tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post3344531898771464655..comments2024-03-17T05:03:46.056-07:00Comments on xkcd sucks: One ThousandCarlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01074589998141327538noreply@blogger.comBlogger155125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-40551618839006986552012-01-13T08:39:08.109-08:002012-01-13T08:39:08.109-08:00xkant, would you say that you have vays of making ...xkant, would you say that you have vays of making me talk?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-19868170713278431932012-01-13T07:40:12.406-08:002012-01-13T07:40:12.406-08:00And I am also german? Come on, let the stupidity ...And I am also german? Come on, let the stupidity flow, don't be shy.xkantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-90981761267179230082012-01-12T17:11:46.716-08:002012-01-12T17:11:46.716-08:00when I hear that a computer can play perfectly in ...when I hear that a computer can play perfectly in a fair game, I don't assume "it can always win." perfectly implies as good as it is possible to be, given the game's rules. a computer can play tic tac toe perfectly even though it's simple enough that most humans can always force a draw. the computer never makes a bad move. for any game that we've solved, this is true of the computer. <br /><br />"Instead he chooses the move out of the set of all possible moves which he judges most likely to make his opponent fuck up so that he wins"<br /><br />this is basically what computers do, except instead of relying on the opponent to screw up, it chooses the move out of the set of all possible moves which is most likely to ultimately end in victory, no matter what the opponent does. a human can't somehow exploit the computer's perfection to achieve victory in a solved game--they can, at best, pull out a draw by also playing perfectly.<br /><br />look at it a different way. if you had two computers play against each other in a solved game, they would draw every time (unless, of course, it's a solved game in which one player can always force a victory). this doesn't make their gameplay any less perfect--it just means that when you pitch two perfect opponents against each other, nobody wins.<br /><br />"Human competition is about exploiting the flaws in your opponent, typical or peculiar."<br /><br />the thing is there is no flaw to exploit in a computer that is playing a solved game. the closest thing is "if I also play flawlessly, then I will be able to force a draw." but if you make one mistake, the computer will be able to capitalize on it and force a victory.rshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-38226113385910400032012-01-12T16:17:39.098-08:002012-01-12T16:17:39.098-08:00In the first paragraph you summarise your summaris...In the first paragraph you summarise your summarising and explain why people summarise.<br /><br />In the second paragraph you continue summarising.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-107665600761656852012-01-12T15:50:44.880-08:002012-01-12T15:50:44.880-08:00Anonymous Jan 10, 02:42 PM:
I summarized what had...Anonymous Jan 10, 02:42 PM:<br /><br />I summarized what had been said because there were a few comments in between, so to avoid others getting lost... and also to point out the blatant stupidity of what was said, so yes, I pretty much copied it. You like it? Cool.<br /><br />And then, just after your comment, another one trying to discredit me because I am supposedly german. How pathetic, but apparently that's no news in here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-6355445314509868442012-01-12T02:42:32.000-08:002012-01-12T02:42:32.000-08:00Yeah Rob but guaranteeing a draw isn't perfect...Yeah Rob but guaranteeing a draw isn't perfection, is it?<br /><br />At some particular game state, it is possible that there are several moves which guarantee at least a draw and some which might not even guarantee a draw. The best player doesn't necessarily even choose one which will guarantee a draw. Instead he chooses the move out of the set of <i>all</i> possible moves which he judges most likely to make his opponent fuck up so that he <b>wins</b>. Human competition is about exploiting the flaws in your opponent, typical or peculiar.<br /><br />e.g. a "perfect" draughts computer playing various opponents may never lose but it may never win either since it always possible to respond to it with an equally "perfect" move. But a good human draughts player playing various opponents may lose occasionally but win lots. N.B. that draughts has only been solved weakly from a starting board - for simpler games it may genuinely be possible to play perfectly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-81631246297338605362012-01-11T15:58:45.743-08:002012-01-11T15:58:45.743-08:00"On a more general note, "perfectly"..."On a more general note, "perfectly" doesn't mean perfectly in the layperson sense but is a term used to describe a restriction on the opponent's behaviour. This need to doublespeak a drawback as a feature is one of a great long list of properties of computer scientists which are... Orwellian."<br /><br />it just means they've solved the game. that is, they've found the ideal sequence of moves that will guarantee either a win or a draw, which includes the ideal response to the opponent's moves, etc.<br /><br />i'm not sure what doublespeak you're talking about here, but i think 'knowing the ideal response to every possible move' counts as perfect even for a layman<br /><br />anyway yes there is an old meme. it goes basically 'oh your name is eric blair, eh? how... ORWELLIAN.' the caps are important.rshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-41646358870037513532012-01-11T13:17:38.784-08:002012-01-11T13:17:38.784-08:00The notion that you can *win* at Dungeons and Drag...The notion that you can *win* at Dungeons and Dragons make *me* want to nerrrd raaage!! With precisely four r's, three a's, and two exclamation points.Arthurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04837322808525126354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-91750760993428049432012-01-11T11:59:29.442-08:002012-01-11T11:59:29.442-08:00@Gone fishing
You're probably thinking of Andr...@Gone fishing<br />You're probably thinking of <a href="http://xkcd.com/595/" rel="nofollow">Android Girlfriend</a> or its follow-up, <a href="http://xkcd.com/600/" rel="nofollow">Android Boyfriend</a>. Both of them suck because he drew the robots in the same way as he draws normal people, for funk's sake.<br /><br />I think the captcha thing is another mini-meme. I'd stress calling them that, because they're somewhere between memes and inside jokes. In the same way as GOOMH is (thankfully) localized within the xkcd fanbase, all of our 'memes' are actually mini-memes. I think the distinction has to be made.<br /><br />Also, I think Randall should have added Dungeons and Dragons in the bottom category of 1002. The fact he hasn't just makes me want to nerrrrd raaage!!Jon Levihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02982566251460262711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-57386751837738110222012-01-11T11:49:07.129-08:002012-01-11T11:49:07.129-08:00The default Starcraft AI does cheat on the very hi...The default Starcraft AI does cheat on the very highest difficulty. There's actually competitions to provide custom Starcraft AIs so it's not out of place on this chart.<br /><br />A game AI isn't doing a brute-force lookahead. The combinatorial explosion is only important for a very limited class of solutions. You won't get perfect play from such AIs, but you only need to beat humans. Some kind of machine learning solution could be used to train an AI up.<br /><br />The AI being handicapped by rendering is absurd in the same sense that a human being handicapped by breathing is absurd. Also Starcraft's rendering isn't that heavy.<br /><br />The only reason to put Starcraft in the "may never" category is that it's unlikely to endure for a zillion years like chess, so likely we'll all move on before anybody bothers to make a superior machine.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-52135849009775590622012-01-11T08:39:30.891-08:002012-01-11T08:39:30.891-08:00Computers MAY never outplay humans? No shit, Randy...Computers MAY never outplay humans? No shit, Randy; I think you can change that MAY to a WILL. You've got two games where the all the rules aren't known up front and may change over the course of the game (Mao & Calvinball), one that is completely random chance with no strategic component (Snakes and Ladders), and one where all participants "win" (7 Minutes).<br /><br />I've never played Starcraft, but I assume it's like most other strategy games I've played; the AI doesn't really get "better" on higher difficulties, it just gets bonuses that are unavailable to the human. I'd put computer strategy games in the "may never" category when the AI doesn't get bonuses. Civilization/Starcraft/etc have way more moves to evaluate than any traditional game, often have multiple win states, and the AI is handicapped by the computer using a good chunk of its processing power to render the game itself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-2088022823086214432012-01-11T06:28:53.417-08:002012-01-11T06:28:53.417-08:00Lol.
Anyway the 7 mins in heaven joke seemed kind...Lol.<br /><br />Anyway the 7 mins in heaven joke seemed kinda old. Something similar has been done in XKCD beforeGone Fishinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00512512356648772706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-45972261914518715342012-01-11T06:28:01.851-08:002012-01-11T06:28:01.851-08:006:14, you do understand that generally a forum has...6:14, you do understand that generally a forum has more than one poster, yes?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-76505844347463025572012-01-11T06:14:46.241-08:002012-01-11T06:14:46.241-08:00Wait Rob... no "germans raped my daughter&quo...Wait Rob... no "germans raped my daughter" claim this time? Gee, you're getting old.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-5022269951008236662012-01-11T04:58:53.029-08:002012-01-11T04:58:53.029-08:00memeleptic's a nice word. It made me smile.
t...memeleptic's a nice word. It made me smile.<br /><br />thanks anon @ 4:35Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-75452183924007818182012-01-11T04:35:41.628-08:002012-01-11T04:35:41.628-08:00Re the grammar v. mathematics meme, IIRC the poste...Re the grammar v. mathematics meme, IIRC the poster stated he was pasting a dozen or so set pieces that he'd prepared for various situations. I'm not sure whether this is the traditional method of forcing but offline it might be analogised to throwing the content of various buckets of shit on various walls until eventually something sticks.<br /><br />(Also, the post's misleading - mathematicians tend to be fine grammarians. They remain frequently poor philologists.)<br /><br />If you mean the "I don't think it's okay" then I think that's the blog's only successful fill-the-gaps/blankety-blank thing. I determine this not because it's posted frequently but because at least once it's had one angrily correcting another for not doing it right. When some Asperger's sufferer has a memeleptic seizure because HURR THAT'S NOT BEEN COPIED EXACTLY RIGHT then you know a meme's been created.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-17413707453073221452012-01-11T04:22:10.118-08:002012-01-11T04:22:10.118-08:00No....?
Or is there?
Oh god I don't know!No....?<br /><br />Or is there?<br /><br />Oh god I don't know!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-84607880198760948632012-01-11T03:50:47.224-08:002012-01-11T03:50:47.224-08:00If those dates are anything to go by he checked Wi...If those dates are anything to go by he checked Wikipedi..reliable sources for at least FOUR of these. It is also sweet that he has put needless detail for CHESS because that's like the oldest geek game amirite? "Look guys SOME computer beat a TOP human in '96 but SOME human beat a TOP computer in '05 therefore computers CAN but might NOT beat humans LOL ISN'T PRIMARY SCHOOL LOGIC AND SCIENCE GREAT?"<br /><br />On a more general note, "perfectly" doesn't mean perfectly in the layperson sense but is a term used to describe a restriction on the <i>opponent's</i> behaviour. This need to doublespeak a drawback as a feature is one of a great long list of properties of computer scientists which are... Orwellian.<br /><br />(There's an Orwellian meme on this blog, right?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-43664359531451878562012-01-11T03:23:59.114-08:002012-01-11T03:23:59.114-08:00So it's just stating facts about games, all fo...So it's just stating facts about games, all for the 7 minutes in heaven joke? And it's not even funny.SilverSurfernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-44173177162057276952012-01-11T00:21:21.697-08:002012-01-11T00:21:21.697-08:00ugh, it's gross. all that bullshit about chess...ugh, it's gross. all that bullshit about chess computers just so he can make a 'joke' about sex robots? ewwwweaselsoupnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-52239589083002852012-01-10T23:27:35.632-08:002012-01-10T23:27:35.632-08:00Newest comic is one of things that you'd know ...Newest comic is one of things that you'd know if you knew about the game, but just never really bothered to put it on a chart.TheMesosadenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-19616174755222772012-01-10T21:08:01.921-08:002012-01-10T21:08:01.921-08:00Since when considering the grammar meme this blog&...Since when considering the grammar meme this blog's only viable meme suddenly became okay?<br /><br />I don't think it's okay.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-5844246341235530342012-01-10T19:30:22.783-08:002012-01-10T19:30:22.783-08:00It's that famed German bureaucratic spirit. Al...It's that famed German bureaucratic spirit. All points must be restated lest efficacy be lost. <br /><br />Also the reason that German conversations generally tail off after the third exchange, as the burden of restating everything said until then becomes too challenging. Hence the Deutsch lack of humor: "What did ze president of Amerika say to ze Reichesbundeskanzler of Germany?" "I don't know, what?" "You do not know vat he said, in fact it vas ze following..." <br /><br />Enough justified German-bashing, though, my main question is whether this blog's only viable meme (that grammar one) was forced or not? I would argue it wasn't technically, some would though. Why?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-47241909211333395152012-01-10T14:42:27.976-08:002012-01-10T14:42:27.976-08:00xk, I like in particular that your first three par...xk, I like in particular that your first three paragraphs merely summarise what has been said.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-36217052254804840752012-01-10T14:25:44.481-08:002012-01-10T14:25:44.481-08:00So... I point out that your jokes are much lamer t...So... I point out that your jokes are much lamer than the ones in xkcd and that you're doing something VERY immature, and what kind answers do I get?<br /><br />One tells me that I must be german and therefore I have no sense of humor - and points out that the commenter I criticized did NOT kill 6 millions of people.<br /><br />And the other one calls me a "butthurt xkcd fanslave"<br /><br />Seriously, you're just making it worse and worse. Lame.xknoreply@blogger.com