While technically correct, there is a steep hand-wave gradient between "just" and "near-impossible." Neural networks can presumably turn an accelerometer into a damn good position tracker. You can try filtering and double-integrating that data, using human code. Many humans have. Most wind up disappointed. None of our clever theories compete with beating the machine until it makes better guesses.
It's like, 'as soon as humans can photosynthesize, the food industry is cooked.'
If we knew what neural networks were doing, we wouldn't need them.
Christ. Over saying 'The Idiot seems insincere.' At least that professor in Toronto said 'good riddance.' Nothing short of wailing and rending of garments is sufficient, for the school shooting apologist who got shot at a school.
I did a few calculations, I don't remember the specifics of it sadly as it has been over two years since that point and I sadly did not document it back then (or I did, but on a partition I no longer have access to) but I remember having gotten roughly 2 1/2 years of possible runtime before an overflow. Obviously, I wanted to know if this would actually happen in the real game on real hardware.
I read the headline and figured, 60 FPS, minutes hours days, two and a half years, yeah that's about 232 frames. But... this is Ultimate Doom. It was built for 70 Hz displays, and the "tic rate" is 35 Hz. 232 / 60x60x60x24 is two years and three months. 2^32 / 70x60x60x24 is just shy of two years.
I guess the PDA version this guy was running simply ran at 85% speed?
This is what Yahoo was, in the 90s. Search didn't really exist yet. They made an honest effort to link, describe, and categorize every site on the internet, and for a while it seemed like they were on top of it.
Glad, at least, to see a headline that's not "Eleven DEMOCRATS! vote for evil bad thing thateverysingleRepublicanvotedfor."
Shit's bad, right now. But 95% of the party doing the right thing, while the other party goes full fascist, shouldn't sound like we're the ones creating evil out of thin air.
While technically correct, there is a steep hand-wave gradient between "just" and "near-impossible." Neural networks can presumably turn an accelerometer into a damn good position tracker. You can try filtering and double-integrating that data, using human code. Many humans have. Most wind up disappointed. None of our clever theories compete with beating the machine until it makes better guesses.
It's like, 'as soon as humans can photosynthesize, the food industry is cooked.'
If we knew what neural networks were doing, we wouldn't need them.