[project1dev] Re: BookModels
- From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:01:37 -0400
like say 70/30 the first time and 50/50 the rest of the way or whatnot
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:59 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> logically speaking i am sure you are right but i wonder if the end results
> would be closer than we think, given a huge sample size? like what do you
> think the average difference would be using your method (the correct one) vs
> my method (luck based) on 1000 cases?
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> whats weird is you could seem like the gambler, relying on luck
>>
>> but also the "goin for bein right in the long term" with the large sample
>> size is also playing the odds :P
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> well you said "with a large enough sample size", in which case luck means
>>> less and less the larger the sample size so in that way you are bound to
>>> lose.
>>>
>>> with 3 out of 5 i'd do it for fun but wouldnt put my life on the line or
>>> anything (:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:46 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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:
