Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
It is still brute force, but it will be far from a per-frame level, making it far mroe managable.
I wish my programming skills wernt shit, or that I had some idea how to write a bot for FCEU or I might actually try it.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I think you are right, but thinking about it further, it seems doable, since all that matters is that the ball is sent out in the right direction everytime it gets low enough to hit the paddle. put more simply, it doesnt matter where the paddle was so long as its in just the right place every so often, so tailoring a bot to do this is better then trying to figure out every key for every frame.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Warp wrote:
It just doesn't make any sense. It's not a question of morality.
its supposed to be more a question fo ethics, if a person is willing to sacrifice one for many, of they have issues seeing the difference between killing someone and letting them die.
I realize that its a totaly contrived situation, and in reality one would just react on instinct, but that is kind of missing the point.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Look, it would be way mroe simple then that
It would only check all shooting angles for the ball, then wait until it looses, and store the location of the ball right before it lost. Tehn backtrack to get the paddle there in time.
Then all it would have to do is try all launch angles again.
It would be a many-branched tree, but I bet it would be possable to do the whole game in that manner.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I dont know about that...
Without rules and punishment, I would think its more like 99% of people who would steal, pillage and rape (if they knew there was no greater punishment for their actions), and 1% who would actually coexist peacfully. People only really act for their own gain. we could adress examples of this, but I really dont think that pretending people care about the survival of others is just wishful thinking.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
You might be right, weight is probably the answer. Funny though that due to arguments like this one many companies switched from 10 to 8, (as discussed in that article) but I dont know how 7 makes any freaking sence. Next time im at the store, I think ill check and see if its exactly a pound or whatever.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Or even better, would you shove a fat man standing by the side of the road in front of a bus, if it ment saving the lifes of 5 people who's car was stalled out in the path?
Suppose you can be sure that the action will save the 5 people but the fat man will die in the process. Also, the 5 people will die if you do nothing.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Put better then I could have, xebra.
But a real question--
Hot dogs come in packages of 8, and so do buns (where I shop at least)
Hebrew national makes some of the best tasting hot dogs on the market (I could give two shits about them being "coshure" or whatever that term is) but they come in packages of 7. Why in gods name would they short you on 1 per package? Who do they think they are fooling? They are already more costly then the others there, but only packaging 7 is just plain cruel.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Kyrsimys wrote:
Homosexuality has been found in many animals, from sea lions to cockroaches. Does this mean that a cockroach has somewhere along the way decided to like male cockroaches instead of female cockroaches?
I see no reason to rule that out as a possability. Animals seem to have preferances about other things, I dont see why we should exclude the idea that it might be much the same question for them as it is us.
EDIT: Actually, looking at your post in more detail, there seems to be a contradiction: You say homosexuality is a preference, but then you say that it's not 100% born in. If homosexuality is just a preference, it has to be 0% born in.
0% is not 100%.
We can discuss how there may be roots of a preferance in genitics, but I fail to see the contradiction here.
IIRC a study has been made about homosexuality among identical twins, and it concluded that if the other twin was homosexual, there was something like a 50% chance that the other twin was homosexual as well. This would imply that the effect of genes (or whatever, I don't know anything about biology) and the effect of the environment is 50-50.
Keep in mind that these studies do conclusivly rule out the idea that homosexuality is 100% genetic, as 2 people with the same genes are not both homosexual (in some cases).
trying to figue out what percentage of nature vs nurture is impossable. That study does not show that its 50-50, but what it does show (if your numbers are correct) is that having a homosexual twin increases the likely hood that you will also be homosexual.
This could be because you grew up in the same house, had the same parents, knew the same people, or it could be genetic. With twins, it is fact that they have the same genetics, but its also true that they share a lot of common experiance (in the mroe common case where they were raised together). It is difficult to seperate the effect of their identical genes from their similar life experiances.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I really, seriously doubt that something like that can be 100% born in. It seems to be a preferance, just like any other. Can a person be born prefering coke to pepsi?
The better question is why a preferance like that can not be viewed in a light where one decision is an identity defining thing. People arnt really free to pick what they like today or tomarrow without being branded "gay" or straight".
Overall, its a topic too many people have put too much time worrying about.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I liked the run, so I think Ill vote yes, but if someone made a 100% run, or a run that somply tried to max out points with the time allowed, it might make a better movie in the end.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
How reasonable would it be to set a TAS bot to work on arkanoid?
Because only 2 buttons (left and right) are relevent, would it be able to work that game over with 100% precision?
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Yes, thank you for explaining yourself.
So to sum up, you are voting no, because the version of the emulator you modified does not work with this movie? Or is it because you prefered to split hairs over some technical problem that has no effect on the submission itself?
If you suspect the frame count to be invalid, what error is there?
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I did notice that if you have watched the movie one time, starting it again seems to cause desync, becuase file A will not be clear, and it will fail to make a new file.
However, I found it to be really entertaining, so big yes vote.
I think you may need to explain yourself more for a no vote like that, I dont really understand your problem.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
honestly--
It seems to be reduced to one of two things--
tool assisted speedruns
and
tool assisted superplay
are not the same, do not strive for the same goals, and are generally incompatable. Faster movies not sometimes more boaring, slower movies are sometimes more entertaining. We haphazardly publish movies based on one or both of these criteria. Some people would rather this site be the former, some would rather it be the latter.
I feel like this issue is at an impass, because people dont agree what what the site should be and it is strictly a matter of opinion.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Information and entropy are both things taht are measurable, and quantifiable. It may not be reasonable to measure it in a particular situation or scale, but knowing that a measurment of it could theoretically exist seems to add creadence to the idea that there is some other, measurable, tangible thing that was transfered in that case.
