facepalmmuzik wrote:isn't that coming in 4.0?toroidalet wrote: Can someone work on using Hashlife for apgsearch?
I forgot about that.
Will apgsearch 4.0 obsolete apgsearch V1 things?
facepalmmuzik wrote:isn't that coming in 4.0?toroidalet wrote: Can someone work on using Hashlife for apgsearch?
No, what about stuff like 1x256?toroidalet wrote:facepalmmuzik wrote:isn't that coming in 4.0?toroidalet wrote: Can someone work on using Hashlife for apgsearch?
I forgot about that.
Will apgsearch 4.0 obsolete apgsearch V1 things?
Nevermind, drc wants it blocked.wwei23 wrote:No, what about stuff like 1x256?toroidalet wrote: Will apgsearch 4.0 obsolete apgsearch V1 things?
Why a GRAIN of salt? I already have a lot of salt. Maybe Epsom salt?drc wrote:Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.
This. There's clearly demand for this type of soup, but let's make sure we don't end up with a lot of different incompatible implementations. If Calcyman, in his role as Catagolue's Benevolent Dictator for Life, decreed the One True Official Way to generate 1×256 soups (and 2×128, and 4×64, and whatever else people want to search), that would be ideal.drc wrote:Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.
cum grano saliswwei23 wrote:Why a GRAIN of salt? I already have a lot of salt. Maybe Epsom salt?
I LIKE my method. I reused the 8x32 code, how do you get better than that?Apple Bottom wrote:This. There's clearly demand for this type of soup, but let's make sure we don't end up with a lot of different incompatible implementations. If Calcyman, in his role as Catagolue's Benevolent Dictator for Life, decreed the One True Official Way to generate 1×256 soups (and 2×128, and 4×64, and whatever else people want to search), that would be ideal.drc wrote:Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.
cum grano saliswwei23 wrote:Why a GRAIN of salt? I already have a lot of salt. Maybe Epsom salt?
Just to repeat it once again:wwei23 wrote:I LIKE my method. I reused the 8x32 code, how do you get better than that?
However, these extraneous symmetries are very useful as 'namespaces' where people can test hacked versions of apgsearch without risking damage to the proper symmetries. Saka_Test is perhaps the canonical example of this: if he or she had submitted those hauls to D2_+1 instead, it would have prompted much unwarranted excitement. (C1 would disbelieve the submission immediately.)drc wrote:facepalm
I feel like all the extraneous symmetries should be removed (and checks done to inhibit more invalid symmetries) until Adam comes up with a standard algorithm for generating those soups
He.calcyman wrote:if he or she
The real purpose of the Saka_Test symmetry was to see if Catagolue would accept:drc wrote:I would not have facepalmed if the symmetries had been labeled 'wwtest_{insert symmetry name here}' or something like that. That's why Saka's test symmetry didn't bother me.
No, they wouldn't get through the chi-square test unless the attacker commits a plausible haul with very subtle changes. Even then, random undiscovered objects would need to be peer-reviewed, so the attacker would also need to run another maliciously-altered instance of apgsearch capable of reproducing exactly the same results in verification mode, and be lucky enough to not be intercepted by any of the benign apgmerae running on other peoples' computers. So it would take a lot of effort.Saka wrote:What would be really dangerous was if someone was to edit the code for making C1 soups and replace it with random undiscovered objects. Would they be put into the user's discoveries?
Well that's some new info. What does the hitchhiker badge look like and the description? Maybe someone could put it up on the Catagolue page on the LifeWikicalcyman wrote: If anyone does manage to win the prestigious hitherto-unclaimed 'Hitchhiker' badge through this brand of tomfoolery, I would be simultaneously concerned and impressed.
Yeah, that's what I'm doing.Saka wrote:Well that's some new info. What does the hitchhiker badge look like and the description? Maybe someone could put it up on the Catagolue page on the LifeWikicalcyman wrote: If anyone does manage to win the prestigious hitherto-unclaimed 'Hitchhiker' badge through this brand of tomfoolery, I would be simultaneously concerned and impressed.
How do you know? Has anyone reached 10 quadrillion soups that you know of?muzik wrote:Teramyriad doesn't seem to exist.
Nope, but I know that at least there isn't an image associated with it.A for awesome wrote:How do you know? Has anyone reached 10 quadrillion soups that you know of?muzik wrote:Teramyriad doesn't seem to exist.
The Whirlpool Galaxy, I think.Saka wrote:Hahaha the Hitchhiker badge looks like a galaxy!!!! I get it..!
Code: Select all
if (ordlist.containsKey("xp2_882030kgz010602")) { createBadge(datastore, requestedName, "Conchita"); }
if (ordlist.containsKey("xp8_4b23021eaz57840c4d2")) { createBadge(datastore, requestedName, "Hitchhiker"); }
Excellent! Are there any plans to support these sizes in apgsearch 4.x, or perhaps to issue an update to 3.x to do so?calcyman wrote:It seems that wwei23's convention for 8x32, 4x64, 2x128, and 1x256 was satisfyingly straightforward to implement on the server side. Indeed, 8x32 patterns no longer have the 8 annoying blank rows on Catagolue. (It's sneakily accomplished by treating the soup as C1, and just changing the RLE header and the frequency of '$\n' line-breaks.)
Yeah, but then 1.0 won't be superior anymore!Apple Bottom wrote:Excellent! Are there any plans to support these sizes in apgsearch 4.x, or perhaps to issue an update to 3.x to do so?calcyman wrote:It seems that wwei23's convention for 8x32, 4x64, 2x128, and 1x256 was satisfyingly straightforward to implement on the server side. Indeed, 8x32 patterns no longer have the 8 annoying blank rows on Catagolue. (It's sneakily accomplished by treating the soup as C1, and just changing the RLE header and the frequency of '$\n' line-breaks.)
Isn't moving forward with newer technology a good thing?wwei23 wrote:Yeah, but then 1.0 won't be superior anymore!Apple Bottom wrote:Excellent! Are there any plans to support these sizes in apgsearch 4.x, or perhaps to issue an update to 3.x to do so?
Maybe he has difficulty using cygwin and stuff.muzik wrote: Isn't moving forward with newer technology a good thing?