mingw__
Joined 6 years ago
Karma
72
Submissions
15
Member since
Jan 6
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 year ago
Seeing the integration with RetroAchievements is especially appreciated!
Comment · 2 years ago
what a weird demand to make
Comment · 2 years ago
Visitor was more of a reference to: https://grugbrain.dev/#grug-on-visitor-pattern
I assumed the AI would outright tell me the pattern was not a good choice.
Comment · 2 years ago
It's a good try. I noticed two things:
It likes to end responses like this: "Grug say, happy coding! [8 emojis]" It also told me the visitor pattern is a best practice.
Comment · 3 years ago
The Vercel way is to say "those aren't breaking changes, they're just bugs".
Comment · 4 years ago
No worries ... DeFi is a confusing space.
DAI is not algorithmic at all, but it is controlled by smart contracts. For $1.00 of DAI to be minted, a user has to post somewhere between $1.25-$1.50 of collateral. The act of creating DAI is literally that of taking out a loan. Over time, your debt to the system accrues interest. If your collateral falls under a certain price threshold, the issuer of DAI (MakerDAO), will seize your collateral to close your position. You keep the DAI, and MakerDAO liquidating you keeps the system above water and DAI at the dollar peg.
Algostables are not collateralized at all. They're more akin to ancient gold coins. Think of Luna as a small piece of gold. When UST is created, the Luna is "melted" to form the UST. At any point, the UST can then be "melted down" to get the Luna back out of it. From a certain point of view, UST literally is Luna.
Comment · 4 years ago
DAI isn't an algostable. It's overcollateralized, so to mint $1.00 of DAI, you generally need $1.50 of crypto or centralized stablecoin.
Comment · 4 years ago
algostable != overcollateralized stable. Being an overcollateralized stable means it's actually backed by something, even if it's USDC. An algostable is backed by the sister token (eg: LUNA), and relies on faith and confidence in the sister token.
Comment · 6 years ago
Probabilities have been calculated from Billy's footage that shows his alleged arcade games rendering as MAME. His random hammer smashes give points way higher than the mean, suggesting he stitched save states in an emulator.
Comment · 6 years ago
Is there any reason to believe that cheating is something that started recently?
No, and no one involved has suggested this.
Is there any reason to believe that the ROM loaded on every single original Donkey Kong cabinet is exactly the same?
Yes, unless otherwise documented by MAME.
Is there any reason to believe that the components on every single original Donkey Kong cabinet perform the same?
Yes, based on literally thousands of hours of video footage.
Comment · 6 years ago
I don't think there's disagreement - my score from 2016 is the one this article is about. The max is whatever the game's RNG will give you, and is probably somewhere close to 1.3m.
As top-tier play has gotten better, the ceiling has increased. We used to think this score was about as good as it was going to get, but only a few years prior, we thought the max was closer to 1.15m. Wild how things change.
Comment · 6 years ago
Would love to hear more about API-QL. It doesn't sound like this is something available for public use yet. Is there any plan to open source this?