11–20 of 23 posts
The first lines seemed familiar: http://quotenil.com/Planet-Wars-Post-Mortem.html
Haha. It didn't say that before, because he hadn't officially won yet. It's actually been propagated from Tron: http://a1k0n.net/2010/03/04/google-ai-postmortem.html
No content inside (but ads)
I think the hosting provider may have pulled the plug after a traffic surge.
Google cache
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Haha. It didn't say that before, because he hadn't officially won yet. It's actually been propagated from Tron: http://a1k0n.net/2010/03/04/google-ai-postmortem.html
I definitely had no intention of starting a tradition there. Haha.
Unfortunately the link appears to be temporarily dead. Luckily before you read about his bot you should watch it play anyways! Here are two replays of the same map. The first is played by average players and the second is played by xathis (and other top bots). Avg: http://aichallenge.org/visualizer.php?game=335973&user=8... Top: http://aichallenge.org/visualizer.php?game=329760&user=4...
It's a hard problem to write any kind of generally adequate player for. All the good bots depend heavily on subtle properties of emergent behavior. Don't let the simple explanations fool you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I definitely had no intention of starting a tradition there. Haha.
You didn't do too badly this time yourself. 11th place. Looking at what he did, do you see what you could do to improve your bot further?
Is that really actually true, or is it some kind of 'modesty'[1]?
When people talk about IQ there's usually a list of people saying something like "IQ is meaningless, it's a flawed concept (but my IQ is 138)". Are there any people saying "I worked really hard at this, I spent a lot of time and effort. I ranked 984th."?
Because I'd love to see the results if those smart people got together and spent some serious time and effort on it.
Lots of popular science projects suffer from a heavy churn rate, which leads to people being introduced to the subject, producing an introductory program, doing a bit of reading, but then moving onto something else. A few people stay, and work on intermediate and advanced level projects, but they suffer from lack of interest and expertise. See, for example, all the millions of artificial life / evolution softwares derived from Martin Gardners Bugs. (See also the death of Fractint, which was excellent software but did not transition to Linux or Windows or modern display programming.)
[1] Not the right word but I'm not sure what fits.
I see a few people saying that they didn't have much time (or that they didn't want to spend too much time) for this. Is that really actually true, or is it some kind of 'modesty'[1]? When people talk about IQ there's usually a list of people saying something like "IQ is meaningless, it's a flawed concept (but my IQ is 138)". Are there any people saying "I worked really hard at this, I spent a lot of time and effort.…
Now this is what I go to HN for! The most interesting part for me was that he did not focus on some huge strategy. Just individuals and small groups with clear goals and constant revaluation. Keeping in mind that the only thing kept between rounds were missions and those were constantly reevaluated as well. I think this is a vivid, albeit simplified, example of how successful organizations of anything should operate.…
I see a few people saying that they didn't have much time (or that they didn't want to spend too much time) for this. Is that really actually true, or is it some kind of 'modesty'[1]? When people talk about IQ there's usually a list of people saying something like "IQ is meaningless, it's a flawed concept (but my IQ is 138)". Are there any people saying "I worked really hard at this, I spent a lot of time and effort.…
It's a way to placate the ego. :)