[project1dev] Re: BookModels
- From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 16:55:23 -0400
there was a comic book in the 60's where green hornet fought batman and
before the fight everyone was like... dude, green hornet doesn't have a
chance, batman's got the tech, the armor, the weapons, the experience, etc.
etc. etc.
but green hornet had moves that batman couldn't handle and thus kicked his
ass.
i think its a good analogy for anytime one side would have most of the
advantages logically speaking but in application, the underdog's one
advantage is enough to transcend and allow them to overcome the odds
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Matthew Morgan <MMorgan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What do you mean green hornet had all the moves? I'm very lost.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *eric drewes
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 01, 2009 1:46 PM
>
> *To:* project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [project1dev] Re: BookModels
>
>
>
> batman's got all the tools, all the preparations, all the knowledge,
> experience...
>
> ...but the green hornet had the moves :)
>
> Hey alan! 1 on 1, your mathematical precision vs. my reliance on luck,
> best 3 out of 5, john henry vs the steam engine man, lets rock this joint
> and settle it old school
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> well you can do what you want, but the code is gonna do a binary search if
> it has to search for somethin, and it will be FASTER because of it hehe
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:43 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> this all goes back to the green hornet vs batman argument
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Matthew Morgan <MMorgan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Not saying that at all. But what fun is it?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Alan Wolfe
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 01, 2009 1:41 PM
>
>
> *To:* project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [project1dev] Re: BookModels
>
>
>
> yeah, logic never works (;
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Matthew Morgan <MMorgan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Theyre too logical.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Alan Wolfe
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 01, 2009 1:40 PM
>
>
> *To:* project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [project1dev] Re: BookModels
>
>
>
> lol i dont think so :P
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> ya cuz they are cowards, no guts no glory man
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> well check it out
>
>
>
> in computer science they teach this method as the quick way to search for
> something in a sorted list (it's called a binary search).
>
>
>
> They don't teach or even mention trying the first third to "get lucky" or
> anything.
>
>
>
> I'm pretty sure it's just the best way period
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:34 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> im thinking about it like w/ bayem's theorem
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The bigger the sample group, the less luck matters so i think itd be in the
> smaller sample groups that it had a chance of doing worse
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:30 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> it is mathematically the most efficient but i bet if you counted on a
> little luck in combination w/ a system like that you could get it quicker
> and have a quicker average if you ran a series of tests enough to get a big
> sample group
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure it is
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:09 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> hey alan... i think we should make you have to get it in a couple places
> less than optimal.
>
> wait, hey alan, are you SURE that is the most efficient way?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:05 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> it could be like for a password for a backalley secret club
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hey you know what would be a cool puzzle to put somewhere too would be the
> number guessing game
>
>
>
> IE someone is thinking of a number between X and Y and you have to guess it
> within so many guesses.
>
>
>
> Whenever you guess, they tell you higher or lower.
>
>
>
> The most efficient way to solve it is by starting in the middle and seeing
> if higher or lower and chopping the resulting numbers down the middle etc.
>
>
>
> We could make it so you have enough guesses that usign the "optimal
> solution" could get you there for sure, and so that way you could either
> guess at it til you got it right, or if you knew the "trick" you could get
> through it first time
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:00 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> i think this will be really good too because it gives people an option
> other than trial and error when building hteir character. a really neat
> trick to find right off the bat!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Sounds rad, let me sponge some knowledge from josh and see if i can come up
> w/ some basics for you to refine etc
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:50 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> hey alan i think thats a great idea and i think it'd be a funny little
> minigame puzzle. because its steam powered we could make it be about
> connecting the right hoses and pipes together, etc.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Cool that would be fun (:
>
>
>
> We could make it where you actually are confronted with a simplified sort
> of circuit board and have to literally hack it like you chip devices, or how
> you do hardware hacking (bridging connections and things).
>
>
>
> If you like that idea, we could base it on the real thing. I know you've
> done chipping. I know a little about how logic circuits work, Josh knows a
> lot more about the details of hardware circuit design though.
>
>
>
> We could probably design somethin kinda neat.
>
>
>
> And, we already have the ability to make a 2d user interface come up for
> such things. We'd just have to set it up in such a way where it would be
> controller friendly as well
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:23 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> laying on the bookshelf... hey i have a pretty sweet idea in regards to
> this...
>
> one of the books could be accessible and by picking it up (using it) you
> would learn how to sabotage the automaton and maybe by doing that instead of
> the questions defining your character you'd be able to manually do it (for
> those people that would prefer that) and it'd be neat cuz youd do it by
> hacking an analog device
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hey Eric are these books gonna be in the book case or lyin around on the
> ground?
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:34 AM, katie cook <ktmcook@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Sounds good. I will put something together. =)
>
> --- On *Wed, 7/1/09, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>
>
> From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [project1dev] Re: BookModels
> To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 5:56 AM
>
>
>
> books look great katie, i like them. How about if we put titles on the
> cover? we could have fortune telling with some kinda mysterious logo, tarot
> card books, along with maybe a maintance manual for the Fortune Teller 2000
> - complete automated predictor of the future :)
>
> you dont have to but it might be nice for a little "flavor"
>
> what do you think?
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:55 AM, katie cook
> <ktmcook@xxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ktmcook@xxxxxxxxx>>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> Here is a snapshot of the book models I have done. I am going to work on
> making that folder that Alan/Chris mentioned and helped with. I didn't have
> a chance to tinker with it tonight, but should be able to work in out in the
> next couple of days. I will upload the stuff into there when I get it worked
> out.
>
> Have a good night guys. =)
>
> Katie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
>
> This e-mail is the property of Oakley Inc. It is intended only for the
> person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that
> is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure.
> Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein,
> to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
