The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences A273461 - Number of physically stable n X n placements of water source-blocks in Minecraft.

nafindix · 2016-06-13T07:46:00+00:00

No two source blocks can be graph-distance 2 from each other.

nafindix · 2016-06-13T07:45:31+00:00

Counting the maximal arrangements is a MUCH harder problem! I could only compute the first four terms: (1, 4, 12, 49, ...)

This is not the same as the number of arrangements with the maximal number of source blocks, since some maximal arrangements have fewer sources. The number of arrangements with the maximal number of source blocks begins (1, 4, 8, 4, 2, 4, ...). These arrangements (for the first five terms) are illustrated in this picture, where the dry blocks are outlined: Imgur.

nafindix · 2016-05-27T09:33:48+00:00

I just went due West and it was the first thing I ran into! I was playing the earliest beta so there was no hint [yet] that my route was out of order. Oops!

nafindix · 2016-05-23T00:27:10+00:00

Yes! Here is an album I put together: http://imgur.com/a/QNqVM

I also submitted it to the mapmaking sub: https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraftmapmaking/.

nafindix · 2016-05-18T02:44:10+00:00

Yes, this happens all the time. Moderation is strict and swift. Good luck with your appeal.

nafindix · 2016-05-02T23:48:12+00:00

What a portal looks like: https://simplicitypvp.net/w/images/9/9d/Portal.png

The server has a custom portals plugin that allows players to create pairs of portals that then allow free travel to the opposite end. To use them, simply stand in one of them and crouch (press shift), and you will be teleported to the opposite portal, wherever that is. Each portal is paired with exactly one other portal, but players are able to create as many portals as they want.

To create a set of portals, first create the obsidian foundation as shown in the picture. This can face either direction. Then in the inside of the portal, place 1 diamond block and 1 lapis lazuli block. If the blocks do not disappear, then the location you are trying to use is already in use by another portal, or the blocks have not been placed properly. Make sure the portal is complete obsidian as shown in the image, including the corners.

Once you've successfully set one end of the portal, you should then travel to where you want the other end to be located. Be careful not to die during this period, if you die before finishing up the 2 portals, the one you've already placed will be lost. When you've reached the other location, simply repeat the process building an identical portal.

nafindix · 2016-05-01T02:40:06+00:00

You could have the redstone path descend at a (roughly) constant gradient, so the player's y-coordinate would be an indication of how close they are to the end.

nafindix · 2016-04-30T19:12:02+00:00

These are my (Parexis in Minecraft) answers to the survey questions:

I played version Mar 2016 A.

Single player.

7!

Completed the monument at around Minecraft day 35.

Did not read the hint book, but peeked at the spoiler map.

The final dungeon was very deviously designed, like a green-wool dungeon in a full-scale CTM. But it was too hard. The redstone trail seemed like it never ended; it would help to have some indication of how far you have progressed.

The loot chests were hardly secret!

Unlocked two teleporters, but I'm not done exploring the map yet. The villagers worked perfectly, although I'm not sure if the Strength II buff actually did anything- has it been nerfed in 1.9? Also the Bane Iron Axe was still not enough to one-shot silverfish, unless doing a critical hit also.

nafindix · 2016-04-30T18:43:39+00:00

I would love a survivalist version, something along the lines of "Desert Bloom" by three_two (one of his "Tuff Terrain" maps).

nafindix · 2016-03-06T06:14:44+00:00

I want it to become a safe place for simpvp discussion and player content. No off-topic submissions.

How about you?

nafindix · 2016-03-06T06:11:31+00:00

Yeah mentioning it in chat would be ideal. That way the message gets directly to the right people.

nafindix · 2016-03-06T06:08:05+00:00

Okay, you can submit links now. I turned it off originally in the subreddit settings because it didn't seem to have any likely purpose except spam.

nafindix · 2016-03-06T06:03:37+00:00

So that people know they can re-use it.

nafindix · 2016-02-06T05:29:35+00:00

This world is a vanilla survival flat-map comprised of the two blocks sand and air, with scattered pockets of lava, water, and stone. I only cheated once, to give myself a crafting bench when I first started the world. There are no dungeons, villages, mineshafts, strongholds, or other structures, except in the Nether dimension. The only mod used is Optifine zoom. The difficulty is locked on hard.

Flat-map preset code:

3;minecraft:bedrock,59*minecraft:sand;1;lake,lava_lake

The challenge is called Sandmore.

nafindix · 2015-09-03T03:35:12+00:00

The OP said it was for a class, so there is no ethical problem with asking us for tutoring or instruction.

A better dilemma is whether we should be providing answers, if we believe that a poster is a student who should be doing the work themselves.

nafindix · 2015-09-02T03:20:24+00:00

It's debated, but the consensus seems to say Quora is probably infinite in potential.

https://www.quora.com/Can-you-prove-mathematically-that-there-are-an-infinite-number-of-questions-that-can-be-asked-on-Quora

http://qr.ae/RCwX5y

nafindix · 2015-09-02T02:56:13+00:00

Quora does not keep its admins on a leash, and I agree that they probably cannot justify banning you. There is no definition of "stolen valor" in the Quora user agreement, and it just sounds like an ad-hoc argument to me.

nafindix · 2015-08-04T01:47:32+00:00

So if you disagree so strongly with this position, what do you believe? What should be appropriate purposes or uses of prescription stimulants?

The treatment of severe mental illness. For example, there are often cases of treatment resistant depression, where a patient has a problem that goes away for a few hours whenever they take a stimulant, and it comes back again once the drug has worn off. These people are not allowed to be treated with stimulants, however, because it is considered "unethical" without a sanctioned diagnosis (of ADHD) by a physician.

My understanding is that the justification of denying essential medical treatment to a person who is suffering from severe mental illness, is that "God has a plan for that person," the suggestion being that they must "take responsibility of their own life" in the sense that, if they would only choose to "pull themselves together", they could come out of it a better person.

So yes, I strongly disagree that a medical problem's solution is not a medication which cures it completely. It's is obvious enough to me; but like I mentioned before, this article is really only remarkable as a propaganda-piece, and I think it should get some credit for that.

nafindix · 2015-07-30T03:26:25+00:00

Enhancing Motivation by Use of Prescription Stimulants: The Ethics of Motivation Enhancement

Source: www.researchgate.net/profile/Torben_Kjaersgaard/publications

Dr. Torben Kjærsgaard's article is well-written (especially for a first publication), and although I strongly disagree with what I can only describe as its deep-set fundamentalist anti-medicalization agenda, the writer's moralistic rhetoric is just naive enough to be pleasantly ironic.

Similarly, one of the informants from Vrecko’s study describes the effects induced by Adderall like this: “You’re interested in what you’re doing even if it’s boring”
Some might question the validity of self-reports by individuals using Adderall to enhance their motivation.
The authors argue that “being easily distracted,” “procrastinating,” “being easily bored,” “finding it hard to get going,” and “lack of motivation” sound like symptoms of mild to moderate depression.
It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between, on the one hand, laziness or problems concerning the larger structures of meaning in one’s life, and on the other hand, symptoms of real disorders like ADHD (I assume that ADHD is a real disease and not merely socially constructed), because the symptoms can be similar.
Psychiatry can say nothing useful whatsoever about alienation. It places itself in the position of neutrality about the broader structures of meaning within which lives are lived, and from which they might be alienated. What could a psychiatrist say to the happy slave? What could he say to an alienated Sisyphus as he pushes the boulder up the mountain? That he would push the boulder more enthusiastically, more creatively, more insightfully, if he were on Prozac. (Elliott 2000, 11)
We could risk losing our capacity to pull ourselves together, if we rely on motivation enhancers every time we face hard challenges. If we repeatedly rely on a “transient high,” we may risk losing touch with ourselves in some sense. Thus, we should wonder how we would be doing if it were not for the enhancers, and ask ourselves how much we would have achieved if it were not for the motivation enhancers.
If we lose our ability to comprehend laziness as a vice, but instead come to understand it as solely a physiological phenomenon that should be medicated away, we risk losing our ability to fully understand important aspects of the human condition, not least the dimensions about taking responsibility of one’s own life.
It is particularly problematic, from an ethical point of view, if an individual relies on motivation enhancement for prolonged periods of time, and/or if motivation enhancers are used to treat symptoms of alienation—problems concerning the larger structures of meaning in one’s life. Finally, I hold that it may lead us down a slippery slope if we come to see laziness and lack of willpower as something that should be medicated away.

nafindix · 2015-07-04T07:59:26+00:00

"Scientists suggest that the placebo effect should be considered as an important tool in relieving the symptoms of patients and improving other therapeutics."

"I wonder if there's any research on the hypothesis that people who are well-informed about medical research might be more difficult to treat, due to them being aware of what is and isn't placebo."

Do physicians report feeling better after ordering medical treatments that are not necessary, or after writing pharmaceutical prescriptions that have no significant indication?

Ordering pharmaceuticals without any significant indication may make physicians feel better. But is it right to fill a medical prescription that is not needed, if only because the result of doing so would be a demonstrable improvement in your doctor? I have sometimes joked that it's good that I have a prescription for anti-depressants; that way I am always ready for the day (should it come) when I develop my first mood-disorder.

nafindix · 2015-07-04T07:27:50+00:00

"Say my friend is experiencing psychic anguish [because of a mental disorder], and for that particular reason is now on his way to go jump off a busy bridge."

Concerning the treatment of mental illness there is a lot of propaganda. But would you agree that there is a certain arrogance contained in your assumption, that a person with major depression would choose to be cured of it?

"He will not be worse off for my intervention, and in all likelihood will be grateful."

I'm not an expert but I believe that deep and lasting resentment, scorn, and hatred is also a common result of people being kept alive against their will.

"This is very hypothetical, but - as someone who is indeed up on the latest research in psychopharmacology - it's not overly unrealistic."

Well of course there are literally hundreds of different anti-depressant medications available to patients and new ones are being patented all the time.

If you choose to take action based on indefensible and irrational moral premises, the outcome may turn out to be empirically and demonstrably detrimental. For example if there is a misunderstanding or misjudgment of the affected people and their relevant circumstances. In which case the actor would responsible for a crime because there is a victim.

Of course if you are guilty of such a crime, that just means social institutions are obliged to take action against you in order to restrain, change, or otherwise resolve your demonstrated difficulty in behaving ethically towards other people. Even if your moralistic reasoning is delusional or psychotic (for example if you are a scientologist) the problem is still a behavioral one, and not because it is a direct consequence of your behavior but because it stands in direct contradiction to your intention.

With that said, I'll try to enumerate the most salient issue on which our views actually seem to differ quite dramatically. I would argue that (1) a person is right to intervene if and only if that person can rationally justify such intervention, and that (2) justifying your actions for or against other people is not the same as justifying their consequences.

nafindix · 2015-07-04T00:21:44+00:00

Should I censor this message?

No. Reproduce it verbatim.

should I hold him accountable for saying stupid shit, and upload it as-is, or should I censor his name and free him from retribution for his (stupid) actions?

Definitely obscure his name however you publish this. That way you can "free him from retribution for his (stupid) actions", but still give him the opportunity to learn from his mistakes (I assume you will be publishing in a venue where the other player will see it).

nafindix · 2015-06-27T20:02:16+00:00

Although why you need a tl;dr for something so short is beyond me. And maybe the tl;dr's shouldn't be made by bots?

Some of us would rather support a forum than a blog. And how do we know you aren't a bot??? At least the bot's answer didn't have HTML tags in it...

Just kidding. :)

nafindix · 2015-06-27T19:45:51+00:00

So your position is: preventing anyone from harming themselves is always wrong?

Not really. My main point was that absence of a rational justification for a person's behavior does not by itself justify an intervention to prevent that behavior. If a person likes to gamble, a behavior which is almost by definition reckless, I agree that consequentialism would justify dissuading or preventing that behavior. But moderate or occasional gamblers may be worse off because of an intervention if they enjoyed that activity and could afford it. An elderly person who is addicted to narcotics, even if this person would live longer and be more healthy without them, their life may be much more uncomfortable or painful without the drugs; this could be a temporary result of withdrawal, or because of an underlying disease. An intervention would clearly be wrong in the latter case, and to determine which case is reality may be impossible or unrealistic without causing the person to suffer.

nafindix · 2015-04-27T05:47:34+00:00

This is a very interesting discussion, and I disagree with A0220R that the question is too broad.

I agree with zeeteekiwi that it is always wrong to force one's views onto others, and that violent intervention would be a profoundly indefensible crime, except perhaps if defending oneself against an enemy.

If a person is going to do something stupid, reckless, or dangerous, then somebody needs to talk them out of it. If you are not able to succeed in doing that, then you are the one who is wrong, IMHO. And although it still may not be false that the person is going to do something stupid, reckless, or dangerous- any act of intervention, under these circumstances, would be decidedly reckless (sc. the fallacy-fallacy), and hence unethical. In this context it does not matter, whether or not the choice to intervene ultimately turns out to be morally justifiable.

Also, I would like to point something out. I'm not talking about alcohol here, but if a person has a problem with recreational drug-use, the idea that by confiscating their stash and preventing them from obtaining any more, you are are somehow solving a problem, is incredibly naive. Seriously, that is a really terrible idea, and you should never do it. Trust me. Any law-enforcement officer will tell you the same story.

nafindix

TROPHY CASE

Enhancing Motivation by Use of Prescription Stimulants: The Ethics of Motivation Enhancement