The source article[1] suggests that (in my own words) it may have to do with several kins that were brought together and tried to seal their bond by assembling a fictive individual from several deceased relatives. Or that an original important burial site was disturbed and they tried to restore the body.
Incidentally, my Windows installations never self destruct, and I have used the product on several versions in the last 25+ years (since W95). My Linux installations however have, for example by standard updates.
HTTPS when used in the ubiquitous manner it is now always strikes me as unnecessary complexity and tedium, and reasonings like yours addressing them with even more complexity and tedium.
It happened that the last S changed from "stupid" to "secure".
If I use HTTPS I can safely enough connect to my home services through an open cafe Wifi, for example
I’ve been using caddy for a year which does everything for you. Basically nginx/haproxy but with https built-in via LE, no fiddling about with cert files and brittle LE scripts, also supports subdomains equally easily.
How bad is the HN hug of death btw? My laptop can serve 200k QPS per core. I can't imagine HN is that much more intensive? Are 1vCPU VMs just that much worse?
Yes, they are much worse than bon-fide actual single cores on most recently purchased laptops. But also, the HN hug of death mostly happens with tiny non-static sites that are sloppily hosted. If you're serving static assets it's hard to "hug of death" a Casio watch.
M3 at work, Acer Swift 3 at home. Both are comparable in that regard. You can do 200k QPS of actual work (a little protobuf parsing, a little old-school ML, handling the networking, a little HTTP1.1 parsing, ...), more if you just want vanity metrics, just by wrapping something like uSockets [0] and not doing anything to explicitly pessimize the system.
You can do better with a hand-crafted solution, but most projects don't need anything fancier.
Agreed that 3D is overkill. I'm fastest at prototyping in Unity though and this was only a couple day project, so I'm unlikely to port it to anything else.
Probabilities are mostly randomized during board generation but skewed in a way to make gameplay feel a bit better. There's a cap on the likelihood of the neutral event, and a bias towards the good event rather than a bad one.
Can you please share the specifics? I'm trying to make my own AI for this game, and would like to compare mine against random play to estimate its strength.
Also, in your listing of your ai beating the random, how are you counting drawn games?
MaxNeutralChances and MinGoodChances are both set to 6 in the release build. Note that one chance is equal to one face of the die, so 5%. Also, this overload of Random.Range() has an inclusive min value but an exclusive max value.
I guess I didn't include ties in that little blurb I wrote up, but the real results of my 10k trials were around 5:1:11.5 (lose:tie:win) for the AI vs random actor.
Would love to see your AI when it's done! Please shoot me an email if you want. My email is in my profile / in the site footer.
Why an AI? Just for the fun of implementing it (totally valid, just curious)? Given the probabilities of the outcomes couldn't you just "solve" for the best way to play it based on expected value?
If there are 65% and 50% to complete a row in one direction, and a 35% and 20% in another direction, you don't really need AI to tell you which one would be more advantageous to go after?
Yes, I've made what is intended to be a perfect solver (Although it in some testing it's clearly making mistakes, so I have some debugging to do yet). I'm making it because I was nerd sniped into thinking through how to handle some of the trickiness with the solving. It's not an AI in the LLM or machine learning sense, but in the previously common use of the term (eg, deep blue), or in the video game sense.
Agreed. Taking the time to roll the dice is important the first few times, to fully cement the idea of the game. After that it gets annoying.
To be specific, you could probably even leave the roll time as-is, to give you that suspense, but the time it takes to move the die to the center, flash it, and flash the result, is too long and gets irritating.
An extra click that would stop the animation immediately might be helpful.
Or to turn this into a different game: the d20 stops fast by default, but extra click to cheat and keep it rolling if you feel that it's about to stop on an unfavorable face.
I made some updates to speed up the UI, and improved the computer player, as I was interested in finding the optimal strategy: https://keshav.is/coding/pt3
[1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/as...
reply