basman

Based on looking at the games at the end of the post, it seems unlikely. Both sides play extremely poorly — gpt-instruct is just slightly less bad — and I don't see any reasonable engine outputting those moves.

Also a bad argument: rephrasing GP's "We don't know enough to be sure this is safe" as "This is definitely unsafe".

The raycast probably disambiguated the state pretty well, such that it essentially had to memorize a few hundred actions, so that it did end up basically doing a sort of asynchronous distributed Dijkstra's algorithm.

352 with all options and limit 1000. Anyone do better? :)

This is a misleading article in the following sense: the implication is "here are these seven surprising factors that are correlated with successful marriages". Except, in recent decades US divorce rates have bifurcated into two groups — well educated, affluent people who get married later and have lower divorce rates, and less well-off people who have a higher divorce rate. Given this one fact, most of the factors in the article are completely unsurprising. For example, it would be surprising if going on a honeymoon was not correlated positively with a successful marriage given that it is positively correlated with income.

So yes, they would be runtime errors in Python. But that's not such a catastrophe, actually. The way I write Python is by being in an IPython shell, writing short functions, unit-testing them as I go. So the development-time cost of those runtime errors is not very high, and in my experience offset by the flexibility and interactiveness. Writing in a functional style without much mutable state is really the thing that I find saves development/debugging time.

Your type checker catches array indexing bugs? Impressive.

Not a book, but Andrew Ng's coursera course (or Stanford class video lectures) are great and have lots of practical tips.

Or, perhaps easier:

scoped_ptr<Image> image(allocate_image(...));

What about the fact that 13 of the warmest years on record happened in the last 15 years?

> He basically wanted to upgrade just one (obscure) app, and the process triggered the automatic removal of Gnome2 and installation of Unity. Just _IMAGINE_ how nightmarish this must look for normal users. You simply dont remove somebodys installed desktop sneakily from under their feet. You simply dont. That feels like the total loss of control over your computer.

Hmm, that's not exactly what happened, according to the link: "I upgraded to Ubuntu 11.04 a week or so back in order to get a more recent version of SCons."

Your overall point is well taken, but I wonder how much it affects what I think of as "normal users", who don't care so much about upgrading to the bleeding edge of scons. Consider a hypothetical user of Hardy, so they've had it for four years: what are they actually missing if what they do is web surfing, email, and maybe document editing?