Just noting that when one submits to this website, there's a clause that says: "By pressing "Save/Edit" you agree to publish this content under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license."
This means that this submission can be published even without the author's permission. (The license in question specifically states: "The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.")
Whether it's ethical to do so is a different question, though.
Started watching the series alongside Doug Walker, who started making a vlog about it. I lasted for almost 2 seasons before stopping. I really, really wanted to give it a try, and some episodes even were somewhat enjoyable (especially the Marceline ones), but in the end, I just couldn't "get" it, so to speak. (I suppose I "get" it at an intellectual level, but the feeling just isn't there. I suppose you could say I "get" it, but I don't "dig" it.)
It was a good finale (definitely a thousand times better than the season 3 finale). A couple of things I personally find a bit unlikeable, though (and yes, this is a spoiler, so don't read it if you don't want to get spoiled):
So now Twilight's homely, cozy treehouse library has been replaced with a big, bulky, sterile and, let's be frank, ugly, crystal castle. In the middle of the homely, cozy little village where it doesn't really belong... Ugh, I'm not sure I agree with that decision at all. It sticks out like a sore thumb, and it looks like a horrible place to live.
Even after the entire season, I still can't get comfortable with Twilight being an "alicorn princess". It still feels artificial and tacked-on, with some episodes more or less forcefully trying to accommodate the fact, while other episodes basically completely ignoring it. This finale didn't help much in that regard. While I appreciate their, maybe intentional or maybe not, self-deprecating reference to Twilight not doing much as a princess, it still just doesn't fit. Her role as a "princess" makes no sense no matter how they try to force it.
Does the CPU execute unintended opcodes in RAM that were put there by the runner (usually through glitches in the game, but it doesn't really matter exactly how)? If yes, I'd classify that as arbitrary code execution.
No, it's arbitrary code execution if the player can make the game run whatever code he wants. If he can only specify a limited number of instructions to run, after which control is lost, then that's not arbitrary code execution. It's just a code execution exploit. "Arbitrary" in this sense means "unrestricted", not "random".
So, wait, you're not going to pass by the toy aisle of your local department store so as to not spoiler yourself about a cartoon show made for little girls? That lineup's been on sale for months now.
Finland isn't the biggest market for such toys, and such toys are not usually shoved onto your face at stores here. Stores are usually divided into departments by logical categories.
Well, if the CPU is executing ROM routine X, and then some memory corruption makes it jump to ROM routine Y, then it's not IMO arbitrary code execution. It's simply affecting which part of the existing program the CPU will execute.
For it to be arbitrary code execution, the CPU would have to interpret and execute data entered by the player as machine code.
Not going to look at that until after the episodes in case it really is spoilerific, but if those toys really spoil the ending, it really makes me facepalm.
This run does not execute arbitrary code. It just corrupts memory. Corrupting memory is the first step towards ACE, but it isn't sufficient. Arbitrary code execution doesn't mean "runs some nonsense code". It means that you can make the console execute whatever string of instructions you choose.
Does the CPU execute unintended opcodes in RAM that were put there by the runner (usually through glitches in the game, but it doesn't really matter exactly how)? If yes, I'd classify that as arbitrary code execution.
Non-ACE memory corruption would be when data in RAM is corrupted somehow, and this causes the game to do unintended things, but those corrupted values are never executed as opcodes by the CPU.
it's no wonder that such a definitive game engine should hold a place on TASvideos.org.
One of the core tenets of tool-assisted speedrunning is that the original, unmodified game is controlled by pressing keys only. Such a keypress file must be re-playable in such a way that the game behaves exactly as if it were a genuine user who is pressing the keys, and the game just reacts as normal to such key presses.
The reason for this is that the run must be a genuine playthrough of the original game, with no progress that's impossible to achieve by pressing input keys only, and it must be possible to verify that the run indeed is genuine in this sense.
This excludes most PC games with internal gameplay recording abilities because in those games it's not the keypresses that are recorded, but the position of every object (including the player) at each frame. The "replay" then simply goes through this file and places every object as instructed there, at each time stamp.
This means that it's easy to cheat and make the game do things that are impossible to do via normal gameplay, such as advancing faster than is possible by playing. Heck, you could just have the player appear at the end of the level on the first frame, and thus each level would be completed in one frame.
The legitimacy of this type of record file cannot be corroborated, while the legitimacy of keypress files of re-recording emulators can (because in the latter case the emulator does nothing more than to pass the timed keypresses from the file to the game, and the game just reacts as it normally does when those keys are pressed.)
Also, Super Scribblenauts playaround. That thing is a meme factory.
I get the feeling that many people don't fully understand what a meme is.
A joke is not a meme (unless it's widespread and, often, used in unrelated contexts, as a kind of "inside joke" or reference to something.)
A funny anecdote is not a meme (unless like above.)
An interesting, curious or unusual event is not a meme (unless likewise.)
Something that you came up with right at this moment (even if it's based on a past event) is, pretty much by definition, not a meme (because it hasn't had time to get widespread.)
Some of those things can become memes, but aren't so by default.
The "color-a-dinosaur" thing could be legitimately called a (small-scale) meme here because it's indeed a meme-like phenomenon in this forum. Other than that, I can't think of anything else.
Short version: The coordinates of a sprite on the screen may be internally stored with more accuracy than the pixel resolution of the screen. If this is so, then it's said to be stored at sub-pixel accuracy.
(The reason why many games do this is because it allows for more fluid acceleration and deceleration, and other reasons.)
Yes, but I don't have time to sit down and whittle down the issue to a base problem and report it, especially when I have a perfect working solution. My boss would never sign off on spending a lot of time fixing problems for something inferior which we don't need.
But then you are perpetuating the problem you are complaining about, instead of helping the project become better.
(Also, I honestly find your case strange. It's not like clang is used by just an extremely small niche group of hobbyists. It's used literally by millions of people, many making production code, mostly for MacOS X and iOS. I doubt that all of those projects are just small and simple programs.)
Performance results from 2011 are hardly relevant anymore. They do improve the compiler all the time, you know?
(I'm not saying that clang already produces code that's as fast as gcc. I'm just saying that citing data that's almost 3 years old is hardly relevant anymore.)
Oh yeah, ok. Then I think he's right... this was the oldest non-obsoleted movie. The site has only been around for about ten years or so, so a nine-year obsoletion is about as long as it can get.
I somehow get the feeling that the development of gcc is slightly stagnant (although it admittedly has made huge improvements in some areas, such as link-time optimization), and clang has been catching up at a frightening speed.
I don't think it's the best of ideas to artificially come up with (currently non-existent) memes, or classify some one-off joke that someone made 4 years ago as a "meme", just for the sake of adding them there. That's not what memes are.
The "color-a-dinosaur" could perhaps be classified as a meme because it has been used repeatedly for years. Besides that, is there anything else?
This is a rather difficult, albeit interesting, case.
Should entertainment be judged based on the gameplay that happens during the input (ie. the first 6 seconds), or should it be based on the entirety of the time that's spent gaining the maximum score (ie. 22 minutes)? Does the run "end" (and thus be evaluated in terms of entertainment) at the 6-second mark or at the 22-minute mark?
Yes? No? Maybe? Screw this, I'm going home?
Do you really think that people will say : 'Ok‚ we have a 1 minute run where normal gameplay has totally disappeared‚ I don't think we need any other runs for this game' ? I don't think son.
To be completely honest, that's exactly what I fear, and was the major reason why I started the thread. (Yes, the fear may not be completely justified, but still...)
