So like, infinity, infinity-1, infinity-2, etc.?
Readit Newsjojojaf commented on Here's a puzzle game. I call it Reverse the List of Integers mathstodon.xyz/@two_star/... · Posted by u/self
jojojaf commented on Japan: Moon lander Slim comes back to life and resumes mission bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia... · Posted by u/neversaydie
jojojaf commented on The man who coined the word "robot" defends himself spectrum.ieee.org/karel-c... · Posted by u/jruohonen
Defensive "robot" coiner.
"Robot"er defensive
jojojaf commented on The man who coined the word "robot" defends himself spectrum.ieee.org/karel-c... · Posted by u/jruohonen
Despite a policy of "use original titles", the HN software automatically mangles titles.
This is one of the more bizarre auto-editing of titles it does because of how pointless it feels.
"The man who" is established English convention. "A man who" is changing the meaning for the sake of it without producing a clearer title. The person is unambiguously defined, so the definitive article is entirely correct. If the person isn't one of a set of people to whom the description could apply, it makes no sense to use the indefinite article. If a title was, "The man who starts every day with steak and chips" then switching to, "A man who starts every day with steak and chips" feels correct, he almost surely is not alone in doing so.
In contrast, "A man who coined the word Robot", is not correct, it alters the meaning to suggest that someone else could also have coined the word.
HN also removes "How" from the start of titles which often destroys meaning too. That is explained as trying to "reduce clickbait" titles, but the effect is often to make the title nonsensical.
It's one of the many contradictions about this place.
I feels as if whoever set up this system hasn't truly understood the meaning that "The man who" conveys, and has attempted to force a version they see as "more correct" despite it producing nonsense.
I say go the Slavic route and lose all the articles;
"Man who coined word 'Robot' defends himself"
Fits with the 'robot' theme
jojojaf commented on Nobody knows what's happening online anymore theatlantic.com/technolog... · Posted by u/furrowedbrow
Maybe that's a good thing? I remember a few years ago when journalists were outsourcing their reporting to Twitter and we had headlines like "The Internet is Freaking Out About X" when it was really a dozen nobodies on Twitter. The death of Twitter and the re-fragmentation of the internet sounds like a breath of fresh air compared to the purple haze of the last decade's centralized web.
This comment uses 'X' as a variable, which I found confusing to parse given the recent rebranding of Twitter to X
jojojaf commented on Magic: The Gathering Is Turing Complete (2019) arxiv.org/abs/1904.09828... · Posted by u/ekiauhce
One my decks is actually built around getting the game into infinite combos which cannot end but that also don't kill anyone so the game ends in a tie. Same sort of thing. Always fun to pull off.
Any infinite combo is of this form?
Like, if you have an infinite mana combo, you can just keep running the steps of it to block gameplay instead of playing your fireball
jojojaf commented on Elon Musk tells advertisers: 'Go fuck yourself' theverge.com/2023/11/29/2... · Posted by u/satai
It's like watching our supreme overlords descend into madness, in a kind of scarily literal sense
Any reason this was posted today? (e: and voted to the top?)
It's exactly 340 days until Halloween
jojojaf commented on Why the Human Brain Perceives Small Numbers Better quantamagazine.org/why-th... · Posted by u/digital55
I didn't read the article but, small numbers are more immediately useful. Larger numbers are needed for describing more complex phenomena, and their construction relies on smaller numbers. So I find the explanation to the title of this article to be intuitively obvious; I don't see how it could be possible for a brain to evolve to perceive large numbers better than smaller ones
Operations:
1) Split an integer into two smaller integers. (e.g. [7, 5, 3] → [6, 1, 5, 3]) 2) Combine (add) two integers into a larger one. (e.g. reverse the last e.g.)
Restrictions:
1) You can never make an integer greater than the largest integer in the original list. 2) You can never make a move that results in the same integer appearing in the list more than once.