same - also there isn't much incentive for a manufacturer to produce a "normal" single serving (about 60-70g). By my judgement that single serving looks at least 100g
Is that issue not immediately apparent to you? Your splash page says literally nothing. Why can't you put even a tiny example of what this is all about? You can't expect people to hand over personal information to hear an elevator pitch.
agreed - he doesn't say the age of the kids but I imagine they're both under 10? Done right this could set them up for life and make them millionaires with virtually no effort by the age of 30 and still give them a childhood filled with toys and fun. But removing birthday gifts entirely from a young child... woah. Kids need physical items and tangible hobbies to share and bond with friends, even if it's just a cool looking stick. Is a child's brain developed enough to understand, enjoy and share a lot of these concepts, could it maybe lead to them becoming isolated?
>Done right this could set them up for life and make them millionaires with virtually no effort by the age of 30
This seems hyperbolic. Given that money doubles in roughly 10 years at a 10% rate of return, if kiddos are 10 years old they get two doublings by 30. To be a millionaire by 30 requires a present value investment of $250k per child.
It’s been my experience that when people are talking about some future sum of money without specifying real or nominal they are referring to a real sum, based on their current day concept of monetary value.
Figured as it was January 1st a lot of people will be trying to shift a few pounds over the next couple of months. This is the diet/system I've had the most success with over the years!
And the cultural aspect that rather than deliver bad news, they prefer to just not deliver news at all (thinking that that's somehow less of a problem or gets them in to less trouble?).
You know, as much as I admire the drive of people to write tools and hack together scripts to brute force and essentially break the game - I also hate that the world is like this sometimes. Cant we just have a fun game that people can while away a few minutes a day being human and imperfect for once? Do we have to find the optimal solution to everything... all the time?
You're asking whether we can have a challenge where no one on earth is interested in studying it and I think the answer is "no."
If you don't want spoilers, don't look them up? It's like complaining that the existence of archeology as a field takes the romanticism out of dinosaur stories.
I don't think I'm asking that? I guess I'm asking, where is the fun in reducing a game that takes some brain power to a game of solving one 5-letter anagram. Your analogy is a fair one though. I don't begrudge people using their talents to analyse and dig deep in to a game (like chess or go), I think it's just a bit sad that every single one of these simple games is effectively broken just days or hours after taking hold with 20 lines of code (see also 2048).
> every single one of these simple games is effectively broken
Can you elaborate on how the game is broken? How does someone else writing a solver affect your own enjoyment of the game? Wordle isn’t competitive, right, so is the problem just knowing that a robot can do it demotivates you from trying?
This might be an interesting question about human behavior and our motivations that we should think about as we move into the AI age, because no, there will never be another popular game that escapes AI players. Not only are we going to make AI for every playable game, we are building AI for every human activity.
FWIW, I’ve written Sudoku and Boggle solvers, and still love to play those games manually. In fact writing the solvers I think increased my own enjoyment of them, it gives a certain perspective on the difficulty of the game, and of how much humans do to simplify our effort compared to a computer.
I guess it's broken because it's been reduced from a game of progressive deduction to solving 1 5 letter anagram - not the original intent of the game.
I completely agree that it's a fascinating wider question I think I'm alluding to here - living in a world where AI/computer brute force can achieve everything is a going to be a strange place to live in in 50-100 years time. Do we want to make humans redundant in this way - sure this is just a silly game, but, as COVID has shown us the last couple of years, supply chains, logistics etc are all minutely tuned and determined by computers with little human involvement - is that a world we all want to live in, I'm not so sure.
But I mean why does someone else reducing the game to an algorithm hurt your personal experience with the game? If you don’t use AI to play the game, and if the game isn’t competitive, why does it make you sad when someone else does?
BTW I’m not trying to debate or contradict you, your opinion is valid and I’m hoping to dig into that wider question a little by getting more specific about your personal experience and emotions, to uncover in more detail what it is about AI that is bumming you out. I’m curious to hear about what the automation is taking away from you from your perspective. Does the Wordle anagram solver here feel worse to you or similar to older examples like the Big Blue chess AI? And how do computers in general fit in, as well as mechanical automation like cars & tractors, etc?
Are there certain kinds of AI automation you see value in, any things that leave humans with less manual labor and more free time? I’m kind of excited for driving AI, for example, if we can make it safe and reliable enough. It will definitely upset certain economies, but maybe fewer accidents and traffic jams and more free time during travel are redeeming values?
Agreed, but in this case I don't see it as optimal. In the last example he's found 4 of the 5 letters after 2 guesses. Using 3 more guesses at that point seems like a bad idea. At some point finding words that shuffle known letters around to unscramble them might be better. There are also words like ROBOT that have duplicate letters - that was the wordle of the day recently.
For a nice do-it-by-hand puzzle try this:
Fill a 4x4 grid with whole numbers less than 30, such that all rows have the same product (of all 4 numbers) and all columns have the same sum (of all 4 numbers). This can be done by hand with some paper - I kept notes in notepad to do it.
I agree. The one thing I wish there was a program that just gave me the list of remaining possible words. Some start words have an S or T in them which doesn't really help since 80% of the word list has an S or T. I use more obscure words. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I got today's on the 2nd guess by thinking "what is a weird word" with only knowing one letter and I got it. These days are way more fun than always getting it on turn 4.
The game itself has limited novelty, with the majority of people getting the solution in 3 or 4 guesses through normal fitting. It's entirely natural that people try to find new ways to challenge themselves with it.
The group of people playing a game, and group of people analyzing the same game for optimal solutions are both doing the it for fun. In what way does either group spoil the fun for the other?
I don't see the harm in someone spending a few hours nerding out on a strategy for a solitaire game. It's an interesting read for some, and shouldn't diminish your enjoyment.
I don't really see how this can work in any kind of project/sprint based working environment. I work in a position where our clients contract us to complete a parcel of work over a period of several months with a hard deadline at the end (maybe a 1-2 week extension, but the end release date is well known early on).
It is expected that in the last 1-2 months we're not just working 40hrs/5 days but probably 60,70, even 80hrs a week and likely 6 day weeks (the last project was 7 day weeks and I worked 71 days in a row without a day off). I'm not proud of this in the slightest and indeed will be refusing to do this again.
But - my situation isn't unique or even uncommon in many tech jobs that involve delivering projects to a (small) pool of paying clients. Our profit margins are also slim - there is no way my company is going to hire another person who can share jobs with me and have say 2-3 of us on the same 2-3 different projects in parallel to cover the lack of cover 20% of the time. We need to be really zoomed in on the problems to solve and tasks to do - not being there 20% of the time couldn't possibly work.
The dream of a 4 day week is for many, many workers just that - a dream.
I think the idea is that a 4-day workweek would come along with a broader cultural shift.
Imagine a world where Saturday was a workday, it shouldn't be hard as this was the case for many only a few generations ago.
We could say that it is expected that you will not only work 48hrs/6 days a week, but probably 70, 80, 90 hours likely 7 days a week!
Fortunately, a cultural shift occurred along the way, and the work week is now commonly accepted to be 5 days. Expectations of clients, managers, and employees are based around this standard.
So why can't the standard change again? Why couldn't a broad cultural shift occur in which expectations are better managed towards the productivity of a 4-day work week?
Do you think there would be a perception that I (a client) paying 100% rate for a project where people only 80% switched on will lead to a feeling that I'm only getting 80% "quality" or 80% of what it could be. (I work in a creative industry).
Employees working 80% does not mean that the company output has to be reduced to 80%. With the salary reduction, for every 4 employees there would be roughly enough cost reduction to hire another employee, bringing the output to approximately what it was before.
More hours don't translate directly to higher quality or higher output in creative fields. You might actually produce higher quality stuff if you work less. This is pretty well documented at this point
Project deadlines like this are pretty bad for protect quality. Asking people to grind 80 hour work weeks is honestly stupid. It's bad for your employees, it's awful for productivity (your productivity per hour massively dives), and it's bad for quality because you're over worked and stressed and tired, which is bad for your clients. So if you want to do thing exactly the wrong way, yeah do 80 hour work weeks and serve your clients rushed half baked garbage. If you take your time and do it right, everyone will be happier. People have limits and you can't just push them passed those limits when it's convenient or when someone gives you unreasonable deadlines.
It's understandable that the client schedule seems like an immovable object, but in truth it simply is not. Of course, I recognize that it is immovable by you. But imagine they applied the same mentality shift that we're discussing for the work week. Asking "why does it have to be this way? maybe we could try something different".
Is the deadline it tied to something else that truly can't be changed, like a holiday? Then what if the project was started earlier? Or if not, then what if we were in the world where it takes N+3 weeks instead of N, but the people doing it are happier and more productive?
I agree that it's not a small step to get to that reality, but I wouldn't say it's a dream; more a vision.
I don't even understand what 'amazing service' would even be? Someone filling your water glass the instant it was empty (just leave a jug on the table thanks), or someone bringing your food from the kitchen and placing it down in front of you in a timely manner?
What even is 'great service' as opposed to 'sufficient service'
Sometimes servers will be really cool and have a conversation with you, or make jokes, or be really charismatic, or go out of their way to figure out what kind of food you can eat if you have a weird allergy, and be really nice and obviously wanting to be helpful. They can please a difficult family member who generally complains about everything, or make great food suggestions based off what you say you like. There's a lot of stuff a server can do to go out of their way to stand out. Are you saying you've never had a server where you thought to yourself after you leave "wow, that guy was great."? (also I think some places aren't allowed to, or can't put pitchers on tables, so just ask for 2 waters for yourself if you drink a lot of water and don't want to be bugged)
