Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
keylie wrote:
Nach wrote:
If you can ensure it syncs or resync it on a stable distro, great.
All three Shovel Knight TASes sync on Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 with Linux kernel 4.13.0-36-generic
Terrific. Please add this to your submission notes for each movie, and we should be good to go!
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
noahkiq: Please mention in you submission notes which Linux version you used. Thank you.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
keylie wrote:
Indeed, I'll modify with a stable distro.
If you can ensure it syncs or resync it on a stable distro, great.
keylie wrote:
By "Linux version", do you mean Linux kernel version?
Yes, we need to know which Linux version to ensure compatibility. Some stable distros offer newer kernel versions as time goes on, especially if there's important patches.
Anything which has a strong possibility of affecting sync should be mentioned, so we can ensure that our judges and publishers can (easily) play back the movie, especially if they're revisiting a movie that was submitted several years earlier.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I didn't see Linux version mentioned in the details. But you did mention it uses Buster, which is not stable.
This violates our rules: http://tasvideos.org/MovieRules.html#LibtasMovies
"The version must be a stable release."
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Please include your OS details, thank you.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Please include your OS details, thank you.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Please include your OS details, thank you.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
<Nach> requiring build instructions for an image which is reproducible, completely free, and no legal issues is a nice start
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warepire wrote:
Nach wrote:
Also, maybe we should consider VirtualBox-RR.
VirtualBox-RR? I am not touching anything Oracle has had their hands in. Do you recall my whine about their MySQL drivers?
They're not actually from the same teams. MySQL was created by MySQL AB, originally a stand alone company. Then every major server vendor and huge social sites contributes all kinds of crazy patches.
VirtualBox was created by people at Sun Microsystems.
True, Oracle runs them both now, but it doesn't mean you should expect any similarities in their code.
feos wrote:
Regarding VirtualBox-RR, recently we had an Hourglass submission created in a VB WinXP. It only synced for the author, but for none of the people who had an identical VB environment. It worked for me partially on native XP. I would very much try to avoid anything that heavily depends on the host hardware, even though the possibilities that running a modern system emulator would open are quite tempting.
VirtualBox has settings as to whether you want to use the host hardware or not. Obviously anything tightly coupled to the host shouldn't be used. That's where Hourglass has also had issues, where games acted slightly differently depending on the video card used.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
The TVC updater needs to be fixed so badly! I suspect that if the updater part is fixed, some part of the code used for publishing will also be fixed.
I was hoping to fix it last week, then I ended up in the hospital.
I'd fix it now, but I can only use one hand, which is super hard to develop with.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
A great improvement to a great run, I love it. Big money, big prizes, yes vote.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos, okay, I'll look into your rating request.
Nach wrote:
BTW, before I get too far with this, please explain me on an idiot-proof a rubber duck level why the link here is temporal.
Maybe if I see how you learned this, I can learn this myself and we'll be able to skip some unnecessary part of this talk.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
But please give me an example of a statement that'd debunk your claim if it was true.
If it were true, it'd be something like:
Nach, all entertainment ratings over 8 also always have a technical rating over 8, because getting over 8 on either one means heavily luck manipulation was used to complete the game in an impossible condition. As we know, these impossible conditions when conducted are seen by the audience to be at least an 8 on each, and neither ever gets over an 8 without it. Therefore there is a causal link between the two, at least when we look at the segment which is over 8, even though there is some variance beyond that.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
From Masterjun:
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
I was asked to write that section.
Thank you for writing that section.
Warp wrote:
Of course basically the only way that a viewer can get any sort of idea how much effort was put into the run is by reading the submission description (which the author ought to also put effort into). I was thinking that if the author demonstrates a great deal of work put into making the run (and its submission text, I suppose), that could be a good reason to raise the technical rating by a notch or two.
Also they can look at how many rerecords are used and so on.
But this depends on the author being truthful. I could make a submission I spent one hour on, change the rerecording count into the billions, and write a long text about how I spent years researching the game and post a disassembly I generated with some tool, and make it seem like I really did go nuts with it.
I think a person should pay more attention to what it actually looks like is going on, than to anything they claim.
Warp wrote:
Like the other bullet points in that list, it wasn't intended as a hard rule. As in "does the author demonstrate a great amount of effort? If yes, raise the score, else lower it." Instead, it's more like a suggestion or idea of something to look for and consider, when deciding on a technical score. I hope I have succeeded in describing what I was thinking.
I believe I got the gist of what you're saying. I think it may have some ambiguity though as some people earlier seem to think they need to understand the game inside out, instead of seeing how the the actual results speaks to them, and rate it based on that.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
It is too hard to use, this is what I'm saying. I went as far as to say that it's "impossible to sensibly use", partially because of how hard it is.
Okay, how would you like to improve it?
feos wrote:
Saying that tech top list will in future significantly diverge from top entertainment is yet another claim that can't be checked.
This continues to miss the point.
My statement on the matter is that while there is some actual link in what occurs between entertaining and technical because one often fuels the other, the actual link in results is of a temporal nature.
You can show me all the lists you want, that does absolutely nothing to debunk my claim of the rating link being of a temporal nature. If you want to debunk my claim, you must show that there is a causal link between the two which cannot be broken. Anything else is arguing in the wrong arena.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
DrD2k9 wrote:
I repeat, without criteria what value does the rating hold?
In my opinion, there is little to no value.
That is indeed the existential question.
DrD2k9 wrote:
But if no specific criteria are established, no one has the right to discount anyone else's ratings, reasoning for said ratings, or definition of what is technically good/bad.
We have a page with guidelines (thanks Warp) linked from the rating's page describing how to rate. The criteria is established. Whether the majority follow the criteria for anything is anyone's guess. We can be certain that not everyone is for both entertainment and technical.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Yes, I know that we can sort by rating and create such links. But to make this option usable for tech top, one has to find movie lists that are already small enough. Using huge movie lists in order to check the tech top takes too much time and site resources. Using smaller lists implies that the user already looks for something very specific, so sorting by tech rating doesn't change the result too much.
I don't understand.
If a user wants to find top tech for NES movies, they can. I don't see what's missing.
feos wrote:
I posted a statement that you declared false. We can only check if it's true or false using actual data it was talking about: movie lists sorted by tech and by entertainment.
Your suggested method for looking into this only serves to perpetuate the falsehood.
feos wrote:
If they are mostly the same, my statement is correct. If they are significantly different, my statement is wrong.
No, in either case it's wrong because they are not linked. What you see today changes tomorrow.
feos wrote:
I asked you which data should I pick for an actual experiment.
Picking data for the experiment means you misunderstand the issue at hand. It's not about data, it's about the system itself.
feos wrote:
You simply declared that it's impossible for my point to be correct. Therefore you don't seem to want reality to be checked. In that sense, your claim about my statement is unrefutable. Do I need to explain what that means for this talk?
You can argue against me by stating why my system isn't good. Showing me data for a different system is not relevant and therefore the point you are making is impossible to be correct.
When I'm talking about dogs, and you want to discuss Saturn's moons, any relationship you want to make about Saturn's moons to the dogs isn't a real relationship and therefore incorrect.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
I don't understand how you're waiting for an answer when I already provided.
Quote? How exactly do I make use of the information about technical top?
You yourself quoted me saying how one might use it. I don't understand why you're playing these games now.
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
feos wrote:
Because all the top entertaining movies are also top technical.
I've mentioned this a few times already. This statement is false.
OK, so you want me to come up with actual lists and compare them. Which movie groups would make you agree with my point?
Why would I want your lists?
Nothing agrees with your point because you have two unrelated things which are constantly shifting.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
I asked you how to use it, and I'm still waiting for the answer.
I don't understand how you're waiting for an answer when I already provided.
feos wrote:
1 means the site doesn't let you easily obtain the information about top tech movies exclusively.
It doesn't? If there's a usability problem there, we should fix it.
feos wrote:
Because all the top entertaining movies are also top technical.
I've mentioned this a few times already. This statement is false.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
DrD2k9 wrote:
If we can't agree on criteria for determining a rating (of any type, not just technical), what value does the rating hold?
When you reach this point in your thinking, you ask yourself what's the point in ever voting for anything or anyone.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Do you think human beings are ever entirely objective for any kind of poll?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
I'm saying that tech rating is impossible to properly give on the scale of the whole community, and it's impossible to sensibly use, because
1) the site is not designed for that,
2) it's inherently misleading due to being mostly subjective, as you already said, and also
3) a user will most likely just pick a high tech run that's also entertaining, and disregard the one that's only high tech.
The only thing I've really been hearing from you that it's impossible to give with the criteria you defined or use in the limited way you consider personally using it. This indicates to me that you should give ratings using better criteria and be more considerate of others.
As for your three points, I don't know what 1 means. I don't find how it's misleading just because it's nearly entirely subjective. All ratings anywhere provided by human beings is subjective at least to some extent. Whether people rate properly or not, be that tech or entertainment is also a general issue that applies everywhere. Humans aren't perfect. So what?
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
The list may or may not be the same.
I can go and check once again, for any group of movies you want. It is mostly the same.
I'm not arguing that. Nothing enforces that they be the same. They may, or they may not.
feos wrote:
You questioned the probability of being entertained by the most entertaining movies on our site, but you skipped the question about what a user is more likely to watch.
I don't know what you mean by this. At this point in the exchange, I'm not even sure if we're speaking about the same topic.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
