can be proven that the level required for happiness decreases as the average income decreases as long as the expectation/experience is not there to expect that income.

While I'm a capitalist in a first-world country, I'm not in denial about this. We are overprivileged. We are the economic equivalent of obese people whose gut flora has become unbalanced and they feel that they need to eat carbs all of the time. We are lazy fuckers that expect investors to show up and fund our big idea, and that if they do, we deserve it; because we don't give a shit about the many others who are much more intelligent, creative, and able than we are, but don't have the resources or support structure that we have are not our problem. Well- fuck that. Wake up and realize that you don't deserve a trophy for showing up. We're all lucky as shit to be here reading this. It's not a blessing to be overprivileged- it's a challenge; you are torn between trying to make your family/self happier and your duty, really, to take care of others. If you fail that challenge, which many do, at the least you are significantly lowering the potential of the planet. Do you not realize how many lives you could be positively impacting by helping others who are less fortunate? And at worst, you are further dividing the haves and the have nots- which is a cause of war.

Sorry but I don't agree with this at all.

The fact that this is the highest voted comment on this post makes me lose all faith in HN.

I told you how many solutions you'd have to store. I don't see how that is underestimating.

A petabyte of storage would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. Think of the not too distant future.

we can't in reality solve chess and go with computers

I don't think this is correct. Both could be solved by determining the perfect move for each board arrangement, leading to a very simple, but very data-heavy solution (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number - number of chess positions somewhere below 2^155 - and also need to track for each position whether can empassant for each pawn like X-FEN does, and http://tromp.github.io/go/legal.html - number of Go positions for 19x19 board ~2.081681994 * 10^170, though other-sized boards would each need their own set of solutions). In addition, both Chess and Go engines have beaten masters:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E2%80%93computer_chess_m...

http://www.wired.com/2016/03/googles-ai-wins-fifth-final-gam...

You could be correct about the human brain being incapable of storing all of the Chess or Go solutions. While the brain could perhaps memorize enough strategies and board positions to substitute, the theoretical maximum of 2.5 PB may not be enough to hold all board positions and metadata.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-memory...