daynthelife

20 dni temudiscuss

Out of curiosity, did it shift up or down for you? I've had perfect putch from a young age, but now at 30 I hear everything a semiton higher (so e.g. a B sounds like a C to me, and I have to manually subtract the semitone to infer the real pitch and hope that I am not overcorrecting)

daynthelife

21 dni temudiscuss

My read of GP is that there is a cycle economy between "bitter lesson" style domain-general scaling and domain-specific adaptation once the scaling plateaus for the latest tech.

daynthelife

24 dni temudiscuss

I love this! If I were to suggest any improvements:

- Have a play-by-play view so users can see plays they missed

- Make the "between innings" tabs clickable rather than forcing users to wait for the cycle (cycle by default, pin if user clicked a tab)

- show glove on right hand for outfielders that throw LH

- maybe show baserunners taking leads rather than keeping a foot on the base

daynthelife

2 miesiące temudiscuss

To the extent that's true, the same would then apply to any sufficiently intelligent life. So if that's the crux of the argument, it has nothing to do with AI being a great filter.

daynthelife

2 miesiące temudiscuss

It always bothers me when people suggest that AI could be the "great filter" in the sense of Fermi's paradox. Yes, AI may well wipe out biological life, but all evidence suggests AI will have a much easier time with space travel compared to biological life, and it will emit much louder signals unless it is intentionally staying silent.

daynthelife

3 miesiące temudiscuss

It clearly doesn't use minimax, since it doesn't play the best move for black in the critical line, leading to a mate in 5 instead if a mate in 6.

Best line is N4 N5, Nx6+ K7, R4 N3+!, K2 N5, N8! Kx8, Rx5#. The site has black instead play Kx6 on the third move, allowing a faster mate.

daynthelife

3 miesiące temudiscuss

The site plays Kx6 instead. You're right though that I was generous with the exclams; all the moves are easy to find in reality.

daynthelife

3 miesiące temudiscuss

It frustrates me that the site does not give the strongest defense for black. The position is mate in 6, not 5:

1. N4 N5

2. Nx6+ K7

3. R4 N3+!

4. K2 N5

5. N8! Kx8

6. Rx5#

daynthelife

3 miesiące temudiscuss

> Theoretically you can max out every 5 hour window, but they lose money on that.

No, there is a weekly limit as well. Maxing out a single 5h window uses ~10% of the weekly limit

daynthelife

7 miesięcy temudiscuss

I find a lot of motivation from topology. If you plot a smooth degree d curve over the complex numbers, it forms a surface of degree g=(d-1)(d-2)/2. In the case of a cubic, we get genus 1, i.e. a torus. Now tori admit a very natural group action, namely addition in (R/Z)^2. And sure enough, if you pick the right homeomorphism, this corresponds to the group action given by the elliptical curve.

Of course, the homeomorphism to (R/Z)^2 does not respect the geometry (it is not conformal). If we want the map to preserve angles, we need our fundamental domain to be a parallelogram instead of a rigid square. The shape of the parallelogram depends on the coefficients of the cubic, and the isomorphism is uniquely defined up to choice of a base point O (mapping to the identity element; for elliptic curves, this is normally taken to be the point at infinity). You still get a group law on the parallelogram from vector addition in the same way, and this pulls back to the precise group action on the elliptic curve.

The real magic is that the resulting group law is algebraic, meaning that a*b can be written as an algebraic function of a and b. This means you can do the same arithmetic over any field, not just the complex numbers, and still get a group action.

daynthelife

7 miesięcy temudiscuss

Rooks don't have taxicab geometry. Their metric space is compact even on an infinite board. I think you're thinking of the wazir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wazir_(chess)

daynthelife

10 miesięcy temudiscuss

Sure, but who's reading the conversation to determine whether it "looks suspicious"? A regex? A neural network? Who decides the algorithm, and do you really can believe they won't ever change it to serve other more nefarious purposes like suppressing dissent?

comments