Note, that x32 is another architecture than simply 32-bit (commonly called i686 or x86), so it's better to just call it 32-bit. (64-bit is often called amd64 or x86_64)
Dimon12321 wrote:
...
Is it exactly for 32-bit Windows? It writes me an error! Sth like "Version of this file is incompatible with usable version of Windows."
When quoting error messages, remember to quote them exactly, word by word (with the exception of abbreviation or substitution of paths or the like).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
There's your answer. We wouldn't pick this for usual encodes because it makes encoding the video less efficient. Other than that, I like what it's looking like.
If you then can somehow disguise the fact, you're playing on a flatscreen monitor with a modern gamepad (which is the usual setup, I assume), one can get a very authentic feeling even without authentic hardware. The CRT filter helps this a lot IMHO.
Edit: This is an AVISynth filter, so above paragraph doesn't really apply.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Dahm it! Just a law of meanness! I've done a TAS on a simple GC game, made everything what guide says, but it just can dump frames to AVI (error)! Why not just make a hot key for this, like on horrible PCSX2-rr (at least dump with errors)? How can I record the movie for myself, not for publishing (I hope sth will be soon)? Sorry if sth wrong!
What error message do you get? Just a crash?
Make sure this is true for you, if Dolphin crashed:
Should the emulator crash at this point examine the User\Dump\ directory of your Dolphin installation ($HOME/.dolphin-emu/GC on Linux) and create the folders Audio and Frames if either of those are missing.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Genesis and Saturn .bkm movies are not supported right now. Someone having access to the site's parser code needs to implement that before it accepts your WIPs (I can't).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Hello,
I tried to upload the .bkm of my WIP of Asterix and The Great Rescue, but when I tried I got this message:
<<< Can't parse movie (error from format parser) >>>
Errors from the movie parser:
error_handler:
errstr=Division by zero
errfile=/home/tasvideos/public_html/formats/bkm.php
errline=74
I can't really understand it, it looks like there's a problem with the bkm format?
It would be helpful to have the file for debugging. Can you upload it elsewhere? (e.g. at http://rghost.net)
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
The Movement is not about Comparative Religion, False-Flag Terrorism, Economic Hit-men, Fractional Reserve Banking or the Federal Reserve. The films are unrelated to The Movement in detail and are personal expressions of Peter Joseph. There is often some confusion in this regard and in the most extreme cases some people have the knee-jerk reaction that TZM support's forbidden "Conspiracy Theories" or is "Anti-Religious" or the like. This type of rhetoric tends to be of a pejorative/insulting nature, used in the context of dismissal of The Movement by an erroneous and "taboo" external association. The fact is, there is no direct association whatsoever.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
(see The Zeitgeist Movement or Venus Project for more information about that).
Friendly advise: If you want to be taken seriously, don't refer to a lunatic conspiracy theory movement.
What are some of the conspiracy theories they believe in? Reading the The Zeitgeist Movement's mission page seems like they are not that narrow-minded at all (BTW: I find conspiracy theories really enjoyable from a comedic standpoint).
See e.g.: http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/faq#faq1 (esp. "General Observations"). I don't think that this is delusional at all.
antd wrote:
nfq wrote:
I think society and the world should be governed using the scientific method, instead of people's opinions and money
How do you decide which issues are important without people's opinions?
I read that as "either unqualified or not well-founded opinions" (not no opinions at all).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
...
I think society and the world should be governed using the scientific method, instead of people's opinions and money (see The Zeitgeist Movement or Venus Project for more information about that). Nature is our dictator, which decides how we can behave on the planet, and what is the most efficient way of taking care of the entire humanity and the environment.
Technology and science is what solves most problems, not politics, which is mostly just about distributing money and creating laws (which are not long-term solutions that solve the root-cause of crime). Money is an ancient form of technology, which in the modern world slows down the evolution of civilization.
...
Signed. We find ourselves in a vicious circle consisting of the need to grow economically to maintain our infrastructure, constantly rationalizing away what sustains this unstable system (workforce (no work->no income->no consumption->no growth->boom)) and yet not seeing this as an opportunity to give people more free time for urgently needed social services, higher education or simply hobbies. I'm all for automation, but not because this gives a few even more wealth than they already have, but because this can be an opportunity where we free people up from tasks that are no longer necessary to put manual work in. There's just so much more meaningful to do than just working in a lower-wage job to sustain yourself only because either no machine or program exists yet that could replace you or because that's not cost-efficient enough. Needless to say that this system, as unstable as it may be, is self-sustaining, esp. when capitalism and politics mix and politicians "can't" differentiate between the good for the people/the world and their own.
P.S.: I think it's quite hard to establish such an "utopian country" from the ground up that is able to supply its own resources, population, etc to survive in the long term on the foundation of how the current world works. There's definitely are large hurdle to overcome initially.
Warp wrote:
When I said that I could lose my job if this happened, I got no sympathy.
Your point is a symptom of the above. Imagine you had everything you needed for a living, worked 20h per week helping that it stays that way for everyone and you could do game programming because it's fun or whatever. Right now, where software programming is as valid as a profession that's needed for the individual to sustain itself, it's only logical that one would oppose any such suggestion that would get rid of one's own means to continue doing that (and that's no praise for the Pirate Party).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
...
Any other suggestions? Emulators are obviously acceptable, open source preferred. I've only found a bunch of commercial ports or "free" demos without quicksaving, are there any others?
There are ScummVM and PPSSPP for Android (both free/libre software and can be supported by donations or by buying PPSSPP Gold).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
also another thing that would be great would be if you could map hotkeys to buttons on your gamepad. how am i supposed to press pause then pick up my gamepad to play without that dead time appearing in the video im trying to record?? do i have to have a friend press pause for me? or use my toes?? cmon!!!
You can record your input and later replay it while capturing, so pausing is not visible. You are encouraged to use the inbuilt a/v capturing facilities for that.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
This problem has been on my mind a little lately. I haven't given it a whole lot of thought, but to the extent that I have, I'm stumped.
1) Construct a function of two real numbers that, using only addition/subtraction, multiplication/division, and absolute values that takes the value of the larger of the two numbers. (So construct the max function using only absolute values. This should be very easy.)
2) Construct a function of three numbers with the same requirements as above (using only a/s, m/d, and absolute values) that takes the value of the middle number. (This is only a bit harder.)
3) Construct a function of four numbers with the same requirements as above that takes the value of the second-largest number. (I don't know off the top of my head how one might do it.)
...
1)
f_1(a,b) := (a + b + |a - b|) / 2 = max(a,b)
Proof:
Let a>= b:
f_1(a.,b) = (a + b + |a - b|) / 2 = (a + b + a - b) / 2 = a = max(a,b)
Let a < b:
f_1(a,b) = (a + b + |a - b|) / 2 = (a + b - a + b) / 2 = b = max(a,b)
Likewise: f_2(a,b) := ( a + b - |a - b| ) / 2 = min(a,b)
For the others: Maybe somehow construct the function from min()/max() functions?
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
...
I expected that tasvideos accepts all games that aren't TASed to give people more fun, according to what TAS is difficult to make, like this.
This is not true. If a movie is known to be clearly suboptimal (at least for speed goals) it is not accepted even if there isn't a TAS for that game published already (the more complex a game, the more lenient this rule is abided by). See the movie rules: http://tasvideos.org/MovieRules.html#MovieSTechnicalQualityMustBeAcceptable
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
I'm going to take a wild stab at this and say a + bx + cx2 corresponds to the first three terms of the Taylor series of ecos(x). I'll leave it to you to show that the limit approaches zero, especially since I have no clue how rigorous your analysis course is. (But the real reason is that it's been forever since I've done this kind of stuff...)
You were correct. A quick visual check with first three Taylor coefficients at x_0=0 (a:=e, b:=0, c:=-e/2). I'm honest to say I still don't really see the connection there or how you could see it at once. Tomorrow I'll be thinking more about this... too tired now. Thanks for the hint, I doubt I would have gotten a correct solution at all.
I obtained the same coefficients when I sketched out my answer.
As for how I did it so quickly... well, I'm not entirely sure myself. It's just that you do enough problems of this sort and you start to "read" them and see what kinds of points they're making. I think that's true of any subject. I still can't "read" a whole lot of mathematical proofs, nor can I "read" computer code. But Taylor series are incredibly practical, so I picked this one right up.
You have some function f(x). There is nothing to immediately suggest you should take the Taylor series of it, although when you do realize you should do a Taylor expansion, it helps to recognize that ecos(x) is analytic. (I.e., it is infinitely differentiable everywhere. Functions that only involve exponentiation, sines, and cosines tend to be analytic automatically and it is often unnecessary to rigorously prove that their Taylor series converge everywhere.)
From there, you provided a function g(x). The 1/x2 term out front is "bad" because it tends to infinity as x goes to 0. Let's disregard it for a moment and concentrate on making |f(x) - (a + bx + cx2)| go to zero. As you found out in your own attempt, it isn't enough to make the function go to zero at a given point (the 1/x2 screws everything up), so we really want to make it "as zero as possible". In other words, make it as close to zero as possible in the interval immediately surrounding x=0. Well, now we essentially have the condition that
f(x) ~ a + bx + cx2
for x approximately equal to zero, which is practically the definition of a Taylor series.
So we give the Taylor series a shot. Can we intuit that g(x) goes to zero as required? Yes. The (infinite) Taylor series of f(x) and a + bx + cx2 match up through the first three terms, so we are left with a polynomial that starts with the term x3. (In fact, the actual polynomial has coefficient 0 to the x3 term and it really starts with an x4 term.) That means that when we divide by x2 (the absolute value operation doesn't change things much), we are effectively left with a polynomial whose first term is no lower than x, meaning there is no constant term in this polynomial. That means g(x) goes to zero as x approaches zero.
Now, rigorously proving all this is another matter, and I'm forced to leave it to you for the reasons I gave above: I don't know how rigorous your course is and even if I did, I haven't done this stuff recently enough to be of all that much help. If your instructor is evil, they will make you do a proof involving epsilons and deltas (although if memory serves me, even that shouldn't be so bad for a function like this). If you've proved some theorems in class and are allowed to take "shortcuts", something like Taylor's theorem will be much help. Regardless, you should look at these problems as an exercise in building your intuition, not in memorizing a step-by-step series of instructions. As you can see, it is much more helpful to have a broad view of what is going on and to be able to "guess" a strategy rather than to embark on a direct proof from a completely naive perspective.
Now that's a great explanation! You don't find these very often in forums or threads dealing with these rather ordinary tasks. I could not formally prove the convergence in the end (yet) and moved on because the exam is coming closer rapidly. Thanks for the help.
P.S.: I won't post my maths exercises again (if they're not particularly ingenious), don't worry.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
I'm going to take a wild stab at this and say a + bx + cx2 corresponds to the first three terms of the Taylor series of ecos(x). I'll leave it to you to show that the limit approaches zero, especially since I have no clue how rigorous your analysis course is. (But the real reason is that it's been forever since I've done this kind of stuff...)
You were correct. A quick visual check with first three Taylor coefficients at x_0=0 (a:=e, b:=0, c:=-e/2). I'm honest to say I still don't really see the connection there or how you could see it at once. Tomorrow I'll be thinking more about this... too tired now. Thanks for the hint, I doubt I would have gotten a correct solution at all.
Mister wrote:
RGamma wrote:
As x --> 0, f(x) --> e (because cos x --> 1). We get (g is > 0 and continuous on (0,infinity) so we can replace f(x) with e):
1/x^2 * abs(e - (a +b*x + c*x^2))
You missed something here. For instance, suppose that f(x):=x and g(x):=(f(x)-0)/x, and consider their limits at x --> 0. You see that you can't replace f(x) by 0 though f(x) --> 0, since g(x)=1 whenever x =/= 0.
Oh and I somehow mindlessly applied some of these rules without this even being correct here as my failed attempt has shown...
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
I don't want to turn this into a "help me with my Maths homework" thread or the like, but I've been stuck on this last task of an Analysis exam for quite some time and can't find a solution.. The task is as follows:
Let f(x) := e^(cos x). Choose coefficients a,b,c element R such that:
g(x) := 1/x^2 * abs(f(x) - (a + b*x + c*x^2)) --> 0 for x --> 0
Note: abs() is the absolute value function, --> denotes convergence.
My conclusion is that this task is impossible (and the way it is stated suggests there is a solution):
As x --> 0, f(x) --> e (because cos x --> 1). We get (g is > 0 and continuous on (0,infinity) so we can replace f(x) with e):
1/x^2 * abs(e - (a +b*x + c*x^2))
Because constants won't serve us a purpose, choose a := e:
1/x^2 * abs(-b*x - c*x^2))
= 1/x^2 * abs(-1 * (b*x + c*x^2))
= (b*x + c*x^2)/x^2
= b/x + c*x/x
= b/x + c --> infinity for x --> 0 regardless of b or c.
What am I missing here?
Edit: Imagine there is a lim_x-->0(..) on each line (and "= infinity" on the last) to obtain a more correct way of writing this down...
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
The corrected time for this submission is: 14:23.02
Sync-verified on Dolphin tag 4.0.2 (dsp_*.bin files that came with the emulator) with "Super Monkey Ball 2.iso" (MD5: 29dd871cf4a00b2455c9d03e9328e7bd, SHA1: 36902d42ee1ecea8b2144f3aef2c0fc3a62b71da).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
The corrected time for this submission is: 13:10.78
Sync-verified on Dolphin tag 4.0.2 (dsp_*.bin files that came with the emulator) with "Super Monkey Ball.iso" (MD5: 391b8e620d8d924f150dc40343ced8a5, SHA1: 2cca02879db51ca2850949c7b2349cf470607cf5).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
