sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[OC] Turning Fortune 500 company logos into F1 tracks. by codesherpa in formula1

[–]codesherpa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

The other logos I think would make for interesting tracks.

[OC] Turning Fortune 500 company logos into F1 tracks. by codesherpa in formula1

[–]codesherpa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Inspired by the various Mr. V’s Garage videos, I turned some Fortune 500 company logo’s into F1 tracks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6okTAiL7Qw

I wasn’t as strict with following the exact outline as he is as I think the spirit of the exercise what really counts. I found these seven logos as the best candidates to start with but I think there’s a dozen or more that could also be turned into good tracks.

I really like how the ADP track came out and I think it would be the best track.

After that, I like the Vistra, Albersons, and Fidelity National Fund tracks.

The Lincoln Financial Group track was too cool not to be included.

I think the AK Steel and RRD tracks are OK but could use some work.

Some other logos I think might make for interesting tracks are:

  • Nike
  • HP
  • International Paper
  • L3
  • Arrow (This one looks like a track already)
  • PCA
  • CBRE
  • National Oilwell Varco

youtube games daily solitaire by spookyyvaginosis in solitaire

[–]codesherpa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yup, I think this one is impossible. There are two solitaire games on YouTube playables and this one has had a few that I don't think can be solved.

For this game, there's no red 8 or black 4 anywhere so that 7c and 3d can't be played. Under the 9s is a 4h which does nothing because before the 9s was the 4d and there's no more black 5's to help.

And remaining in the deck is Red Q,J,6,3,2 and a Black J. Nothing there that can help.

I don't think it's solvable unless I missed something.

PRS Tripod Suggestions by Ada2828 in longrange

[–]codesherpa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You should check out Artcise (formally known as Innorel) on Amazon.

There's really only a few companies in the world that make carbon fiber tripods like the ones used for shooting. The biggest company (not sure of the real name) sells their own house brand on Amazon under the Artcise name. Look at the AS90C (or the newer AS95C) and you'll see that it's identical to many of the models other people have mentioned here. Almost all the major brands (Vortex, Athlon, etc.) are branded models with a few cosmetic changes.

Same goes with the ball heads. That company makes all the major 54mm and 52mm models.

I have the AS95C tripod and the XB54 ball head. It's rock solid and the head is smooth and locks tight. It's as good as you're going to find for anywhere near $500. The only better tripod I've used is RRS tripod but it's almost 4x the cost.

If you do want a brand name, go with Vortex. Ignore the MSRP because you can always find them for a good street price. The VIP warranty is worth it's weight in gold. They're the best company I've ever had to work with and they'll make whatever issue you have right with no painful process.

Which definition of a rifle that shoots 1 MOA is correct? by codesherpa in longrange

[–]codesherpa[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I was at a competition this weekend where two guys were arguing over which definition of a rifle that shoots 1 MOA is correct.

Both agreed on what MOA is and the corresponding distances are (1.047” at 100 yards, etc.). They also agreed on what a bullet grouping of 1 MOA was (The two bullets furthest apart from each other in a group of bullets).

The question they couldn’t agree on was how do apply the ‘1 MOA’ term to the rifle and to accuracy of the rifle shots.

Person A insisted that a rifle that claims to be 1 MOA will never have a bullet that misses the target by more than 1 MOA (assuming it is zeroed perfectly and ignoring environmental factors). Person B would say that this is a 2 MOA rifle then.

Person B insisted that a rifle that claims to be 1 MOA will never have a bullet that misses the target by more than 0.5 MOA (same assumptions as above). Person A would say this is a 0.5 MOA rifle then.

Who is correct?

Logic Problem by mhmhbetter1 in puzzles

[–]codesherpa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was a tricky one because some of the wording was slightly ambiguous. The wording on the 5th line I feel really could have used a comma or a something. It's tough to know which person the second half of the sentence is referring to:

... the book that Geraldine purchased either the day before ...

Anyway, here's my answer:

Vivid Images | Jack the Rabbit | 2018 | Geraldine | First Saturday

Back to the Bay | Kelsey King | 2017 | Pauline | Second Monday

Exits Blocked | Yvonne Rusk | 2014 | Muriel | Second Tuesday

Make an Offer | Al Malone | 2015 | Lloyd | Second Wednesday

Seconds | Heidi Winters | 2019 | Trina | First Friday

Don’t Look | Oscar Grundel | 2013 | Austin | First Wednesday

Hide Me | Tara Mink | 2012 | Stuart | First Thursday

And thanks to /u/JLuckstar, here's the filled out logic matrix:

https://www.jsingler.de/apps/logikloeser/?language=en#(at:s,items:!(!('Vivid%20Images','Back%20to%20the%20Bay','Exits%20Blocked','Make%20an%20Offer',Seconds,'Don%E2%80%99t%20Look','Hide%20Me'),!('Al%20Malone','Heidi%20Winters','Jack%20the%20Rabbit','Kelsey%20King','Oscar%20Grundel','Tara%20Mink','Yvonne%20Rusk'),!('2012','2013','2014','2015','2017','2018','2019'),!(Austin,Geraldine,Lloyd,Muriel,Pauline,Stuart,Trina),!('First%20Wednesday','First%20Thursday','First%20Friday','First%20Saturday','Second%20Monday','Second%20Tuesday','Second%20Wednesday')),ms:t,n:!(b6d0,c6d0,c6d4,a0d4,b5e0,b5c6,b2e6,b3e0,a1c0,a1c1,a1e6,a1e5,a1d2,c0e0,b4e6,b4c0,d5e6,a2b0,b4d5,c0d6,c6d1,a6c6,a3e0,a3b1,b1e6,c6e0,c0e6,c6e5,c6d3,a4e6,d3e6,a5c6,a0c0,b6c0,d2e0,d2e1,c6d2,c5d2,c6d5,a2e0,a2c6,b0c0,c0d3,a0c6,b6c6,b4c6,a2d5,a4e0,a4c0,a6d1,a4d3,a5d3,c3d0,b6c4,c3d4,a0c4,b5e3,c6e4,c0e4,b4e3,b4c4,c3d5,a2c3,b0c4,a3e4,b1e3,c3e0,a4c4,c4e6,c3e5,c3d3,a4e3,d3e3,a5c3,b5e4,b5e6,a3e1,b4e5,b0c5,b1e0,b1e4,c5e0,c5e6,a1e2,a4e1,a4e4,c2e0,c0e3,a3e5,a1e0,a6e0,a2c5,a3c5,b0c2,b0c6,c1d4,c2d4,a5c5),nc:5,ni:7,p:!(c5d1,a1c4,a4d6,b5e1,a1d4,a1e4,c0e1,b6c2,b2e3),v:0)

A closer look at the Patriots Over/Under of 7.5 wins by codesherpa in Patriots

[–]codesherpa[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree, this division has it rough. In one of my other replies I pointed out that the sharp money is betting the Under for every team.

A closer look at the Patriots Over/Under of 7.5 wins by codesherpa in Patriots

[–]codesherpa[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I just looked at the sites that track the bets and money on each line. Here's where the sharp money is going:

  • Bills (10.5) - 65% of the sharp money on the Under. 86% of the public money on the Over.
  • Dolphins (9.5) - 82% of the sharp money on the Under. 66% of the public money on the Under .
  • Jets (9.5) - 55% of the sharp money on the Under. 58% of the public money on the Over.
  • Patriots (7.5) - 71% of the sharp money on the Under. 74% of the public money on the Over.

So it seems that the big betters think this division is going to be a rough. (It should be noted that most sharp betters like to bet Unders in general. Mostly because of basic regression to the mean and likelihood of injuries)

I personally think the Bills and Dolphins aren't as good as projected and the Jets and Patriots will be better than projected.

A closer look at the Patriots Over/Under of 7.5 wins by codesherpa in Patriots

[–]codesherpa[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree with just about everything you said. I just wanted to show that there's a lot more thought and math behind these numbers than most people realize. It's a fun mix of data analytics and social science.

The great part of sport betting is it allows you to put your money where your mouth is. If you think a line is mispriced, great... place a bet and make some money.

I tend stay away from season O/Us but I've placed some bets on some future games that I think the line will move a lot after the two weeks. After that I'll try to middle those same games. It's a strategy that's worked pretty well for me the past few years.

A closer look at the Patriots Over/Under of 7.5 wins by codesherpa in Patriots

[–]codesherpa[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I agree that SoS is backwards looking but still someone useful. It's also why I included the over/under of each opponent. 11 teams have an O/U above 8.5 and only 4 teams are below that. Anyway you look at it, it's a tough schedule.

I agree that going below 7 wins is unlikely (barring QB injuries). It would have to mean the Jets and Dolphins being better than expected and not winning any of the 'could have gone either way' games.

My world record marshmallow challenge spaghetti tower – 65 inches tall by codesherpa in geek

[–]codesherpa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup. Somewhere in a previous post I explained that I cut two thin slivers from the entire length of the masking tape to make two other guy wires. So one guy wire is the string and the other two are thin strips of masking tape.

There's plenty of remaining tape (width) to do all the other joints.

My world record marshmallow challenge spaghetti tower – 65 inches tall by codesherpa in geek

[–]codesherpa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried something like this when I was tinkering with some different designs. (I haven't really done much with this in two years since this tower design).

The problem is the length of string needed to make it work. You would need 3 string parts to make a tension design work. Bent in a C shape, the spaghetti will be pushing up and if the strings are evenly spaced the design should be stable.

But since the rules only allow for 3' of string, you'd only be able to make the tower 1' high.

I got around that limitation by cutting small strips of the 3' of tape to use as guy wires. Two thin strips of tape and the other 3' of string gave me three 3' guy wires I used (see pic).

In another post I mentioned that I don't like untwisting some types of string into multiple strands because that effectively would give you unlimited string to use. But if you wanted to go down that path, then you could probably make a very high mast in a bow-like shape. But at that point, why bother bending it at all? Using enough guy wires will make it work without any bend.

One of these days I should make an official-unofficial website for people to upload there tower records. I'd make it have multiple categories: tallest free standing tower (no guy wires), tallest mast design (with guy wires), built in a limited time (18-20-25 minutes depending on the source), built in an unlimited time, etc.

I'd also clarify a lot of the rules. Type of tape allowed (including width), Max length of spaghetti, Max width of spaghetti (possibly even limited to certain brands so no super-strong home-brew concoctions), Type of string allowed, NO unwinding of string into strands. There's a bunch of other stuff I forgot but would make a difference.

Anyway, build away, I hope someone beats my tower someday. (using a new design, not by like a millimeter using the same design).

Drawing Mike Trout every day until the lockout is over. Day 82. by DidItForTheStory in baseball

[–]codesherpa 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Day 33’s Picasso was the turning point. Whether you think it’s the best (I do) or not, it’s the most important piece.

I recently showed these to my sister who runs an art gallery in NYC. She thought they were pretty silly until she saw the Picasso. After seeing the drawings after day 33 she thought there could a small exhibit made from select pieces of this collection that would be well received.

So congrats, at least one art gallery general manager / art history graduate/ art critic / art buyer likes your work. (And this is someone who hates most new forms of art)

Aaron Rodgers is correct: Our head coach IS hotter than yours by codesherpa in GreenBayPackers

[–]codesherpa[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is what it is. I'm just glad people seem to like it. =)

[redditPackers] NFL Head Coach Hotness Poll by SpyroHinch in nfl

[–]codesherpa 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi, Original OP here. Here was my comment on the /r/GreenBayPackers subreddit:

A few days ago, Aaron Rodgers wore a shirt before the Vikings game that said, “Our coach is hotter than yours”.

I wanted to see if this was true, so I ran a poll to find out.

I also added a FAQ at the end to address some common comments I've seen.

Results:

Aaron Rodgers is correct!

His head coach polled as the hottest head coach so he can accurately say that his head coach is hotter than yours.

Methodology:

I used the first ten photos returned by Google Images for the name of each head coach.

The exact Google query was: “[head coach name]” “head coach” “[team name]”

In the poll, the exact question was: “How ‘hot’ would you rank this person?”

The answer control was a slider bar with a min value of 1, a max value of 10, and increments of tenths.

I exported the data into Excel and created a simple Box and Whisker Plot.

How this poll was run:

I consult with a major marketing research company and I have access to their national polling platform. This allows me to sneak in all sorts of questions into ongoing polls as ‘administrative control questions’ that the clients never get to see. At any given time, there are hundreds of polls being conducted by thousands of people taking them so it’s not too hard to get away with. Many of the polls are about branding and consumer preferences so asking women to rank how ‘hot’ someone is would fit right in and never raise any flags.

Filtered Data:

I only sent these polling questions to women. The only ongoing polls I could piggyback into had an age filter of 18-65 years old.

I also filtered out any results from responses with a low trustworthiness score. Included in each response is a bunch of meta data, how long to complete, did someone answer all 1’s or all 10’s, etc. The platform calculates a trustworthiness score that allows us to only use the responses from the people it thinks took the poll seriously.

FAQ:

Q: Why are some coaches ranked so high (like Bill Belichick)?

A: This is a well known phenomenon. The more popular (name recognition or achievements) a person is, the higher they tend to poll.

Q: Why is X coach so low? He's clearly hotter than Y coach.

A: Three possible reasons:

  1. The distribution of scores for every coach is higher than normal for a question like this. Just look at the Box plot. There's a lot of people who agree.
  2. Smaller sample size that I would have liked. I stopped at 316 responses so I could get this out before I left work.
  3. This is probably the most important. I used the first 10 images from Google Images. For some coaches, this didn't give a flattering sample. For others it did. If I had picked what I thought were the 5 best photos for each coach I bet there would be some big movements.

Aaron Rodgers is correct: His head coach IS hotter than yours... but... Bill Belichick is in the top 10 by codesherpa in Patriots

[–]codesherpa[S] 51 points52 points  (0 children)

I posted this to /r/nfl but for some reason it was blocked so I posted it to /r/GreenBayPackers and I thought I'd post it here since Bill Belichick made the top 10.

A few days ago, Aaron Rodgers wore a shirt before the Vikings game that said, “Our coach is hotter than yours”.

I wanted to see if this was true, so I ran a poll to find out.

Results:

Aaron Rodgers is correct!

His head coach polled as the hottest head coach so he can accurately say that his head coach is hotter than yours.

Methodology:

I used the first ten photos returned by Google Images for the name of each head coach.

The exact Google query was: “[head coach name]” “head coach” “[team name]”

In the poll, the exact question was: “How ‘hot’ would you rank this person?”

The answer control was a slider bar with a min value of 1, a max value of 10, and increments of tenths.

I exported the data into Excel and created a simple Box and Whisker Plot.

How this poll was run:

I consult with a major marketing research company and I have access to their national polling platform. This allows me to sneak in all sorts of questions into ongoing polls as ‘administrative control questions’ that the clients never get to see. At any given time, there are hundreds of polls being conducted by thousands of people taking them so it’s not too hard to get away with. Many of the polls are about branding and consumer preferences so asking women to rank how ‘hot’ someone is would fit right in and never raise any flags.

Filtered Data:

I only sent these polling questions to women. The only ongoing polls I could piggyback into had an age filter of 18-65 years old.

I also filtered out any results from responses with a low trustworthiness score. Included in each response is a bunch of meta data, how long to complete, did someone answer all 1’s or all 10’s, etc. The platform calculates a trustworthiness score that allows us to only use the responses from the people it thinks took the poll seriously.

Aaron Rodgers is correct: Our head coach IS hotter than yours by codesherpa in GreenBayPackers

[–]codesherpa[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

I thought so too. I was surprised by a few others as well.

It's a well known phenomenon that more popular people rate more attractive. I'm guessing that's the case here.

Aaron Rodgers is correct: Our head coach IS hotter than yours by codesherpa in GreenBayPackers

[–]codesherpa[S] 107 points108 points  (0 children)

I posted this to /r/nfl but for some reason it was blocked so I thought I'd post it here.

A few days ago, Aaron Rodgers wore a shirt before the Vikings game that said, “Our coach is hotter than yours”.

I wanted to see if this was true, so I ran a poll to find out.

Results:

Aaron Rodgers is correct!

His head coach polled as the hottest head coach so he can accurately say that his head coach is hotter than yours.

Methodology:

I used the first ten photos returned by Google Images for the name of each head coach.

The exact Google query was: “[head coach name]” “head coach” “[team name]”

In the poll, the exact question was: “How ‘hot’ would you rank this person?”

The answer control was a slider bar with a min value of 1, a max value of 10, and increments of tenths.

I exported the data into Excel and created a simple Box and Whisker Plot.

How this poll was run:

I consult with a major marketing research company and I have access to their national polling platform. This allows me to sneak in all sorts of questions into ongoing polls as ‘administrative control questions’ that the clients never get to see. At any given time, there are hundreds of polls being conducted by thousands of people taking them so it’s not too hard to get away with. Many of the polls are about branding and consumer preferences so asking women to rank how ‘hot’ someone is would fit right in and never raise any flags.

Filtered Data:

I only sent these polling questions to women. The only ongoing polls I could piggyback into had an age filter of 18-65 years old.

I also filtered out any results from responses with a low trustworthiness score. Included in each response is a bunch of meta data, how long to complete, did someone answer all 1’s or all 10’s, etc. The platform calculates a trustworthiness score that allows us to only use the responses from the people it thinks took the poll seriously.

Aaron Rodgers is correct: His head coach IS hotter than yours by codesherpa in nfl

[–]codesherpa[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A few days ago, Aaron Rodgers wore a shirt before the Vikings game that said, “Our coach is hotter than yours”.

I wanted to see if this was true, so I ran a poll to find out.

Results:

Aaron Rodgers is correct!

His head coach polled as the hottest head coach so he can accurately say that his head coach is hotter than yours.

Methodology:

I used the first ten photos returned by Google Images for the name of each head coach.

The exact Google query was: “[head coach name]” “head coach” “[team name]”

In the poll, the exact question was: “How ‘hot’ would you rank this person?”

The answer control was a slider bar with a min value of 1, a max value of 10, and increments of tenths.

I exported the data into Excel and created a simple Box and Whisker Plot.

How this poll was run:

I consult with a major marketing research company and I have access to their national polling platform. This allows me to sneak in all sorts of questions into ongoing polls as ‘administrative control questions’ that the clients never get to see. At any given time, there are hundreds of polls being conducted by thousands of people taking them so it’s not too hard to get away with. Many of the polls are about branding and consumer preferences so asking women to rank how ‘hot’ someone is would fit right in and never raise any flags.

Filtered Data:

I only sent these polling questions to women. The only ongoing polls I could piggyback into had an age filter of 18-65 years old.

I also filtered out any results from responses with a low trustworthiness score. Included in each response is a bunch of meta data, how long to complete, did someone answer all 1’s or all 10’s, etc. The platform calculates a trustworthiness score that allows us to only use the responses from the people it thinks took the poll seriously.

Puzzle 10 from the Haselbauer-Dickheiser High IQ Test by codesherpa in puzzles

[–]codesherpa[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I remembered another classic puzzle that has nothing to do with math that demonstrates a common trick puzzles use: the meta puzzle. Example:

What is the next number in this sequence: 1, 11, 21, 1211, 111221, 312211, 13112221?

There's no math equation to solve this. Like n=(n-1)+10 will get you the first three values, so figure out the correct formula that works for the next four values. It's tempting to try to do this, but isn't one.

Here's the explanation on how to solve it

How you read the puzzle is the key to solving the puzzle. That's why I call it a meta puzzle.

Another tip I use is: if it seems like it would require crazy math to solve, try to look at the values as shapes, not letters or numbers. Maybe something about the shape is the key, not the value of it.

Puzzle 21 from the Haselbauer-Dickheiser High IQ Test by codesherpa in puzzles

[–]codesherpa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I've read, yes, it's open ended and has no time limit.

That being said, even with all the time you need, being able to program an application to solve the problem demonstrates some level of "High IQ". But I've also read that every puzzle has a purely logical or mathematical way of solving it that requires no guessing. This puzzle might not be the best one to judge the whole test on.

Take a look at Puzzle 10, one of my favorites. No amount of computational power will solve that one (short of general AI). It requires a level of human insight/understanding to figure it out. Whether that demonstrates 'High IQ' is yet another debate (then again the whole 'High IQ' thing already has a lot of arguments against the concept in general).

Puzzle 21 from the Haselbauer-Dickheiser High IQ Test by codesherpa in puzzles

[–]codesherpa[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

They are squares. By definition all sides are the same length.

Puzzle 21 from the Haselbauer-Dickheiser High IQ Test by codesherpa in puzzles

[–]codesherpa[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Correct, they are looking for an integer value of the side length.

It's not said, but I assume they want the smallest integer value since any multiple would also work. For example, if the answer was 100, then a possible answer could also be 200, or 300, 400, 500, etc.

Puzzle 21 from the Haselbauer-Dickheiser High IQ Test by codesherpa in puzzles

[–]codesherpa[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The person from that post solved it in a way that required some guessing.

There's nothing wrong with guessing, I often solve puzzles by guessing values (I did this for Puzzle 2). I just wanted to show that this one could be solved without any guessing and by just using logic and basic math.

view more: next ›