I honestly don't get today's expert puzzle. When you start, horse is at 8, donkey is at 10, and cow is at 14. I get two districts for horse, which the puzzle then states "horse wins," but wouldn't the final standing then be
horse: 10, donkey: 10, cow: 14
So cow still wins? Why did it say horse wins on the "See results" screen?
Each district you draw is the only thing that counts for voting.
So, "gerrymandering" the districts to make it so the least popular "party" wins is the objective of the game. What's maybe not clear about the game is that each dot represents one animal and not say another mini district.
the numbers are just the number of hexes for each candidate, what you care about are the number of colored areas / colored squares. If you see 2 or more blue colored squares above the buttons, then the horse wins, which is what you want.
Oh ok. I thought that was the number they were ahead by. So if I was down 8 to 14, I'd have to gerrymander 7 district wins to beat the cow. It makes sense they were the count of the dots.
> In an interview, Dr. Poolos said he would not even have entertained the idea of tapering for a patient like Bowen, given her history.
“No, not rational, no way,” he said. “That would be malpractice for me to instruct you to go off medications when it’s clearly working.”
I'm a little conflicted. What is she supposed to do? She's saying the side effects are intolerable, but at the same time, this doctor is corroborating her fears that she won't be listened to. I imagine the correct answer would be prescribe an additional medication for the side effects, but it's hard to say she's wrong when she's right.
I mean maybe he could have switched her to a different medication or something but saying "she's right" is a little weird when the doctor is saying he wouldn't have done something that literally killed her.
I have a question/thought/philosophy. If AES is a relatively strong encryption method right now, _why don't we wait to crack the assets until the encryption method is easy to decrypt_? By the time that's possible, the game assets will likely be old as shit, so it would potentially sit better with everyone. If we wait, it takes on a more archival type feeling.
I understand importance of preservation, but frankly, the English WWW seem to massively and simultaneously overestimate rarity and undervalue financial costs of creative assets like 3D models and 2D images.
It's not rare that these assets cost in ranges of $10k and made in less than dozen man-hours each. They're not harvested and collected, but artificially created by individuals by work orders or as their own projects. A lot of these conversation feels like people are talking about something similar to Louvre collection items that cannot be obtained other than by somewhat illicit means, leading to discussions of which illicit means will be tolerated in the name of preservation.
No, it's something they make as we speak on Blender. Like with a mouse and a keyboard, or sometimes with a pen tablet. I think the anglosphere Internet hasn't yet reached the point where justification of dubious means can be discussed; we're at the phase where it should be educated to people more often that these are man-made creations that each has economic values.
I think you are missing the point here. The art assets in question belong to the studio. Yes, they are painstakingly made. They are made with the assistance of some very very expensive technologies. Full body scans. Facial rigging with 180 high fps cameras. Mocap suits and props in a full blown warehouse studio. The works. It's not just a 3D model. It's a rigged 3d digital twin of an actor. There's image rights, etc that have to be negotiated and deals made. Preservation would be to preserve the data as is rather than reworking it into a blender scene.
Without getting into the much debated philosophy of restoration/display of preserved things and how restoration can often cause degradation to the original piece, consider that just preserving the data in the manner you suggest also requires preserving the original software if you ever want to view it. Which requires not just preserving that original software but also all the external hardware and software that original software relies on. Quite often that's a dead end as it requires preserving an activation/license server that the preservers don't have access to.
That isn’t true, you preserve the data as is for the software as is. You can emulate under it if you need to run it. This is what internet archive has done and the proper preservation of the media is in tact. In NO WAY do you ever need to convert the data back to a workable source in its original authoring program.
You are wrong, you are basically saying "black cats exist therefore cats can't be tabby", there are plenty of preservation initiatives that preserve works in different forms when the original media can not be practically preserved or displayed. Yes best practice is to preserve as close to initial state as possible, that does not mean that when you cannot feasibly preserve the work in it's original state (with digital it's often due to drm) that you just say screw it nothing we can do but chuck it in the dustbin of history.
That's like saying bank robbers don't actually shoot guns, only people who use guns legally shoot them. It's still preservation. Or even more apt saying archeologists aren't archeologists they're tomb raiders. They may be tomb raiders but they are still archeologists.
My point is about endemic lack of general understanding for these types of arts on English part of the Internet/WWW, no offense to GP intended. It feels like listening to museum curators discussing "oil on canvas" without ever having set foot on a store that have tubes of paints and canvases on the shelf and Apple Pay stickers at the cashier.
Without more widespread recognition about how these models, arts, games, etc., are artificially made by humans, and not magically discovered, I think discussions as to how they should be handled will be always a bit off, whichever way it would go. That's my point.
horse: 10, donkey: 10, cow: 14
So cow still wins? Why did it say horse wins on the "See results" screen?
reply