nan boxing - https://www.google.com/search?q=nan+boxing

This action will delete this post on this instance and on all federated instances, and it cannot be undone. Are you certain you want to delete this post?

Delete This Post

This action will delete this post on this instance and on all federated instances, and it cannot be undone. Are you certain you want to delete this post?

toddsundsted postedMar 29, 2021

nan boxing - https://www.google.com/search?q=nan+boxing

toddsundsted postedMar 25, 2021

at that stage in life...

https://www.replacementlaptopkeys.com/macbook-pro-2017-replacement-keys/

toddsundsted postedMar 22, 2021

toddsundsted postedMar 18, 2021

the keyboard keys to the left of "for" spell "die"

toddsundsted postedMar 15, 2021

I finally took the plunge.

toddsundsted postedMar 14, 2021

i slept an extra hour so now i'm two hours off...?

toddsundsted postedMar 13, 2021

toddsundsted postedMar 11, 2021

I've been thinking about the impact of starting player order on winning strategy games. It seems like the kind of thing you'd want to design out of a game (or otherwise counterbalance). I came across an article that modeled the dice and card game Machi Koro and then used a DNN to play 10,000 games. In the process the author found that there was a significant bias in favor of the first two players (vs. the last two players).

I'm going to see if I can replicate the results using MXNet.cr.

toddsundsted postedMar 8, 2021

My Covid-19 quarantine plan for the last 12 months was to write code every day. With a few exceptions, I pulled that off. The big pre-Covid plan was to *write* every day, but in traditional hacker fashion I first built some tools (Ktistec and kin).

The big project was Ktistec, of course, but early on I spent a lot of time on MXNet.cr, mostly on native MXNet bindings, but also on a Gluon compatible library. I also put a lot of time into Ishi, a project that sprang from my desire to visualize MXNet output inside of my iTerm console.

Now, to do some *writing*...

toddsundsted postedMar 7, 2021

I recently stumbled across Scott Aaronson's lecture notes for PHYS771 Quantum Computing Since Democritus. (I haven't yet read the book.)

Scott Aaronson is a computational complexity researcher/thinker first and foremost, and I love his particular style/peculiar style. En route to quantum computing, he talks a lot about computational complexity, reflects on free will, and manages to loop in time travel, as he does. But the notes (and presumably the book) are not a primer on quantum computing (which was what I was looking for).

The questions Scott’s trying to answer are, generally, *what kind of problems can you solve with quantum computing*, and, specifically, *will we be able to solve NP complete problems in polynomial time with quantum computing*. These are *very important* questions, because Shor’s algorithm (a quantum algorithm) can factor integer primes in polynomial time, which threatens to reduce the effectiveness of a lot of the cryptography on which we all depend. So there are real world consequences.

Factoring integer primes is in NP but it's not known/believed to be NP complete, but if a polynomial time algorithm is discovered for a known NP complete problem, like the traveling salesperson problem, an entire class of difficult problems becomes very much easier to solve, because a solution for one NP complete problem is a solution for any NP complete problem.

How much easier? For reasonably large problems it's the difference between solvable and solvable but not in the lifetime of the universe, because the only known algorithm amounts to trying every possible solution.