Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - GeoLib

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 46
1
General Discussion / Re: Brag Board
« on: July 10, 2015, 12:01:24 am »
I have been published in a peer-reviewed journal (first author as an undergrad)!

2
General Discussion / Re: Punctuation inside or outside quotes?
« on: June 02, 2015, 09:59:10 pm »
It's wrong because it's an incorrect application of what quotations are being used for.

I would use this statement of yours against your own position.  The purpose of quotation marks is to delimit what is being quoted.  If punctuation is included in the material being quoted, put it inside the quotation marks.  If not, leave it outside the quote marks.  Any other course of action is not only illogical, but inaccurate, as regards the quote itself.

I believe this is exactly Witherweaver's stance. Just popping in to lend support to the logical style. I've been bucking the American standard convention I was taught in my writing recently. I do think I was only ever taught to put "small" dangling punctuation such as periods and commas inside the quotation marks, but to only include question marks, exclamation points, colons, etc. inside the quotation marks if they're part of the quote.

3
General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.
« on: May 29, 2015, 10:45:26 pm »
Ok I have a problem that I don't really know the answer too. Or rather, I have two contradictory answers that I'm trying to reconcile. Perhaps it's more suited to the logic puzzles thread, but I think reconciling the answers might be a math issue. Anyways:

There is a king with a kingdom of countably infinite people. He decides to play a game with his subjects. This game consists of multiple rounds. In the first round, he calls one of his subjects to play. They come to the castle and he flips two coins. If they're both heads then that person wins and the game is over. Otherwise, he calls up two people, flips two coins. If they're both heads those people both win and the game is over. Otherwise, he calls up four people, etc. The game ends as soon as someone wins. In each round twice as many people come up and their fates are still decided by two coin flips.

You are called by the King. What is your probability of winning?

So I think I have a resolution to the paradox after posing it to a friend of mine (this is really his solution, not mine).

When we do the second scenario and it's all been decided, there's an extra piece of information: that the game is over, as sitnaltax said. This eliminates the zero-probability event that the game goes on forever and there are infinitely many losers. So the issue is that we multiply zero by infinity, and this event still contributes to the probability of being a winner, lowering it from 0.67 to 0.25
 

4
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part II
« on: May 27, 2015, 08:59:09 pm »
I was just reading some stuff and came across something implying that some people have to pay to receive texts and phone calls. Is that actually a thing anywhere in the world? It sounds pretty insane if it's true.

I don't know, I just send texts from home all day, and I'm usually safe that way, since WiFi is awesome.

....

You realize that text messages don't go through WiFi, right?  SMS uses the carrier network.  I truly can't tell if you were being facetious.

Depends on your plan. My dad has a plan whereby he can only send/receive texts over wifi.

5
General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.
« on: May 23, 2015, 07:58:58 pm »
Hmm, okay. So if we solve it that way, the question is, what fraction of people are winners? This is always greater than .5 as you say, but it varies. Possible fraction sequence is 1, 2/3, 4/7, 8/15.... and in general if the game ends in the nth round the fraction is 2^(n - 1)/(2^n - 1). What is the probability that it ends in the nth round? 1/4, 3/16, 9/64, 27/256..., or in general (1/4)*((3/4)^(n - 1). So the expected fraction is the infinite series formed from the product of the two:

1/4 + 1/8 + 9/112 + ...

and in general the nth term of the series is 6^(n - 1)/(2^3n - 2^2n), which you can check for yourself by multiplying.

And... I'll let somebody else figure out if the series converges and if so what to. But clearly if it converges it is greater than 1/4, and after just 3 terms it is 5/112 away from 1/2, so my guess is that's where it converges. So I am very confused too, unless this series doesn't converge for some reason.


After 1000 terms its at 0.671837 and it's still there at 10000, so that's probably about right.


It looks to me like the apparent paradox is resolved by the fact that in the second scenario, you have an additional piece of information: the knowledge that the experiment is already over.

I am also reminded of the two-envelopes paradox, although I can't put my finger on exactly why.

Yeah something involving you getting new information might be it.

The other thing is that while the fraction that are winners and the number of rounds are convergent series, the total number of players is not. I don't know if we're losing something in the infinity. Like perhaps it doesn't even make sense to talk about the king finishing choosing everyone and then calling them because he would have to have already picked out an undefined number of people.

PPE: I will check out the Bertrand Paradox

6
General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.
« on: May 23, 2015, 06:14:58 pm »
If I understand right, the answer would be 1/4, simply the probability both are heads. You are called, so you will get a chance at the coins being flipped, and no other chances.

Yeah this is one answer and I think the right one. So the question is, how do you reconcile this: No matter when the game ends, there are more winners than losers. Say the King flipped all the coins and figured everything out first, and only then started calling people to tell them whether they've won or lost. This seems like exactly the same game, but he calls more people to tell them they've won than he calls people to tell them they've lost.

7
General Discussion / Re: Maths thread.
« on: May 23, 2015, 05:40:28 pm »
Ok I have a problem that I don't really know the answer too. Or rather, I have two contradictory answers that I'm trying to reconcile. Perhaps it's more suited to the logic puzzles thread, but I think reconciling the answers might be a math issue. Anyways:

There is a king with a kingdom of countably infinite people. He decides to play a game with his subjects. This game consists of multiple rounds. In the first round, he calls one of his subjects to play. They come to the castle and he flips two coins. If they're both heads then that person wins and the game is over. Otherwise, he calls up two people, flips two coins. If they're both heads those people both win and the game is over. Otherwise, he calls up four people, etc. The game ends as soon as someone wins. In each round twice as many people come up and their fates are still decided by two coin flips.

You are called by the King. What is your probability of winning?

8
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part II
« on: May 16, 2015, 02:16:25 am »
Man, you guys make me Google stuff myself.

Nexus 6 is 6", while Galaxy Note 4 is 5.7".  I have the Note 4.  I could go for an even bigger screen.  I have big fingers.  Note 4 does have a few more pixels per inch though.

This is the first I've heard of the Nexus 6, though.  I didn't think there was anything competing with Note 4 in terms of phone/tablet hybrids.  (I don't count Apple products.)

I love it because it has no bloatware from the manufacturer or the carrier. The screen on this guy looks great, and I can reach the corners with one hand without too much trouble.

I need to get a new phone. Are you considering rooting it?

9
Game Reports / Re: Venture vs. Witch always wins?
« on: May 13, 2015, 11:11:44 pm »
As for courtyard, I always seemed to have more than $2 but, I guess it could have been purchased on a $3 or $4.

Don't assume that because courtyard is $2, it isn't worth picking up for $4. It quite frequently is. This is true in general though. Don't equate cost with power.

10
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part II
« on: May 12, 2015, 05:33:42 pm »
So, I made up a new type of logic puzzle and need help coming up with a name.  I am absolutely horrible at coming up with names, and nobody I know is both good at names and logic puzzles, so I want to ask you guys.  Here is an example puzzle (with a solution), and here and here and some puzzles without solutions.  The rules are:

1. Divide the grid into rectangles along the grid lines.
2. Each rectangle must contain exactly two shapes.
3. Rectangles containing two circles may not be a square.
4. Rectangles containing at least one square must be a square.

Can anybody come up with a good name?  I tend to like the geeky names better, but any good one will do.

So... It's about not squaring the circle? Shame. I was going to suggest "Squaring the Circle".

Hey, that one would actually work too...

Especially if you just switch squares and circles so that circles need squares and two squares can't have them.

11
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part II
« on: May 08, 2015, 06:35:58 pm »
Where I work everybody has a Mac, myself included, but my home laptop is a Windows.

I have learned how to systematically scroll in the opposite direction I want to.

I'm sure there's a setting on either machine that'll let you make them scroll the same way.

Yes. When they first implemented the backwards scrolling on OS X, I immediately changed it back.

Why would they even do something like that?

To be contrary.

Actually, to make it the same as on a touchscreen.

Scrolling on a mouse is a different motion though.  Reversing the scroll direction still doesn't make them the same.

The "contrary" comment was just snark, but I really don't see the benefit of making reverse scroll the default.  Out just confuses people.

My favorite is that to turn it off you have to uncheck "Use natural scrolling"

12
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card
« on: May 07, 2015, 12:15:24 pm »
My reading is that he was just very dumb.

In any case, I don't understand the fixation on Columbus. His -personal- influence was extremely small scale.

Well part of it is that in the US we have a federal holiday in his honor, despite the fact that he did horrible things. That's pretty frustrating

13
Rules Questions / Re: +Card token and when-you-play
« on: May 07, 2015, 03:20:25 am »
It just seems like things would be simpler if the "it" in

Quote
If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that other card also stays in front of you until it's no longer doing anything.

referred to the duration card and not the other card. If a card directly plays a duration, it stays out with the duration. Simple. This would obviously mean a reversal of TR-Tac, but would just make everything so much simpler. Sometimes you'd end up with an extra TR staying out sure, but I feel like this clears up more issues than it creates.
As I pointed out earlier, it would also cause a Golem (or a Herald) that had played a Duration to stay out, so it's not a good solution.

I don't think that follows... Why is that result more undesirable than:

If a card plays a Duration and thereby causes that Duration to set up its future effect an extra time that turn, keep that card in play until the Duration has fewer than two of those future effects outstanding.


? I think it would make a lot of sense if Golem behaved like TR in this respect.

14
Rules Questions / Re: +Card token and when-you-play
« on: May 06, 2015, 09:59:02 pm »
It just seems like things would be simpler if the "it" in

Quote
If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that other card also stays in front of you until it's no longer doing anything.

referred to the duration card and not the other card. If a card directly plays a duration, it stays out with the duration. Simple. This would obviously mean a reversal of TR-Tac, but would just make everything so much simpler. Sometimes you'd end up with an extra TR staying out sure, but I feel like this clears up more issues than it creates.

15
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part II
« on: May 04, 2015, 05:19:19 pm »
does anyone know if there is a way to quickly get the entire content of a thread without losing BBC formatting?

You can go print -> CTRL + A -> Copy, which does almost what I need except that way, well, bolded letters get lost

edit: preferably something without the html tags which you get if you go print -> view source

Does All -> Print and then saving the page not work?

16
General Discussion / Re: Random Stuff Part II
« on: May 03, 2015, 11:18:33 pm »

17
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: May 03, 2015, 06:55:10 pm »
It's not even sexist to use 'he'. I don't think it's a problem.

I think you're going to get a lot of disagreement on this point, but I also recommend that this discussion not happen in this thread as the OP has already indicated that they would prefer to keep this thread just about discussion of the data and data gathering itself.

18
Feedback / Re: Card name post-count positions
« on: April 30, 2015, 09:00:56 pm »
I like having titles that just last for one post - you have ones for 666, 1337, etc.; numbers that are special in some way. 401, Poster Not Found.

So then, say uh in the 3000's you were a Cartographer, but you wanted 3333 to be So Many 3's. You change the title at 3333, then have the Cartographer title for 3334. So it's two new title entries for each new title, one just reinstating what was going on.

*404

19
General Discussion / Re: Logic Riddles
« on: April 29, 2015, 11:13:11 pm »
Without looking at the clues or discussion. This isn't optimized, but it works (I think):


There are only two hand placement positions, adjacent and opposite.

1. Allow a round to pass without touching anything, to confirm that they don't all start the same.
2. Place hands adjacent.
    If you get two of the same orientation,
        then flip both. Now you either win, or there are three of the same orientation remaining

    else (you get two with different orientations)
        flip them so they're the same. Either you win, or there's at least one of the other orientation.
        3. Place hands opposite. One of the bowls you get is guaranteed to be one from the previous step. If the other is in the same orientation, then flip nothing. You have three bowls in the same orientation. If the other is in the opposite orientation, flip it so now it's the same. Either you win or you have three bowls in the same orientation.

        3/4. Place hands adjacent again. Either you get the single remaining in the opposite orientation, flip it and win. Otherwise, you get two in the same orientation. Flip 1.
        4/5. Now there are two pairs in the same orientation. Place hands opposite. If you get two of the same orientation, flip both and win, otherwise there are two pairs of adjacent bowls with the same orientation. Flip nothing.
        5/6. Place hands adjacent. If you get two of the same orientation, flip both and win. Otherwise, flip both.
        6/7. Now there are two pairs of opposite bowls with the same orientation. Place hands opposite. Flip both and win.



20
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 28, 2015, 12:33:58 pm »
I looked at the faces of the Thief and the Spy, and they looked pretty male. I did the same for some other cards, and found they looked female, mostly in Adventures I guess.

I guess this is a thing I might never have thought through unless I had written my own similar list, but the question I came to is what actually signifies male? 

Thief and Spy are good examples, in that they are intimidating, brutish faces, but with no facial hair, no male pattern baldness, and no visible junk-bulge.  Yes, brutishness is a masculine quality, but it isn't really a male quality.  Thief has broad shoulders, but is also clearly wearing a cape or something that is exaggerating their shoulders. 

I guess an argument could be made that Spy looks like they have stubble, and I guess I would respect that, but for Thief I can't see that at all.

I would argue that in these cases (as well as comparable Adventures cases you ruled as female but I haven't really looked), the absence of biological signifiers should outweigh the presence of cultural signifiers... otherwise you might as well just decide that most thefts are performed by men so Thief is a male card.

I would say Thief's very square jaw is a weak biological indicator for maleness.

21
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Getting cards
« on: April 27, 2015, 09:37:50 pm »
Man does this thread need a [serious] tag  >:(

(:P)

22
Rules Questions / Re: "Resolve"
« on: April 26, 2015, 10:30:35 pm »
I think the real characterization of when you have "resolved" an Action is, an Action is resolved at the time after playing it at which you can either play more Actions or proceed to your Buy phase. That's not a definition, but a description.

This sounds correct to me. Whenever you would otherwise be able to play another action card (if playing that card isn't part of the instructions of playing a card), or whenever you could choose to start your buy phase (or your buy phase would automatically start via having no actions left), this is when you can call Coin or Carriage. In other words, we may not be able to define "resolve", but we all know it when we see it.

Hey, playing with RC the first time, I thought I'd have to wait until a Duration card's next turn before I could call RC on it, because, hey, it's still doing stuff then, so it hadn't resolved.

This is because JSH incorrectly explained it to us that way.

Well part of that was because JSH also incorrectly told us that RC didn't stay out with a duration it played, so we were frantically trying to figure out a way that RC-Hireling wasn't broken.

23
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Quality of card images on wiki
« on: April 26, 2015, 09:33:25 pm »
I would do the "washed out" for all of them, and then redo the ones where it looks really bad (e.g. lost city) at a higher resolution later.

24
Rules Questions / Re: "Resolve"
« on: April 26, 2015, 09:30:36 pm »
I think the real characterization of when you have "resolved" an Action is, an Action is resolved at the time after playing it at which you can either play more Actions or proceed to your Buy phase. That's not a definition, but a description.

This sounds correct to me. Whenever you would otherwise be able to play another action card (if playing that card isn't part of the instructions of playing a card), or whenever you could choose to start your buy phase (or your buy phase would automatically start via having no actions left), this is when you can call Coin or Carriage. In other words, we may not be able to define "resolve", but we all know it when we see it.

I still see this being a circular definition: "How do I know when I can play more Actions or move on to my Buy phase?"

What's wrong with "An Action is resolved after you execute all its on-Play effects"? Next turn effects, Clean-up phase effects, on-Call effects, etc. are all instructions for future times and are resolved at those future times. But once those future instructions are queued-up, the on-Play effects are resolved.

As AJD said, it's a description, not a definition. It's the best way to give people an intuitive sense of when they can call RC or CoTR. Obviously for a definition we need to turn something like what you've got.

25
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: April 26, 2015, 06:28:00 pm »
What about a Rats type card promo?

$6
+3 Cards
+2 Actions
gain a Curse
gain a Ruin

...okay, Rats-ish

FYI, Donald really doesn't like looking at fan cards for various reasons he's outlined several times (I'll post a link if I can find one) and avoids places where they're posted, so please avoid posting them here.

Edit: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5799.msg148774#msg148774

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 46

Page created in 0.089 seconds with 19 queries.