• 0 Posts
  • 58 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 27th, 2023

help-circle

  • Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.detoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldAutomation
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    So is the example with the dogs/wolves and the example in the OP.

    As to how hard to resolve, the dog/wolves one might be quite difficult, but for the example in the OP, it wouldn’t be hard to feed in all images (during training) with randomly chosen backgrounds to remove the model’s ability to draw any conclusions based on background.

    However this would probably unearth the next issue. The one where the human graders, who were probably used to create the original training dataset, have their own biases based on race, gender, appearance, etc. This doesn’t even necessarily mean that they were racist/sexist/etc, just that they struggle to detect certain emotions in certain groups of people. The model would then replicate those issues.


  • Also if we give it the benefit of the doubt (and it really is a stretch to make this work lol): I could make the argument that this person meant to write: “The movie has such a terrible premise, yet it was successful enough to have two sequels. Learning how it got that success despite the material’s premise taught me these 5 things about product management:” and just worded it terribly.


  • I can only speak for myself. For me it felt really great being able to explore the world having absolutely zero idea of what is what, how much game is left, etc. It is reminiscent of a time when I was a kid and playing a game was exactly like that.

    I even got quite sad when my friend “accidentally” told me

    spoiler

    That a certain action I did locked me into a specific ending unless I did something I probably wouldn’t be able to figure out. Rationally I understand that this is as inconsequential as it gets, but I didn’t even know for sure if there were multiple endings until that point.



  • Eh, nothing I did was “figuring out which loophole [they] use”. I’d think most people in this thread talking about the mathematics that could make it a true statement are fully aware that the companies are not using any loophole and just say “above average” to save face. It’s simply a nice brain teaser to some people (myself included) to figure out under which circumstances the statement could be always true.

    Also if you wanna be really pedantic, the math is not about the companies, but a debunking of the original Tweet which confidently yet incorrectly says that this statement couldn’t be always true.




  • It’s even simpler. A strictly increasing series will always have element n be higher than the average between any element<n and element n.

    Or in other words, if the number of calls is increasing every day, it will always be above average no matter the window used. If you use slightly larger windows you can even have some local decreases and have it still be true, as long as the overall trend is increasing (which you’ve demonstrated the extreme case of).



  • so the names of the ai characters HAVE to be stored in game…

    Some games also generate names oh the fly based on rules. For example, KSP stitches names together based on a pre- and suffix and then rejects a few unfortunate possible combinations such as Dildo, prompting a reroll.

    I suspect with your game, they just fed it a dictionary of common words though without properly vetting it.





  • I’d argue that with their definition of bots as “a software application that runs automated tasks over the internet” and later their definition of download bots as “Download bots are automated programs that can be used to automatically download software or mobile apps.”, automated software updates could absolutely be counted as bot activity by them.

    Of course, if they count it as such, the traffic generated that way would fall into the 17.3% “good bot” traffic and not in the 30.2% “bad bot” traffic.

    Looking at their report, without digging too deep into it, I also find it concerning that they seem to use “internet traffic” and “website traffic” interchangeably.



  • There are quite a few other roguelike (or roguelike adjacient) games that do beat it handily. To give a few examples:

    DF started development in October 2002 (according to their own website, scroll all the way down.)

    UnReal World’s first release was in 1992 and is also still getting regular updates.

    NetHack has gotten new versions ever since 1987. The latest big change was 3.6.0 in 2015, 3.6.7 came out in early 2023 but there’s no reason to believe there won’t be a next version. If we count that in 1987 it started as a fork of Hack, we could even add another 3 years in the front as Hack was published in 1984.

    Edit: I just realized: In the world of MMORPGs we also have a few examples: Everquest which came out in 2000 and is still getting expansions. Even WoW isn’t too far behind with a 2004 release date, which probably means development began before DF’s development too.


  • I definitely paid with some time investment, but you bet I wrote a short script to automate toggling that rule on/off. It’s also not like I had to run that script every time I wanted to play a game. Only to play a game in my brother’s library while he was playing something else or when I wanted to play one of my games and he was already in one.

    Summing up the time investment vs. the cost of games, and using a time-money conversion rate that assumes I had a well paying job in my field and wasn’t still a student, it was definitely profitable.

    You’re definitely right on the frustration front though: I bought many games just to not have to deal with this. It was mostly used for games one of us was on the fence about. Or (like in the Outlast case) only one of us really wanting to play a game and the other just playing along because playing together is fun no matter the game.
    Now, in the former case, it might be back to sailing the seas.


  • Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.detoGames@lemmy.worldSteam :: Introducing Steam Families
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I think people are more negative than positive about this change. The old system allowed for far more freedom at the cost of being more annoying to set up.
    This change cracks down on anyone who used the old system in unintended ways, i.e. to share games with family members not living in the same household. For now that check only compares store region/country, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they tighten the requirements further in the future.

    It’s also a negative compared to the old system if one of your (adult) family members throws a huge tantrum, allowing them to cause a lot more damage and inconvenience than before.

    Edit: I just wanna mention, I am saying this as someone who is usually “RiDiNg sTeAm’S DiCK”.