No, but that at least would be interesting, since it would be playing using the same mechanics as a human, and with the same limitations (of the camera, etc). Not using an API.
Because ~200ms reaction time isn't exactly accurate when people are comparing focus on one action versus focusing on many things at once. Reaction time is going to be delayed then for humans (unless they happen to be expecting it at that particular moment), but for bots that doesn't happen.
So this current ai is uninteresting because bots can always instantaneously begin to react on any feedback, whereas humans have to pan and drag the camera around to look at different feedback in the first place, let alone react. Mechanically, humans also have to move the mouse all over the place and think of key combinations, in addition to reacting. Not just clicking a static box on cue.
It -would- be interesting if bots were limited just like humans to the camera view, -not- an API that continuously feeds them information. The bot would then have to learn how to prioritize working the camera, and it would be limited to only what the camera sees, etc.
That doesn't account for focusing on other things. There are a multitude of things to take into account while playing dota that can pull your attention; you can't always directly focus on your character in expectation of a blink initiation.
What citations do you want me to provide? This is purely theoretical discussion. Do I need to cite that after millennia, we still have different languages?
Do I really to dig up some academic paper to acknowledge that humans find it hard to agree on standards? That doesn't even include the geopolitical implications of this- as if China would ever agree to make English the One Language that all government and business runs on, etc.
If you make a theoretical conjecture, I don't need to provide academical papers to provide a rebuttal. Please, treat academical papers with rigor, not as a fallback for when someone challenges you on, again, a theoretical conjecture. I also don't need to provide papers for basic human intercourse.
> This worked for one country, so there are chances it works at a bigger scale.
No, you cannot extrapolate based on one country. Human beings are irrational and proud. Again, look at it from a geopolitical view.
> Yes. Things are imperfect. We will loose in the process. Guess what is also imperfect ? Communicating at the scale of 7 billion people with different culture, believes and needs.
Yes, different cultures, beliefs, and needs. All of which would be lost by -unilaterally- forcing one language, since reaching agreement won't happen. Nations are still figuring out how to solve their own issues, so why should a Korean person care to be forced to learn some random language? That already happened when Japan occupied Korea and forced Koreans to learn Japanese- why don't you read some history and tell me exactly how much Koreans liked that. [This also goes back to my previous statement about military domination being the only real way of forcing a language change.]
> The fact it takes 5 years to a chinese to be able to write english and 10 for an english to learn chinese is not subjective.
[Citation needed again]. Of course English writing is easier to learn, it has a phonetic alphabet... However Chinese has much more simplified grammar than English. There is no subjectively "better" language, unless you specifically mean in 1 single aspect, maybe. But languages don't exist in vacuums, so this point is moot. (5/10 years is way off, also. This is anecdotal evidence as well, and years vary by each individual person.)
Discussing the merits of Chinese or any other language is really another discussion, but Chinese people do just fine.
> Again, that's funny comming from somebody who is all emotional about this.
No, this is coming from somebody responding to a shortsighted conjecture.
> Also, thinking I'm talking about engineering and not politics and sociology "is a very stereotypical hacker news viewpoint".
No, I don't think that you're talking about engineering. I'm specifically pointing out that you are treating a human and cultural issue from an engineering perspective, as if it's merely something that can be "fixed". It's a myopic viewpoint, because that's simply not how humans work.
This never will happen. People will never agree to upending their culture and language, even in supposed interests of humanity. [Whether this would actually work is arguable].
> You can preserve culture and language, while simultaneously forcing everyone to learn English.
Nope, because culture and language are deeply intertwined. Over time, people would use their native languages less and less, and then entire cultural swathes of knowledge will be lost.
Next, no one will ever agree on one language. Not English, not Chinese, nor any made up language. Especially not an existing real language, for any number of reasons.
There are also concepts in different languages that are difficult to translate or grasp in other languages. Translation isn't a 1:1 rote task.
> I think it's about time humanity decides to stop the ego trip and declare english as the earth official language.
There is no "ego trip" going on here. The only "ego trip" is assuming that we can simply force everyone, unilaterally, to speak X language.
> Peace, democracy, exchange, cooperation, archiving, education: they are too hard to do in hundreds of languages. It's a waste of resources, and a hindrance to the most important challenges of humanity.
[Citation needed that this is better than forcing 1 language on humanity, which will almost certainly only happen with supreme military force, aka wars.]
> written chinese is way too complicated
Subjective.
---
Translation is a problem that we have to deal with, but it's better than trying to force one language.. People and societies cannot be engineered with a hand-wavy solution of "oh, just 1 universal language".
This is a very stereotypical hacker news viewpoint of blithely trying to "engineer" life and humanity, as if it were so simple.
With phonetic systems like Japanese and Korean, terms like this regularly get represented as-is in the script. Sometimes they don't get translated, as you can see plenty of jargon in this Korean wiki page on C++. [0]
One example is 'computer' -> 컴퓨터 in Hangul. It's still 'computer', just pronounced with the Korean pronunciation rules.
> perversions that it's still acceptable to demonize, namely pedophilia.
The wording here implies that we shouldn't be demonizing things like pedophilia, or that somehow, we needed Puritanism to realize that we ought to be demonizing pedophilia, or that this is purely a western construct. Puritanism has just lead westerners to demonize sexuality in general.
For westerners, lolicon is no different than child pornography. And lolicon is still controversial even within Japan.
It's easy to run your own instance. Mastodon provides a docker image, provided you have a server or VPS that can handle its asset compilation. I think you can get by with 2gb minimum. You can filter any instances that you don't want to federate with.
I'm not sure what you mean about not being listed on lists of instances. If you mean not federating your own instance, well, that goes against the entire premise of the fediverse / federation. Running your instance means it will propagate. Your posts will show up in the instances of whoever is following you.
It depends on where you look and who you follow. Swifter.at became a refuge for sex workers and is one of the larger instances.
However, you can filter instances, and/or sign up on an instance that blocks switter users.
There is activity, especially if you sign up on a huge instance like mastodon.social (although I don’t recommend this). instances.social lists all active instances that you can peruse through.
I've run into this myself, so I'm working on creating an instance that's a bit more geared towards engineering / tech discussion. It's nyquist.space [1] if you're interested.
It's not hosted on Mastodon but on Pleroma [2] instead so it's more barebones at the moment. (But saves a LOT on cpu/memory resources)
Mastodon.social has over 150k users, and there are other large non-Japanese instances. [1] After the SESTA / FOSTA bills, switter.at also became a huge instance for sex workers.
The instance banning thing is a huge problem and it’s not really being talked about much. The only thing you can do really is sign up on an instance like niu.moe that doesn’t filter besides illegal content.
Define "pointless". Each word has its own etymology, and if we're going to be honest here, the different spellings aren't _that_ complicated. Take it up with English's ancestors for borrowing words from many different languages, and then with more recent ancestors for the great vowel shift, among other things leading to change.
Language is never going to make sense. It's not prescriptive- we just make changes, arbitrarily, sometimes due to mistakes, and it either catches on or it doesn't. Trying to "fix" language is an impossible task because no one is making the rules. English in particular doesn't have a language council making decisions, unlike say, Korean. It doesn't matter anyways because "Standard English" is quite different than day to day conversation, and even in formal settings it's based on stylistic guidelines, not hard rules.
Just let it be- devising an _arbitrary_ method of attempting to corral an entire language is an impossible task. And any work would be undone within one generation anyways since languages evolve. Esperanto, a manufactured language, has already seen linguistic changes by its native speakers (kids who were taught it growing up).
Something that HN readers often don't understand is that being an engineer or having advanced understanding of a field does not equate having an understanding of linguistics, despite being a native speaker of a language. Merely striking out letters from words doesn't make a language or its spelling any simpler...
You are trying to paint a portrait of Americans in general that is flagrantly false.