Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Nach wrote:
Statistics don't work for explaining anything at all
p4wn3r wrote:
If statistics does not matter at all, there's no problem if the data is fake in the first place.
Uh, really? Can you please not randomly substitute words?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
ais523 wrote:
This is down to search algorithms. There are some search orders you can use that are guaranteed to find the shortest output first; the simplest is to try all the possible inputs in length order (except for ones which have a prefix that turned out to be slower than another way of doing the same thing). I think there may be games where this is simple enough that it's actually within the capabilities of a powerful modern computer.
I have some more complex algorithms in mind that would have the same properties but be more efficient. The problem is just finding time to getting around to implementing them.
Yes, I understand that state that's been achieved previously in longer time can be disregarded, along with its input, if shorter input reaching it is found. And indeed I see that it helps to avoid truly exhaustive search. I just want to understand problems that raise after this method is applied, and how hard/easy they can be solved. Can you be more specific on what such an algo would have to do?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
DrD2k9 wrote:
Is there enough perceived confusion about polls (specifically, but not limited to the 'meh' option) for the staff to consider a change of any type? Or is the general consensus that what we have is good enough and doesn't need changing?
Personally, I think the available answers unfortunately cause the poll to be utilized by voters from both a perspective of entertainment (as it's written/intended) but also as meaning "should this be published?" (which is not up to the community, but the judge).
Problems with submission poll do exist. I quoted others talking about these problems in the first half of this post: Post #421751. These are the problems that make the current system imperfect. Less reliable than we'd want.
Why wasn't the poll question changed back then? There wasn't staff agreement about how serious the problems with it are, how to solve them best, whether the tier system needs changes, etc. This minor aspect, poll question, has fundamental site vision backing it up. That vision was introduced in 2012 and opened some possibilities for boring movies and for additional branches. Its main idea is promoting entertaining content.
If there's not enough entertainment, your run goes to Vault if it fits into the category limit. If there's enough entertainment, your arbitrary branches can be published. For any% and 100% that are entertaining, this is just a way to reach out to the viewer easier and to get more feedback as a result.
Untying the poll from entertainment criterion won't help judges in any way. Entertainment value of the movie still has to be assessed. With quite a few exceptions, 80%+ support is most likely Moons. But:
- Should this boring movie be published?
- Yes! To Vault!
You're not getting useful feedback that helps with the judging if the question is changed to that.
I know you didn't suggest it to change like this. But this is still stuck in people's minds very hard.
And that is exactly the problem! Human factor. People with spoil their "objectively reasonable" votes with all sorts of irrelevant things and still find them fitting. This is the reality that can't be fixed or worked around. We are asking them subjective questions, they provide subjective answers. It is okay to receive irrational feedback, because rational stuff we can measure without any feedback at all! But this site is viewer oriented, so irrationally bad and irrationally good impression is something we need aside from plain record keeping. See this thread for reasons:
Thread #20113: Origins of TASVideos' name - split 14293, 20112DrD2k9 wrote:
I think (as I suggested before) that a poll regarding the degree of entertainment may be better than the yes/no/meh options for "did you find this entertaining?"
As explained above, entertainment is irrational, and we want this irrational feedback in addition to rational feedback about optimality. Splitting 3 irrational options to 5 won't change anything. Renaming them won't change anything. Removing them will probably also fail to improve anything. Making the answers public clearly makes things worse, because anyone will be able to flash-mob pro or against someone's vote, so people will just start avoiding voting altogether.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Sorry for sweetening up, but this is exactly the thing I tried to address in the post about professionalism. The world is imperfect, it always was, it will forever be. People are imperfect. It is impossible to fix or work around all problems. It is impossible to prevent all abuse. It is impossible to make everyone happy.
Getting upset over getting imperfect outcome despite doing everything perfectly is natural. And at the same time it's a psychological problem. While to some degree it can be helped by wise actions made by others, expecting everyone to be wise is unrealistic.
Remaining calm when your perfect peace of work is being unreasonably criticized may feel like a victim being blamed. And neither of these helps anyone with anything. Unwise decisions coming out of this feeling won't help anyone with anything.
This is objective reality, it can't be directly fought. But it opens possibilities for raising upon yourself. Even if this doesn't improve the situation, it improves the notion you have.
General "you", no one in particular.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Jabo video plugin for N64 TASes has been deprecated.Thread #20237: Deprecation of Jabo video plugin
All TAS submissions using Jabo from now on will be encoded with minimal and default settings.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Jabo video plugin for N64 TASes has been deprecated.Thread #20237: Deprecation of Jabo video plugin
All TAS submissions using Jabo from now on will be encoded with minimal and default settings.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Jabo video plugin for N64 TASes has been deprecated.Thread #20237: Deprecation of Jabo video plugin
All TAS submissions using Jabo from now on will be encoded with minimal and default settings.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
22:48 Zeupar The main skill I need to work on right now is writing carefuly on irc so I don't have to keep fixing typos.
22:49 Zeupar *carefully
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Jabo video plugin for N64 TASes has been deprecated.Thread #20237: Deprecation of Jabo video plugin
All TAS submissions using Jabo from now on will be encoded with minimal and default settings.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
The most recent BizHawk release, 1.13.2, is compatible with 32-bit Windows XP and features the most up-to-date build of GLideN64 video plugin. It has been explicitly fixed to work on this OS. The only thing that may prevent using it is insufficient video card that only supports OpenGL 3.0 and older.
Due to various problems, like version of GLideN64 in BizHawk being too old, or BizHawk 2.0+ being incompatible with older systems, it was hard to use this plugin for N64 TASes and expect perfectly looking video. We are doing all we can to improve this situation.
Using GLideN64 is important, because it makes it the easiest to create perfectly bug-free, fully anti-aliased, UltraHD encodes of N64 TASes. We have publishers with enough dedication to make such encodes and invest as much time and effort as this requires. The result is better than any emulator and video plugin can afford. It is better than what you see if you just replay an N64 movie in an emulator.
And there is one thing that makes this task enormously hard: use of Jabo video plugin in a TAS.
Once it was one of the best N64 plugin for a lot of games. These times passed long ago. Once it allowed to create encodes that look the best, compared to other plugins. This is not true anymore. GLideN64 tops Jabo in a huge list of games and nuances. And where it yet doesn't, it will.
If one wants to make a perfectly bug-free, fully anti-aliased, UltraHD encode of a TAS that uses Jabo, they must go through the nine circles of hell and waste several months on it. These posts tell in full details why this is so:
Post #453166 (this post talks about another plugin, but the resync process is identical)
Post #461947Post #463184Post #470461
So as a staff decision, we announce:
None of the future TAS submissions after 2018-06-09 using Jabo will have any fixes or enhancements for a publication encode. Internal resolution will remain 1x. No anti-aliasing or filtering will be applied. No emulation bugs will be fixed. Such TASes will be published leaving all the fundamental Jabo problems intact. Youtube encodes will be upscaled to our usual resolution right from 240p that the footage was dumped at.
On the other hand, TASes using GLideN64 will get as many bug fixes and enhancements as a publisher handling them is able to pull off.
If for whatever reason you are technically unable to use GLideN64, a run made with Glide64mk2 is still way easier to resync on GLideN64 than the one made with Jabo. And this will be attempted. Technically practicable enhancements and fixes will be applied whenever they can be. This just won't be top priority.
Different versions of GLideN64 are easy to sync between each other, so if something is made on an older version, it's trivial to swap it with the newest version, occasionally fix minimal desyncs if they happen, and get significantly better emulated video.
If the latest version of GLideN64 still has some bug not fixed, we can report this bug to the developers, who are currently very active (huge respect for that, gonetz!), and its very probable that this bug is fixed in due time.
People who care and want the games they TAS to be properly emulated, are greatly encouraged to help GLideN64 developers by testing and reporting bugs!
If you want to experiment with different versions of GLideN64 patched for BizHawk, here's the repository for our fork:
https://github.com/TASVideos/GLideN64/releases
It contains builds compatible with 32-bit Windows XP, as well as builds that require 64-bit Windows 7 or newer. There's no difference between them in features.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
p4wn3r wrote:
Please, stop this. I discussed the idea with you on another post. It's fine if you did not want to, but don't suddenly put the blame on me.
Let's see...
p4wn3r wrote:
In any case, all the problems could be solved by simply revealing the names behind the votes (Facebook reveals the name of people who liked something because it's so easy to manipulate). If that information is public, it is the community's problem if they fall for the manipulation.
I mentioned the problems with this and remained unheard:
feos wrote:
Making them public simply discourages people from voting, because this info can trivially be abused by literally anyone. You never provided reasons and examples of damage that would justify this.
p4wn3r wrote:
To me it looks like you're just JAQing off so that you can make me look incompetent and at the same time avoid doing your job.
Sorry, this is called discussion.
p4wn3r wrote:
When I write something about site policy, I am not in fact making a submission for rule changes, I am simply writing something about the site policy. You can address it or ignore it, I really don't mind. But, please, don't keep coming to me for a solution to your problems.
I never had problems with "suspiciously and unusually high amount of negative votes - 8 out of 72".
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Is this a joke? That post gives the definition of an investigation. I am not suggesting anything to be done with the voting system.
p4wn3r wrote:
Memory wrote:
This to me is the definition of a witch hunt
Absolutely not. The difference between an investigation and a witch-hunt is that, in a witch-hunt the crime/violation is imaginary. It's impossible for the accused to be guilty, therefore investigating an imaginary crime is the same as harassment.
However, in this case, suppose you open up the "No" votes and it appears that all come from users with the same IP address. That would be conclusive evidence that manipulation took place. Since it is possible for the violation to exist, it's not a witch-hunt.
When do you start an investigation? When there's sufficient suspicion that a crime/violation happened. As was pointed out by many in the original thread, submissions such as those are usually uncontroversial, and the number of No/Meh was unusually large. There was nothing unusual with the number of Yes votes.
If this post doesn't even try to talk about actions staff is supposed to do regarding submission voting, then I stand corrected.
p4wn3r wrote:
feos wrote:
Stop blaming people on a web site. You've been asked for sensible suggestions repeatedly, repeatedly refused to provide them, only to repeat useless whines.
I'm sorry. Now you are simply lying. Let me remind you what actually happened. You asked me for suggestions in this thread, and I immediately replied that I thought a good idea was to abolish anonymity. If I am repeating this, it's simply because you refuse to understand this and keep repeating that I'm wanting you to censor votes, and I really don't know why you are saying this..
This indeed happened. And my detailed reply tells why voting abuse potential is vanishingly small. I addressed this once again in the post you're replying to, but for whatever esoteric reason you don't want to discuss your original idea. Your later posts don't mention anything that can't be done without making the votes public. But they mention enough impossible to implement and controversial things.
p4wn3r wrote:
Later, I suggested that you could avoid drama by investigating the matter. A sensible reply to this is "I did not think there was enough to warrant an investigation in this particular case".
This "sensible" reply would mean that my personal opinion on this is perfectly well-thought and reliable. I don't make bald claims like this without seeing reasons to think so. Maybe there was enough. Maybe there wasn't. You never know without official ways to determine this.
p4wn3r wrote:
Instead, for some unknown reason, you say that it's not appropriate to request an investigation unless I, of all users of this site, provide you with concrete guidelines on when to start or not start an investigation.
This is the key to this whole issue. I look from the perspective of a person who wants to resolve these problems officially. Because of that I always try to find pros and cons to any idea, on the long run. If something is inapplicable, it should be figured out in discussion. If something isn't fine-tuned to the point common staff agreement, then it won't work and it won't become a policy. Staff agreement implies user agreement as well, but is not limited to it. If you are not ready to properly discuss your own ideas, don't expect us to do the mental leg work for you.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Definition of censorcensored; censoring
- to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable
- to suppress or delete as objectionable
This is exactly what you want the site to do with voting system, you just refuse to provide the definition of "objectionable" to go by.
p4wn3r wrote:
What I suggested is to stop making them anonymous
This is a different topic. Making them public simply discourages people from voting, because this info can trivially be abused by literally anyone. You never provided reasons and examples of damage that would justify this.
p4wn3r wrote:
since at this point it's just text interpretation skills, I don't think it's worth talking about it
It is the skills of thinking rationally and reading carefully. If you can't afford that, it's okay.
p4wn3r wrote:
But the fact that some people at an internet website have difficulties handling complaints is at most a minor annoyance to me.
Stop blaming people on a web site. You've been asked for sensible suggestions repeatedly, repeatedly refused to provide them, only to repeat useless whines. TASVideos staff is always ready for productive criticism, because our goal is making this site a good place for TAS artists and other enthusiasts. Your plans regarding this site are by far the contrary.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Thanks for constantly comparing a site where people willingly share their work under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license to all sorts of commercial organizations' problems. Your examples don't help us come up with better policies. You even explicitly refuse to suggest a sensible rule that can be enforced on the site globally.
Since you're not suggesting any official improvements, your posts are basically just counter-productive whines.
- This site needs to censor votes!
- On what basis?
- I don't know (nor care).
And after all the explanations about little meaning of votes here, about vanishingly small possibility to abuse them for real and successfully, about lack of irreversible damage this may cause, you still religiously believe that this censoring should be enforced even when rules are not obviously broken.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Can you please state clearly how we should determine if the case needs investigation in the first place?
p4wn3r wrote:
Besides, I really don't see what is abusive about sending a PM to some people asking "It was alleged that you voted on this submission to degrade the author. Is this true?".
I never said that can be abusive. Requesting investigations can be abusive.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Ah thanks. But I'm still unsure how it's related to making sure a movie is "shortest possible".
The difference from the dictionary I see is this:
Sure, you can compare every memory state you get to all possible memory states, and disregard all the new input sequences that lead to some previously found memory state. But that doesn't tell anything about which memory state leads to absolute shortest movie. It's just not enough to check if the "word" you have is in the "dictionary" or not.
For example, let's say I have a savestate on frame 1000, I got there by executing certain inputs. It may be possible to reach this state sooner in the movie than in 1000 frames. Without testing all the possibilities up to that frame, I won't be able to prove that 1000 is the optimal frame for this state.
Then there's some movie after that frame. Let's say it beats the game in 5000 frames overall, so it lasts 4000 frames itself. I won't be able to prove that 4000 is the optimal movie length for the "game end" state without testing all other possibilities that are shorter.
Some of the search can be discarded based on this similarity, but not as much as in the "find all words" example.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
r57shell wrote:
Possible outcome: "my exhaustive search tells me that it's impossible."
Later someone: "It is possible, I found the way to do it."
It's very close to what happened with MrWint's and HappyLee's SMB submissions. MrWint used some search that's not exhaustive, thought that's it's "exhaustive enough", or maybe "it's not fun anymore", and voila, his (partially) botted movie is beaten.
Warp wrote:
feos wrote:
Games are different from words.
No, they aren't. Not in this context. In this case we are talking about an algorithm to take some input data and find an optimal result.
Can you please be more specific and tell why you think that finding the absolute shortest sequence of inputs that beats the game is the same task (in this context) as:
Warp wrote:
Suppose you are given, let's say, 20 random letters, and a large dictionary of English words (let's take the sowpods dictionary, which is used for official scrabble tournaments, and contains 276663 words), and your task is to find every single word in that dictionary that can be formed with any amount of those 20 letters.
The major difference I see is that the answer to your words task can be checked directly: you just look into the dictionary and clearly see whether the particular word you invented is present or not. The answer to "shortest possible" requires having data to compare to, without having 100% of the possible data you won't be able to prove it's the shortest possible.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Ah I see now. It makes sense to tell people not to vote out of spite. It also makes sense to tell them to only limit their feedback in posts to actual movie contents. Discussing things not related to TASing of the game in question is basically off-topic in the Workbench. And explicit off-topic discussions can be just split, like it happened here.
As for investigating and punishing...
p4wn3r wrote:
Given that this submission has received an unusual amount of negative votes, we decided to investigate.
Where should the borderline for this be? Suspecting unfair feedback is a valid concern. But if there's no clear and sensible borderline to unfair feedback that has to be investigated, then requesting such investigations can also become abusive.
For example, some people suggest that cancellation in this case was done to manipulate the feedback and make people feel sorry. I don't know to what degree this is true, but that's how this decision was partially taken.
p4wn3r wrote:
However, in this case, suppose you open up the "No" votes and it appears that all come from users with the same IP address. That would be conclusive evidence that manipulation took place. Since it is possible for the violation to exist, it's not a witch-hunt.
This is already a ban case. Multiple accounts are not allowed exactly because they can be used to manipulate votes and ratings (and forum feedback). And this indeed can happen upon request.
p4wn3r wrote:
When do you start an investigation? When there's sufficient suspicion that a crime/violation happened. As was pointed out by many in the original thread, submissions such as those are usually uncontroversial, and the number of No/Meh was unusually large. There was nothing unusual with the number of Yes votes.
None of this can serve as a policy. Relying on "usual" and "unusual" will not work, because those do not imply clear cut. They depend on one's notion, personal definition of these 2 words. Even if we try to define them once and for all, these terms are in their nature subjective.
Additionally, controversy shouldn't be relevant to feedback. If there's some past controversy that affects feedback, without people explicitly mentioning it as their voting reasons, it's impossible to determine that their feedback is based on controversy. If there's some current controversy, it should be split as off-topic. And only if it's unrelated to actual movie contents.
So far, "usually uncontroversial" and "unusually controversial" don't sound like a principle for a policy.
Here's what we have right now:
Site Rules wrote:
Abuse of the Voting/Rating System
People are free to vote however they want on submissions. However, users abusing the system for reasons that are clearly and intentionally beyond the scope of the movie in question will be dealt with. Additionally, rating multiple movies by the same author as a form of promotion or degradation will also be dealt with. As noted, this will only be in cases of clear, intentional, and obvious abuse.
Do you want any of this to change?
p4wn3r wrote:
Instead, we get lots of philosophical arguments about art [...] which lead nowhere at all.
This is outright false. In a thread where people are supposed to discuss one's artistic decisions in a TAS, on the site that is supposed to host these pieces of work and encourage people to be creative, talking about TAS art is 100% legit.
As for professionalism, what I said was closely related to this advice:
Nach wrote:
I recommend trying to understand why they're upset (even though it may be irrational), and working to make them less upset. Also don't take the negativity you see about your run so seriously, not everyone is being objective at the moment.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Games are different from words. Right in front of us people find glitches that cause unexpected shortcuts. Not even necessarily something that instantly ends the game. Just basically any glitch can happen if truly exhaustive search is done, regardless of our assumptions of clearly useless input.
If we disregard glitches, then indeed the search can be made very limited and still work for the intended game engine. But look at memory corruption techniques. Setting up what variables will go where, and how they will be broken, takes time that a simplified bot might consider suboptimal, or even obviously useless. But a few minutes after you end the stage that'd take you 10 minutes.
Like I said, it doesn't even have to be a major skip. Some minor glitch with enemy subpixels that only appears in the next stage and lets you save more time than you lose right now by causing this glitch.
It's called routing, and it can be insanely complicated. Building full simulation is sometimes not feasible, so unless the search is 100% exhaustive, there's still possibility that a movie can be improved.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
What's with this decision to skip questions from staff about your suggestions to staff, HappyLee?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
HappyLee wrote:
I think maybe under circumstances like this, some administrator should come up and say something like: "People, place your votes seriously, and don't let your feelings take over the facts" (except I can't express it well).
Which circumstances exactly?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Guys you see? One of the problems with polls is that anyone can have some special personal vision of what their votes mean, and it's impossible to enforce any defined vision, regardless of how far personal vision is from what we actually ask.
On the other side, we don't depend on polls in anything important, so I wouldn't mind any loose interpretation. Polls are just not damaging until someone decides to overreact, which can have any reason really; sometimes even contradicting circumstances cause the same overreaction from the same person.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
