Like one time I was waiting for an elevator in a parking garage. It was empty other than me. The door opened and an old woman was there. She smiled at me, and that made my day because it was the best compliment I’ve ever received.
It’s PC using an Xbox controller, which is the best way of playing any game that lets you IMO.
But the game has no idea what kind of button I’m gonna push since the keyboard and mouse are connected too and I’ve yet to press any key or other button at this point 🤷
Technically both PC and console can tell what you have loaded/connected by the drivers in use (maybe other ways too) so it may switch if you unplug the Xbox controller but if it’s a game they expected to be primarily on console, or played with controller they’ll elect to use that verbiage.
But for pc games and stuff regularly played on keyboard, devs choose to use the press any key language (generally).
It might seem silly but UI Devs put a lot of time and effort into making things easy to understand and use and whatnot.
It’s just a meme tho nbd, just figured I’d bring up the convo piece anyway
Reminds me of the old iTunes shuffle thing. When it was first introduced it was actually random but too many people complained it was broken when they heard the same artist multiple times in a row so they rewrote it as a shuffle algorithm that would feel more random than actual random.
Just goes to show, we don’t actually want random, we want variety.
Reminds me of an article I read long time ago of the need in computer games to tweak percentage chance of success and failure, because if it is true as presented 80% success rate players think it should be “almost always” and complain when one fifth of attempts fail.
Me when the weather app says 80% chance of rain, so I go everywhere with an umbrella but it’s overcast all day long. Then it says 15% and I get rained on while walking to the store.
Well rain chance is a compound probability it’s the probability that it will or will not rain multiplied by the percent of land hit with rain. Like if 50% of an area will be hit and there’s an 80% chance it will rain the number the weather Channel will give you is 40%
Chance of rain is calculated based on two things: Meteorologists’ educated guess on the chance of rain, multiplied by the area that will receive rain, in the event it does rain.
I found out recently that those percentages actually mean 80% of the local AREA would have rain and 20% would not. Meaning if there is a chance of rain in your town at all it’s likely raining somewhere even if it’s just a tiny drop or two.
So if you don’t want to get wet at all bring an umbrella if the chance is over 0%.
Source: was talking to a meteorologist about this exact thing.
Don’t use it though. The karmic dice system works for enemies too. So if you enable the system your rolls will fail less often but so will the enemy’s dice rolls. With karmic dice on I find the enemies crit me more. Especially on tactician mode.
In gen 1 that would be only Swift, Bide and self-targeting status moves because every 100% accuracy move can miss due to a bug (1/256). Fun fact: you would actually be able to beat the game with these 2 moves because Bide, in gen 1 only, bypasses Ghost’s immunity to Normal moves.
Mechanically, the remakes are objectively the better games and they also offer more gameplay-wise with new moves, more logical movesets, abilities, nature, actual EV system. The next big improvement was the physical/special split in Gen5.
I still play the gen1 games from time to time tho. They are hilarious.
Same thing happened with the iPhone shuffle. People complained it wasn’t “random enough” and would often end up calling members of the same family and/or household in a row. So they rewrote that algorithm too.
The problem modern computers have with randomness is that it doesn’t make mathematical sense. You can’t program a computer to produce true randomness—wherein no element has any consistent, rule-based relationship to any other element—because then it wouldn’t be random. There would always be some underlying structure to the randomness, some mathematics of its generation, which would allow you to reverse-engineer and re-create it. Ergo: not random.
No, there are true random sources in a computer. Any outside input can be used to generate randomness. Mostly user input, but temperature fluctuations can work as well, if the sensor precision is high enough.
Also the argument is only correct on a technical level for PRNGs. Choose a 65535 sided dice and make the instructions a thousand steps long and you’ll have a pretty hard time to deduce the instructions from the generated numbers. Not to mention how long the list of numbers needs to be for the attacker to start guessing.
Modern cpus actually do have trng hardware built in. So yes, modern computers can create numbers out of nothing, because they have specialized hardware to do so
No, CloudFlare doesn’t use lava lamps to generate random numbers, that was a marketing stunt. Using a camera in a completely dark room is a better source of entropy than one pointed at lava lamps.
Also, nobody is saying that computers create a number out of nothing. The environment is a great source of entropy (temperature fluctuations, user inputs and so on) which are then expanded into a larger amount of entropy through CSPRNGs.
All digital cameras are imperfect - there is always a bit of noise, but usually it doesn’t come through since your scene is bright enough to make small amounts of noise imperceptible. In a completely dark room the camera still tries to get data from the photo sensor, but the noise (created by temperature fluctuations, imperfections in the chip itself and so on) is all you get. You may theoretically be able to predict the noise on short time scales, but it’s a chaotic system.
This is an irrelevant distinction for any case where you aren’t worried about someone reverse engineering the algorithm and seed by logging output. Any half decent PRNG’s output will be statistically indistinguishable from true randomness.
Pick a new song randomly each time a song ends. This is the naive way to do it and can result in playing the same song twice.
Randomly shuffle the list of songs once and then go through the shuffled list in order, guaranteeing that no single song gets played a second time before all songs have been played.
The strategies are different, but I’d argue that they’re equally “random.”
I’ve got a cheap Chinese aftermarket head unit in my car that uses strategy #1, and it’s mildly infuriating.
Yeah, but all modern music platforms use a more advanced random, where it will avoid putting two different songs by the same artist in a row for example. But it’s still based on the second strategy you wrote.
This seems somewhat flawed. Lets say you have 90 songs by Vengaboys, and 10 songs by Slayer in your playlist. In order to play every song without playing Vengaboys back to back, you’d need to play Slayer 4x more often than you play Vengaboys.
I had an old friend who weighed about 300 lbs, didn’t look ugly but he wasn’t pretty, terrible health and dressed like a street person … but he had the personality of an angel.
He was a lifelong salesman and he could charm you into paying his meal and giving him extra money at the end. He could walk into a restaurant and become friends with everyone including the owner and walk away with a free meal. I saw him walk into businesses and strike up complex deals worth millions.
He was also his own worst enemy and every penny he made he spent five more and he owed money to just about every rich person in the city.
When he was younger, he wasn’t the most handsome but because of his personality he was surrounded by beautiful women … his first wife was drop dead gorgeous.
But it was great to see him interact with people in a restaurant. He would have all the older women hanging around his table and all the young girls gigging. In another life, he could have become an influential politician or even the leader of a country.
As easily as he made friends he had endless enemies and even his family didn’t want him … he died alone about ten years ago. It was all sad, tragic, inevitable, and completely disappointing. He could have done so much more.
I think I sold that guy a motorcycle around 22 years ago! He was around 300 pounds and looked like a bum. He was a salesman and his wife had a super-model quality appearance. We were all shocked when we met her and shocked when we learned how much money he made. When we asked how he swung a wife like that he smirked and said “I’m a salesman”.
fk off, wontchange my diacord name and i wont add an avatar. aint trying to use this like social media, dont care who knows or recognizes me. the only reason my username isnt 469764357 is my own memory
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.