Okay, both of you, is this actually accomplishing anything useful? Regardless of who's in the right, you're having an argument on the Internet, and you know what that means.
"Who is right"? This is not him making an argument and me disagreeing with it. He is outright insulting me and I'm demanding him to explain why he is doing that. He is refusing to do so, and instead continuing with his derogatory writing. He didn't even make any claim at all. His *only* contribution to this thread has been direct blatant insults, nothing else.
If he wants to disagree with my suggestion that's fine, but that's completely different from him insulting me. That's not any more a question of who is right or wrong. Don't make it sound like it was.
I just submitted a rating for that movie, and both ratings were properly stored in the database.
I can't conclude anything else than that the problem is with the movie submissions forum voting. For some reason that code is not always storing the technical score in the database (although it *does* store it most of the time, as seen from the recent SuperMario64 movie).
I would have guessed that if someone does not vote on one of the categories in the submissions forum, then the script doesn't store anything for that category. However, if you did indeed vote on both categories in the submission of this movie in question, then something odder must be going on.
Given that the submission forum voting code was not written by me I think Bisqwit should take a look at it.
Edit: But anyways, it should indeed be decided what to do if someone does not vote on one of the categories. I don't know how Bisqwit intended this to work, but I suppose that if the vote for one of the categories does not appear in the database, a "-" (rather than a zero) could be printed wherever this is used. Of course this is used in several places in the code. I wonder if it could be somehow more automatized then writing explicit conditionals at each place. (Also the calculating the averages should take this into account, but I don't know if Bisqwit has already done that.)
After examining the database, I think I do:
For example IronSlayer's votes on movie 1196:
mysql> select * from movie_rating where movieid=1196 and userid=1282;
+--------+---------+---------------+-------+
| userid | movieid | ratingname | value |
+--------+---------+---------------+-------+
| 1282 | 1196 | Entertainment | 5.00 |
| 1282 | 1196 | Tech Quality | 6.00 |
+--------+---------+---------------+-------+
However, mmbossman's votes on the same movie:
mysql> select * from movie_rating where movieid=1196 and userid=1018;
+--------+---------+---------------+-------+
| userid | movieid | ratingname | value |
+--------+---------+---------------+-------+
| 1018 | 1196 | Entertainment | 5.00 |
+--------+---------+---------------+-------+
No technical score is being stored into the database for some reason. I assume that the PHP code is thus getting zeros for them.
mmbossman: Is this problem happening when submitting from the ratings page, or are these the votes from the movie submissions forum?
Exactly what is your point in insulting me, Mr. "I have made 17 posts so far"?
"Waaaaaaahhhhh, someone with less posts than me has common sense, waaaaaaaahhh :("
Why do you keep insulting me?
Why do you keep pretending to be so smart when others already know exactly how to deal with the situation presented in a more efficient manner than you do?
Your only contribution to this thread has been to insult and attack me in a completely stupid and childish manner. When I clearly asked you why you are doing this, you refuse to answer, and instead keep insulting me. I can't deduce anything else than that you are just an infantile moron.
Fixed? You consider it a problem which needs fixing?
If you must know, it was this reply that triggered my response. Maybe I didn't quite understand your intention with it, but it seemed like bashing to me.
I have to admit that while I usually re-read my posts for grammatical mistakes, I do not often think about them in the sense of how they can be interpreted. I apologize if you felt attacked. It was not my intent. I didn't think too much before writing that.
Ehh I don't think I disagree. I'm assuming you mean human life but humans are not equally strong or equally intelligent or equally successful. It's hard to think of any valid metric where all people come out equal so how can we say people are equally important?
What if the question were flipped around and you had to decide who lives as opposed to who dies. Say a meteor is falling and there is only room in the fallout shelter for 1 more person, do you give it to the doctor or the drug addict?
People who hold onto all life as equally valid can make irrational decisions, such as equating the life of a person to a clump of undifferentiated cells.
Great job at quoting me completely out of context.
If you read my posts, I was talking about murder. In other words, one person killing another person with intent.
I was not talking about some hypothetical extraordinary situations where you have to choose who lives and who dies, where you have to consider what is the best choice with respect to the ones who get to live (eg. a doctor is a good and practical choice because it increases the chances of the others to live longer).
I was talking about the severity of a murder crime. Many people seem to think that some lives are "more valuable" than others, and murdering them deserves a harsher punishment. I disagree: Murder is always wrong, and there's no distinction between victims, no matter what is their age or whatever. Every life is equally valuable, and murder is always equally wrong.
Please stop quoting me out of context.
So, if every life is equally valuable to you, this should be problematic then: You're given a choice to kill either a mass murderer who you know beyond any doubt has raped and murdered hundreds of innocent people or an innocent 12-year-old schoolgirl. Which do you choose? If you really have to think about it, I just don't know what to say.
Oh, yeah, one of these completely artificial "moral" false dilemma questions. Like those ridiculous "would you throw the fat man off the bridge to save the five railworkers ahead" questions.
The point is that this would only affect up to 8 buttons, and often only one.
As I said, I understand perfectly that the difference is minimal, but I don't think that deserves insulting me and calling me "dense". It was a perfectly valid and sensible idea.
Presenting a suggestion or idea does not mean it *must* be implemented. It was just that: An idea. However, I don't think it deserves insults either.
Edit: In short, the only "optimization" would be holding down the final buttons all the way to the end, which is a very, very silly thing to base a claim of "optimzation" on.
I still don't see how it is such a "very, very silly thing". One could consider that using a trick to save 1 single frame on a 20-minute TAS is a "very, very silly thing" to do, but nobody does that. It's actually more or less expected for TASers to use those kinds of tricks, even if they save just one frame.
So what if counting key releases could lower the score by at most 8 points? No needless key releases, exactly in the same way as no needless frame wasting in TASes either.
If you think that's silly, that's your prerogative, I guess, but I don't think it deserves insults.
Is the life of some innocent people more valuable (and thus taking it away more punishable) than others?
a childs life might be more valuable than a 90 year olds because the child has longer to live.
Then we'll just have to disagree. In my opinion every life is equally valuable, and murdering someone is equally punishable regardless of the age of the victim. I think putting people's lives in order of importance is egregious.
how valuable a life is also depends on who the person is. a great scientist could be more valuable than an ordinary person.
Not from the point of view of murdering someone. Murdering a person does not become more acceptable if that someone is "less valuable" to society or humanity. Every life is equally valuable.
Yes Warp, Yes you are. Nobody should doubt it at this point.
Exactly what is your point in insulting me, Mr. "I have made 17 posts so far"?
I argumented that, in my opinion, two movies can differ in keypresses when we also count key releases: One movie can be more optimal than the other because it performs less key releases.
The only counter-argument to this I have seen is that this "problem" (what problem?) can be "fixed" by automatically counting all keys as being released at the end of the movie. Moreover, I have been told that if I want to make such a distinction, I'm doing something "wrong".
Well, excuse me if I just can't understand how this solves anything, or how it is any kind of counter-argument to my opinion, or what exactly I am doing "wrong" here.
You seem to agree with qFox, Mr. Cheezwizz, and even so much that you feel so confident that you can insult me. Then please explain to me what I am not understanding here, since I am so "dense".
Xkeeper wrote:
Do enlighten me if you have something better other than that silly idea, because... well, it makes little sense.
I am really puzzled now. In a forum where we create movies where we attempt to optimize every single frame off, where everything counts, you are saying that in a "minimal keypresses" competition saving key releases is a "silly idea" and that it makes little sense?
Sure, the savings may be minimal, but since when have minimal savings been inconsequential in TASes?
If someone posted a submission and wrote something like "I performed this trick here because it saves one frame" would you respond to him with "that's a silly idea and it makes little sense"?
Fixed? You consider it a problem which needs fixing?
Wtf? Are you really so dense that you can't see what I mean?
I suppose I am. I presented an argument why key releases should also be counted (whether you think it's a valid argument or not is a different issue). You responded with some kind of "fix" (your own words). A fix to what? Problems are fixed. I see no problem here.
I'm sorry but I'm trying to help and make you see that there was no "problem" in the first place.
By suggesting a "fix"? Yes, maybe I am dense, because I don't get it.
But if you wanna go ahead and make it difficult for yourself then fine. But don't be crying here when people are telling you http://www.doingitwrong.com/
Now I *really* don't understand what is it that you are saying. Exactly what am I doing wrong? I don't get it. Maybe your subtle hints just escape me and I really am so dense.
I'll just try to make this very clear: Punishments are there to stop people from committing and repeating crimes. In my opinion this is most effectively achieved by having strict eye-to-eye type punishments, and in my opinion this is fair, and is what is called justice.
I disagree. Do you understand the concept of mitigating and aggravating circumstances? Also doing the exact same thing to the culprit might not be a fair punishment at all from the point of view of the victim.
Suppose that someone pokes someone else in the eye in a way that requires surgery. Maybe it was a pure accident with no malice nor negligence. Should the culprit's eye be poked as well, or would that be too harsh of a punishment because of a pure accident?
What if the culprit was just being a bit careless and should have known better? Is it still ok to poke his eye? Why would that be a fair punishment from the point of view of the victim? Wouldn't a much fairer punishment be for the culprit to pay the victim's medical expenses? The victim shouldn't suffer more than necessary because of this situation, so the fairest thing is for the culprit to pay for the expenses.
If the culprit pays for the expenses *and* he is also poked in the eye as a punishment, then he is punished *more* than the crime he committed. It's not an eye-for-an-eye punishment anylonger.
Let's go to the other extreme: Suppose that the culprit poked the victim's eye with great malice and premeditation, with the clear intent to cause as much suffering and damage as possible, and he isn't even ashamed to admit so much. Wouldn't in this case be fair to punish him *more* than if it was simply an accident which happened due to slight negligence and carelessness? Wouldn't it be fair that he pays for the expenses, plus more, and perhaps spends some time in jail for his crime?
You see, mitigating and aggravating circumstances should always be taken into account when deciding the punishment. A pure one-to-one punishment is not fair in most circumstances. Sometimes it's too harsh, sometimes it doesn't help the victim at all (in other words the victim would have to suffer more than necessary because the culprit is only punished by the exact same thing he did), and sometimes it could even be too light of a punishment.
I understand that, of course, and I do think some people simply do not deserve to live at all (child rapist-murderers, for example).
I have never understood why rape-murdering an adult is "more acceptable" than rape-murdering a child. If people are ok with the adult-murderer getting a lighter sentence than the child-murderer, that implies that they think it's more ok to harm and murder an adult.
Isn't every innocent life equally valuable? Is the life of some innocent people more valuable (and thus taking it away more punishable) than others? It doesn't make sense.
No, they aren't. Not all pressed keys must be released by the end of the movie.
This can make a difference: For example one movie could complete a game while keeping the right arrow key pressed for the whole movie, while another releases the right arrow key before the end of the movie. Otherwise they could be identical. If we count key releases, the first movie is more optimal.
Well Charles Schulz said it was a warm puppy, and John Lennon said it was a warm gun...
Google says...
Personally I think of it as a chemical reaction.
I was not really talking about happiness as a momentary sensation of well-being. I was more referring to happiness as the deeper concept, like "are you happy with your life?".
I still think that key releases should also be counted. Maybe add it as another value? (Perhaps make it optional if both are shown, or only the key presses value is shown.)
Everyone else doesn't seem to get the idea that I don't really know what the other functions in this thread do (I mean, yes, I know that they print Fibbonacci numbers, but not why they do) so I'm asking you about this instead. Do you mean a loop that calculates f(1), f(2), f(3) and so on up to f(n)?
Think about the factorial function. There are two ways of implementing it: Recursively and iteratively. The recursive implementation would look something like this:
The iterative implementation would look something like this:
unsigned factorial(unsigned n)
{
unsigned result = 1;
for(unsigned i = 2; i <= n; ++i) result *= i;
return result;
}
In this case the iterative implementation is more efficient than the recursive one, but not by much. Both execute n steps (but the recursive version has more memory overhead, unless a really smart C compiler is able to perform tail recursion optimization).
The problem with the recursive fibonacci function is that it's exponentially heavier than an iterative implementation. The basic idea in both implementations is the same as with the factorial function above.
I suppose nobody cares about my opinion, but I decided to join the fun anyways.
Bisqwit wrote:
What kind of life do you want to lead 10 years from now? I.e., where do you see yourself, what kind of family situation, etc.?
Deducing from my past 10 years, I don't expect any big changes. At most I might move to another city because of a job.
Derakon wrote:
Xkeeper: what's a practical, efficient, moral, and effective way to solve world hunger?
There probably is no such solution.
mmbossman wrote:
Xkeeper, what is your opinion on the death penalty?
From a purely economical point of view every prisoner is an economic burden to society. OTOH, *not* keeping criminals in jail can be an even larger economic burden to society, so it's a no-win situation, and keeping people in jail is the lesser of two evils (from an economical point of view).
In theory the death penalty reduces the amount of people in jail, without releasing them to harm the citizens. In practice, however, even in the US the amount of people on death row is minuscule compared to the total amount of people in jail, so abolishing the death penalty would not increase economic costs significantly. Thus in practice there's not even an economical reason for death penalty.
From a moral point of view, given the two options, ie. life in prison or death penalty, the former is the lesser of two evils. Since people in prison cannot harm citizens, and since they do not significantly increase economic costs (because people in prison who do not deserve the death penalty are so much more numerous), it only makes sense to not to have the death penalty.
Baxter wrote:
Do you think bald people have a harder time than people with hair when it rains? On one hand, the cold rain drops right on the skull... but on the other hand, it's easier to dry themselves when they get home...
IMO hair is enormously overrated in all cultures. Extremely short hair, or no hair at all, makes your life in all ways easier. The longer your hair, the bigger the nuisance.
Warp wrote:
I suppose my question would be: Why should I care?
I think that the word "none" might not be the best possible one in the voting widget. Just think about it:
Entertainment? None.
Technical quality? None.
It sounds the same as giving it a 0, when in fact it should mean "I have no opinion".
unsigned int fib(unsigned int n){
if (n < 2)
return n;
else
return fib(n - 1) + fib(n - 2);
}
I borrowed it for use in my own code.
You shouldn't, because that's the most inefficient possible way of calculating fibonacci numbers.
I realized that it might actually not be immediately clear why that's an extremely inefficient way of calculating fibonacci numbers. Explanation:
fib(0) and fib(1) obviously return immediately. The total amount of calls to the fib() function in both cases is obviously 1.
fib(2) performs 2 calls, fib(1) and fib(0). The total number of calls to fib() is 3 (the primary call to fib() plus the two recursive calls).
fib(3) performs the calls fib(2) and fib(1), that is 1+3+1 = 5 calls.
fib(4) performs the calls fib(3) and fib(2), that is 1+5+3 = 9 calls.
fib(5) = fib(4) and fib(3) = 1+9+5 = 15 calls.
etc...
The number of calls performed increases quite rapidly. For example
fib(30) performs a total of 2692537 calls to the fib() function.
fib(40) performs a total of 331160281 calls.
fib(45) performs a total of 3672623805 calls.
With a simple loop implementation fib(45) would just perform 45 iterations and that's it.
