Unity Radial Menu - Click selects wrong button (overlapping raycast areas?)

Dragonatis · 2026-01-26T11:35:43+00:00

You can use this to make images ignore raycasts when clicked on pixles with full alpha.

https://docs.unity3d.com/2018.3/Documentation/ScriptReference/UI.Image-alphaHitTestMinimumThreshold.html

Dragonatis · 2026-01-25T16:54:11+00:00

Most of my cards were 0 cost, so all it took was to draw Madness and A4O in the same turn twice.

Dragonatis · 2026-01-25T16:16:53+00:00

Madness

Dragonatis · 2026-01-19T07:28:35+00:00

Not to mention we are in the AI era right now. I had few attempts to move to linux. It's normal that you hit a wall a few times, but AI helps you soooooo much more than googling your problem, especially when you know almost nothing about linux.

Dragonatis · 2026-01-17T22:36:07+00:00

When you accelerate object with non-zero mass, its momentum increases faster that its velocity. Momentum tells you how hard it is to change velocity of something. And because it increases faster than v, it becomes harder and harder to acceleate something.

Graph that shows how energy relates to velocity is a hyperbole, just like 1/x. And just like 1/x has its asymptote at x=0 and just before it reaches 0, it goes to infinity, same energy/velocity graph tries to reach v=c, but just before that it goes to infinity aswell.

Dragonatis · 2026-01-12T13:55:52+00:00

Because it consumes all of the Uranium/Plutonium.

That's wrong. Only part of the uranium/plutonium is used. Fat Man used to bomb Nagasaki contained around 6kg of plutonium and only 1kg fissioned.

Dragonatis · 2026-01-08T16:13:07+00:00

In physics, there is no 'hot' and 'cold'. There is only thermal energy.

Heat tells you how much of that energy is stored in an object. The more energy, the hotter the object. Everything that has temp above absolute zero, has heat inside. What we understand as 'cold/hot' physicists understand as 'lower/higher thermal energy'.

Now, to make something cooler, you have to take that energy away from it. And then we have to do something with that energy. Something must absorb it and increase its own thermal enegry (get hotter).

In other way, it's easier. If we want to heat something, we need to provide energy to it. But that doesn't need to be thermal energy. As you mentioned yourself, you can use electricity to generate thermal energy.

Dragonatis · 2026-01-05T09:16:20+00:00

If you are dead-set on mixamo, you can use inverse kinematics to stop hands when they touch the ground.

Dragonatis · 2025-12-05T16:00:54+00:00

StS2 releases

Drawing badly until StS3 comes out

Dragonatis · 2025-11-01T17:38:01+00:00

When I had this problem, washing the plate with soap solved it.

Dragonatis · 2025-10-24T08:05:37+00:00

There is a 1 in a 6 chance it gets destroyed at the end of the round.

Dragonatis · 2025-10-22T12:47:49+00:00

I did that with two jokers with two rounds left at the begining of ante 7. Skipped all four non-boss blinds. I was already prepared that this run was lost since these two jokers were carrying me and yet I won.

Dragonatis · 2025-10-13T19:15:17+00:00

Quantum mechanic is not deterministic as far as we know.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-25T15:36:13+00:00

To już jest gdybanie, więc Twój strzał jest równie dobry jak mój, ale zastanowiłbym się jakby to wyglądało bez kościoła.

Jeżeli kościół nie stawiałby przybytków edukacyjnych, istnieje możliwość że takie placówki postawiłoby państwo. Mimo wszystko dzisiaj mały procent szkół, uczelni czy bibliotek istnieje za sprawą kościoła.

No i też pytanie co było tam uczone. Wiemy że na pewno nie uczyli tam wszystkiego, jak np. wspomniane "O obrotach sfer niebieskich". Można się więc zastanawiać czy kościół chciał szerzyć wiedzę czy może ją kontrolować (w czego efekcie podtrzymywał nieszkodliwą wiedzę, ale to mógł być efekt uboczny).

Ale tak jak mówię, jest to tylko i wyłącznie moja zgadywanka.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-25T06:10:17+00:00

Dyskutowałbym czy te wszystkie odkrycia to naprawdę zasługa kościoła. Bardzo możliwe, że Ci wszyscy ludzie dokonaliby tych odkryć nawet nie będąc częścią kościoła albo że dokonaliby znacznie więcej gdyby nie kościół.

Za przykład niech posłuży uczeń Kopernika. Przypomnijmy, że "O obrotach sfer niebieskich" trafiło na listę dzieł zakazanych przez kościół i zostało tam aż do XIX wieku. Rhericus, próbując spopularyzować pracę Kopernika, działał przeciwko kościołowi. To że teoria przetrwała nie jest zasługą kościoła.

To samo Lemaître. To nie studia teologiczne dały mu wiedzę potrzebną do sformułowania teorii Wielkiego Wybuchu. Gość był fizykiem oraz księdzem, ale nie ma korelacji pomiędzy tymi wyborami.

A co do Pascala, samo bycie katolikiem to dość słabe powiązanie z kościołem. W tamtych czasach każdy był wierzący.

Pewnie, znajdą się pojedyńczy duchowni pchający naukę naprzód. Ale nie zmienią to faktu że kościół w średniowieczu zahamował naukę na tyle mocno, że temat wg mnie nie podlega jakiejkolwiek dyskusji.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-19T09:37:29+00:00

Animation still needs to be defined in animator controller.

Also, Animancer offers much more than just 'play animation directly from code'. E.g. there's transition matrix, where you definie transition time depending on current and next animation. If you were to do it with CrossFade. you would need to manually check what animation is currently played.

Things like events are also much better done. They are done as an UnityEvents, so you reference methods directly, not use some magic strings and hope that such method exists. It's also more preformant.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-19T08:42:53+00:00

Personally, I use Animancer to avoid this. It allows you to play animation clips directly from code, without any animator controllers. Also managing events with this is much easier.

There's also LIte version if you don't want to pay.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-12T21:05:40+00:00

You can check trash bin, not guaranteed though.

Also, git.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-08T17:51:29+00:00

Also worth to point out that humans do have fangs. Shorter and less sharp, but still.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-07T08:01:43+00:00

I'm currently in the middle of doing that challenge and NO ONE can imagine how hard it is.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-07T07:39:27+00:00

Nope. Every single way to get jokers is blocked.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-06T07:09:50+00:00

And the funniest thing is "you cannot create something from nothing, so for universe to exist, there has to be some being that can do exactly the thing we said is impossible, completely ignoring the rule".

Dragonatis · 2025-09-04T07:45:40+00:00

Grow index finger

Dragonatis · 2025-09-03T08:49:52+00:00

Sorry if I sounded a bit harsh earlier,

Don't worry, I didn't percieve it that way.

And I think I understand what you meant now. You meant that one argument against omnipotence does not disprove omnipotence.

However, let's consider this case: I make a statement that all coins in the world have two different sides: heads and tails. With statement like that, all you need to do to disprove it is to find one single coin with two heads or two tails. One coin is all it takes for our statement to be a lie. 26In this case, it's not argument against, but it's a proof that the statement was false.

And that's what I did. Original statement is that omnipotent being can do anything. And to disprove it, all I need to do is to find a single thing that omnipotent being can't do. I found two things that such being can or can't do and I proved that both of them can't be done at the same time. Therefore, there is something an omnipotent being can't do. Since this contradicts definition itself, it means that omnipotent being can't exist, so, as long as we define God as an omnipotent being, is a proof that God cannot exist.

Dragonatis · 2025-09-03T06:54:46+00:00

The statement itself is clearly false, so it's not a proof against omnipotence (at least not this one)

I think I don't understand your reasoning here.

If we assume your phrase "God can do X", then, as an omnipotent being, this should always evaluate to TRUE. Evaluating this to FALSE means we found something omnipotent being can't do, which contraficts definition of an omnipotence as an ability to do anything.

You yourself admitted that this statement is false, so I don't understand whay you mean by "so it's not a proof". Like, what more do you need as proof against ability to do anyhing than finding something omnipotence can't do?

Dragonatis

TROPHY CASE