Did you do any old Classic Mac gaming? Do you remember Pathways Into Darkness?I don't think it had mouselook. It was all keys. Damned difficult game that I finished right as I was becoming a mouser on other more modern games.
Well, I'm pretty sure it left us in a yard sale when we moved out of state.By then I was all about my TI 99/4a. Rockin my tape drive. Writing my first games in line-number BASIC.
I miss oldskool Notepad being present on the system. Win11 Notepad is a worthless piece of shit.But ... any computer or vm that I use for more than a few hours gets a copy of Metapad.
I've been using Metapad for ... umm ... decades.Metapad is a simple, extremely lightweight editor, intended to just barely be better than Notepad, fixes a lot of shit that MS never did and stays simple.https://liquidninja.com/metapad/
I've chewed on Gidney's 'Falling with Style' paper.I recommend reading it if you would like to understand Shor's Algorithm.
I'm somewhat unclear if the following applies to Shor's Algorithm in general, or just the modified version used for the experiment.But I've come to understand that the algorithm is a recursive series of steps, structured such that it will eventually factor anything.Like ... it could take longer than the age of the universe for some numbers, but the algorithm will do the job if you got enough cycles to spare.
What we are looking for here is quantum supremacy, and once Gidney has explained this much, its obvious from the graph above that we are not seeing it. Pure random noise outperformed the quantum computer.
I guess the thing I've not absorbed yet is, why was the quantum computer expected to not work? I know it was much too complex a system, and internal noise would overwhelm any processing. Gidney described being amazed that the IBM quantum system even let him configure his experiment and run it. Why did it lose so completely to a random noise generator, as in how could you possibly get worse than random noise?
May I present Vampire Survivors.Fantastic game. Entirely oldskool 2d.You can navigate and play one-handed, no mouse.And best of all, this is the exact game you just described, where a n00b can haphazardly press buttons and get somewhere.
Look, I NEVER played that way with the mouse move. Ya, its fukin bizarre.But it allowed you to sweep forward and back in sudden waves, super agile. If you were good at it, it gave you a significant edge.And the games that had that sort of locomotion were originally written to run on x386 processors, so you were fast in a slow world.
Sweet. I'm old and security conscious. I like wires. I have a long-cabled USB hub to extend my peripherals to my nest of pillows or an easy chair.I got this stupid 'lap desk' for my bedroom. Looks dumb, but it holds a drink, a phone slot, keyboard and mouse space. There's a couple legs I rarely extend. Works perfectly.
Man those smart TVs are so cheap now. The video screen is what you interact with most, its the biggest part of the experience. Get yourself a huge TV, an HDMI cable, and call it your gaming monitor. (My TVs don't get to talk to the internet.)
If adulthood hasn't happened yet, it's not likely. I broke enough Atari controllers to have paid my dues. Fixed em with superglue and tape. But, you know. I was twelve. Then I got older and purchased big boy toys.
You ought to consider shorter sentences. And drop some of the formalisms. That works better for today's audiences.
Did you do any old Classic Mac gaming? Do you remember Pathways Into Darkness?I don't think it had mouselook. It was all keys. Damned difficult game that I finished right as I was becoming a mouser on other more modern games.