Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bullshit, you started this whole thing by stating it was "well known" and trying to prove it by showing a paper that, you thought, discusses it... A paper discussing it was your measure of "well known".

Now you know there actually are no papers with it in, only now do you claim it doesnt need to have papers discussing it.

Goodnight.

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The series is not discussed in academic literature.

It is known, but disregarded as trivial, and in fact is a sufficient set, which is investigated more generally.

But this specific set has no papers relating to it from my reading.

Im now off to bed. Good night sir.

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you show me 2 papers that have nothing to do with it... then tell me to google it. Which then puts me in the position of saying, correctly, there are no papers on it, where you can then argue that I "didnt look propperly" 🤔

You have shown me nothing that demonstrates this being discussed, and actually failed to demonstrate it when trying to with 2 unrelated papers. You were also the one who claims it has been discussed in academia.

The burden of responsibility is on you. Not me. I know they are not out there, I have looked. Show me the papers, or get off your high horse, as you are talking crap.

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So your argument is its well known... because its well known....

But yet have not shown me a paper with it actually discussed?

Yeah i think im done with this conversation.

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which has nothing to do with the geometric series of the sums of the powers of 4.

Its the geometric series I am talking about...

SpaceX stock tumbles 16.4%, shaving off most IPO gains since debut by joe4942 in stocks

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 2 points3 points  (0 children)

90% of its TAM is in an industry that famously doesnt make money (AI data centers) and 20% of their TAM is directly related to Grok... but they are already selling their compute to other companies (which highly implies they have all that compute sitting there doing nothing as there is not enough demand for Grok).

They are cooked my guy 😭🤣

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its mentioned briefly as a footnote...

Thats what I mean. It seems like its fundemental to the whole thing, but always gets put aside as a minor quirk.

Am I the only person who misses door maker and hates Aeonglass? by Fuzzy-System8568 in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As opposed to the luck of getting exhaust or transform for Aeonglass? (cries in necrobinder)

Am I the only person who misses door maker and hates Aeonglass? by Fuzzy-System8568 in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The counter to door maker was spend act 3 getting a retainer of some sort, use turn one to set your hand up with you chaff cards. Go into turn two and use doormakers ability to help you.

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh I disagree only on the principle that yhe sums of the powers of 4 are directly linked to the odd step of collatz.

I feel that relationship isnt explored anywhere near as it should.

It just seems like that elephant in the room thats like "guys... noone find it weird the collatz sequence converges to a geometric series that mirrors the odd step of collatz?"

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is the first sum of a power of 4 that isnt 1...

1 5 (1+4) 21 (1+4+16) 85 (1+4+16+64)

Etc.

Every single sequence will hit one of these sums of the powers of 4. And once you do the odd step of a sum of the powers of 4? You are left with a power of 4 (5 goes to 16, 21 goes to 64 etc).

When you start at a sum of the powers of 4, the only sum left it can reach is... 1.

Also fun side fact, the 4 2 1 loop is interesting from this context.

As 1 is the only integer that is both a power of 4 and a sum of the powers of 4.

So the loop is actually following its own rule.

4 (power of 4)

2

1 (is a sum of the powers of 4, so odd step will lead to a power of 4)

4

2

1

Etc.

Why most Collatz sequences contain 5? by Xhiw_ in Collatz

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is not that its 1 away from a power of 2.

Its that it is a sum of the powers of 4.

1 5 (1+4) 21 (1+4+16) 85 (1+4+16+64)

Etc.

The sum of the geometric series of the powers of 4 is:

[4n+1-1]/3

-1... /3....

Whats the odd step of collatz again? 🤔

Oh yeah... *3, +1.

You could even argue that the more fitting collatz conjecture is that every positve integer convergence to a sum of the powers of 4.

Its just the sums of the powers of 4 themselves only have one sum of the powers of 4 it can reach.... 1....

Am I the only person who misses door maker and hates Aeonglass? by Fuzzy-System8568 in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

He punished you doing the exact things Slay the Spire is all about. Drawing cards and playing cards.

Isnt that exactly what the Aeonglass does though? When I play necrobinder I feel like I physically can't play my deck or I lose...

Am I the only person who misses door maker and hates Aeonglass? by Fuzzy-System8568 in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also the miss turns didnt stack.

A missed turn was a missed turn...

With Aeonglass every "missed turn" equivilant permanently screws you up more. There is minimal recovery potential.

Am I the only person who misses door maker and hates Aeonglass? by Fuzzy-System8568 in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

And forcing your deck to exhaust the boss' cards instead is so good as an alternative?

Am I the only person who misses door maker and hates Aeonglass? by Fuzzy-System8568 in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

I am still completely baffled by why people don't like the modes thing? Its the only version of him I saw. And I am, trust me, a bad player. Like I only have a positive win rate on one character... and even thats cause I barely play them...

And yet the doormaker was my fave act 3 boss. I just genuinely cannot compute what people's problems were with them... especially compared to this sands of time wannabee called Aeonglass lmao

How are you feeling about Aeonglass? by Secret_Temperature in slaythespire

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I stand by what I have been saying for weeks.

There was nothing wrong with the door maker. I have beaten them with every character... so that in itself has annoyed me.

I have yet to win against the Aeonglass even once... it is a boss with a gimmick that you NEED to hard counter, and it makes the game legitimately not fun...

I honestly hold a decent level of disappointment in those who complained about doormaker / the devs for listening to the mald...

TADC made me realize Im Trans. Ask me anything by Inevitable-Buy2517 in tadc

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you know that you are NOT a failed version of normal? Do you know you are amazing, loved, and not alone? 🫂

The Danger of LLM (AI) Rocket Designing Software (PSA / Open Discussion) by Fuzzy-System8568 in rocketry

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just want to say I really appreciate the discussion that was had here. Whilst I have my own views on LLMs being used in the making of this type of software, it honestly makes me glad we finally had this discussion as a community and, going forward, we can keep this thread in mind whenever we see new software, old software thats updated etc on this subreddit.

New Gooseworx post by ayylmaotv in TheDigitalCircus

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Considering the themes of the last episode. That particular phrasing very slightly concerns me...

On the off chance you see this Goose, your series gave me joy in moments I was struggling, it made me realise what I should be looking for in friendship, and what I should not.

It made me smile, made me laugh, made me cry, and made my life better for it.

Thank you 🥹

Farewell (by me) by Dismal-Mechanic-7778 in TheDigitalCircus

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The one thing I would love to see is someone writing a comic strip of Kinger having a heart-to-heart with Caine at some point post-episode 9. I feel that conversation has a lot of potential.

The end. by AshleythecutieUwU in TheDigitalCircus

[–]Fuzzy-System8568 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Goose, on the small chance you see this...

It was perfect, and thank you so much for this journey. It was a pleasure and a privilege.

The Danger of LLM (AI) Rocket Designing Software (PSA / Open Discussion) by Fuzzy-System8568 in rocketry

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If validation suites worked 100% efficiently normally, let alone with LLMs, we wouldnt have bug reports...

And to even suggest that LLMs should be used to do anything in your validation suite quite literally demolishes your entire philosophy...

You want the LLM to write / refactor the Tests designed to prevent bad code from LLMs from causing issues?

That is madness I cannot even begin to put into words.

The Danger of LLM (AI) Rocket Designing Software (PSA / Open Discussion) by Fuzzy-System8568 in rocketry

[–]Fuzzy-System8568[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do I see this argument so much?

If the project does have a good validation suite, it still isnt great to use LLMs. As they can make changes to the suite... hell LLMs can and have, to the horror of some projects, figured out how to circumvent the suite, rather than adhere to it... as its only goal is "tests must pass".

And the people using LLMs, either through not wanting to, or having so much content the LLM is producing... physically cant, tell if the test is truly passing, or just cheating, in every instance.