I do not think this is a terrible idea. Games such as league of legends feel dramatically different when I play with friends in real life.

One strange thing is that as my age grows my preference for multiplayer game changes from "competitive" to "coop".

I would take it if demon offers me a a deal that transfers my pattern matching IQ to the proficiency of using language as a tool (in Wittgenstein's sense)

Link to gov release: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/former-ebay-executive-ple...

"Senior executives at eBay were frustrated with the newsletter’s tone and content, and with the tone and content of comments posted beneath the newsletter’s articles. The harassment campaign arose from communications between those executives and Baugh, who was eBay’s senior security employee."

Now what about these frustrated "senior executives". This is mafia in age of internet. Cringe.

Careful, they might go after you next!

Obviously sarcastic, but drives home just how insane the scenario even is.

Also, how do senior executives even find the time?

One of my family member is living Shanghai who has not taken any vaccine yet due to contraindications. Not to mention that there are millions of elders living in China who are not suitable for taking vaccine.

I am very concerned if an authoritative gov aiming for "zero-covid" would push and mandate every citizen to be vaccinated. But I saw all these comments bashing gov on "why lockdown", "why not just take vax", "why not herd immunity" without deeping into questions - which is not much different from "Let them eat cake”.

Or by Occam's razor, I would say the goverment simply screws up (so badly) at their top-down approach at this stage.

Multiplying the saved cost by probability of a defeat (which is ineffective mentioned by writer) does not seem bad considering the grid is low-cost design.

But placing timer/accelerator in RPG as a backup plan for fusing in case the warhead is shortcircuited also seems low-cost. I must be missing something here.

Good luck retrofitting your extra fusing system into thousands and thousands of RPG-7s.

I am not familiar with public debate. Before two persons start a public debate, is it a common assumption that you are going to hold your ground till the end, whatever the information provided by the opponent?

There is no flow of information and I could not see this form of acts as "communication" - it seems to be more like a kind of art/show/performance.

The goal of a public debate is to influence the perception of the many passive listeners, not the few other participants of the debate; There is extensive flow of information/communication, but it's simply not aimed towards the other participants of the debate.

So a key part of such debates becomes influencing or provoking others to talk about things that advance your cause and avoiding discussion of things that hurt it. E.g. if someone says "you eat babies" and you respond with extensive evidence that you don't, then that public debate becomes a debate about you being a baby-eater and not whatever you wanted to promote.

Correct, public debate is theater.

Im not sure I was using the term correctly. What I mean is arguing or discussing matters of public discourse... politics and whatnot.

It goes far beyond twitter culture. Even in daily conversation there are people who only open out port and close in port. One signal is that whenever you bring up a perspective (either in support/disagreement) this person gonna continue his speech and make the conversation expereince like attending a lecture.

If your packets keep bouncing, you stop sending 'em. Their packets get ACKed and disregarded.

Tongue in cheek, I'd call that "racist uncle at thanksgiving".

"Implicit learning is “nonepisodic learning of complex information in an incidental manner, without awareness of what has been learned.”

If I am terrible at online competitive games, does it reflect my poor implicit learning ability on strategy?

Depends on the type of game I suppose, not all are high-speed button pressing fests. If you are terrible at high-APM games like Starcraft then it might be more due to hand-eye coordination skill than due to strategy skill, if you are also terrible at online chess then it might be due to strategy. Both hand-eye coordination and strategic thinking can be improved through practice though.

Performance in games like this is a child with many fathers. It's more likely that you underestimate the amount of work some people put into improving, and also underestimate the role of luck.

You could use unsigned ints, whose arithmetic wraps, to deal with the overflow.

I'd still be curious about any theories of storage.

Javacript doesn't have an unsigned int datatype. The numbers in the article were doubles.

you cant swap doubles like that though... b/c if any of them is a NaN or an infinity, it breaks down.

It works for integers (and pointers)

It also breaks due to rounding even if you don't have NaN or Inf.

No - to deal with overflow, the variables need to be widened by 1 bit.

Not sure if this is what the OP meant, but adding a bit is effectively doubling the size. 16 bits = 65535. 17 = 131071.

I'm reasonably certain you'd more commonly say that the range is doubled. When we say "size", we usually mean the "width" of the variable, as e.g. demonstrated by the "sizeof()" operator in C, which gives the size/width in bytes[1].

[1] Actually multiple of sizeof(char), where sizeof(char) is defined as 1. And that's technically not 1 byte everywhere, but most of the time nowadays it is.

For future reference, don't assume everyone on HN writes C/C++. I know what those terms mean but I was trying to point out that OP probably meant the exact same thing.

Telling someone who doesn't know what widening a variable means that they meant widening a variable without explaining what widening a variable means helps no one.

(Plus adding 1 bit to the "bit size" of a variable _does_ double the base 10 size of the variable if you want to be really pedantic)

I think it's pretty intuitive that the size of a variable is the amount of memory it takes, while the range of a variable describes the bounds of the values it can represent.

This is consistent with other uses: The size of an array, the size of a data structure in general, the size of a file... In all of those you are concerned about how much memory or disk space is taken.

So I think calling the range "size" is counterintuitive and gives the wrong idea, and I do not agree that the "base 10 size" of a variable is equivalent to its range. (What does "base 10" have to do with it anyway? The range is doubled no matter what base we're operating in.)

the second half my comment is wrong. As someone comment points out there is xor swap