The bot at https://mrgris.com/projects/minesweepr/ does these calculations, and has a winrate of 37.8% on expert. I don't know what a more naive bot would achieve.
I think the human experts mostly care about speed rather than their average solve percentage. If they're forced to guess then they can just restart if they get it wrong.
I would go further: Anyone who has published a "scientific paper" in the last decade or so either "distrusts science" or is more likely than not a mid-wit at best.
Your posting doesn't give me the impression that you're very familiar with "science".
Isn't that true for everything, though? If I weren't a software developer I wouldn't know that I have to worry about questions like "has this plane been rebooted in the last 51 days?" [1] or "does this bank offer anything other than SMS as second factor?".
Maybe structural engineers feel safer after their Master's when they traverse a bridge, but I bet that's more the exception than the rule.
Seeing how the sausage gets made makes you realize ALL the downsides and things you'd rather not have known. That doesn't mean you can think of a way to fix science. Let alone get the required funding to make an actual attempt.
> Anyone who has published a "scientific paper" in the last decade or so either "distrusts science" or is more likely than not a mid-wit at best.
That is very unhelpful, to say the least. The amount of noise has increased, but it does not mean that the scientists who know their subject disappeared. They are still around and not any less bright than their predecessors were 30 years ago.
Steel-manning their argument, 'distrusting science' doesn't mean they throw the whole thing out, they're just aware that there is disagreement and bullshit going around within the process. As far as I can tell, it's dangerous to try to assess a topic through reading papers alone. A scientist active in the field will have read more widely, be aware of the reputations and biases of the different groups, and likely will have tried some of the published experiments themselves (replication does happen, if it's an interesting result, it's just rarely worth publishing the result).
Aren't there companies that provide the "caching server for free" as a service?
If I understand the author right, the big companies are allowed to set up caching servers at ISPs.
Isn't this basically a CDN? If you spin up your own screaming start-up you would first go with akamai or whatever and if you reach sufficient scale you set up your own agreements with ISPs.
Is the blog basically arguing for making it illegal to cut out the middle man here?
If one were really great with this - would it be possible to reproduce both the Richter and the Gould version of the WTC 1 Prelude in C Major (except maybe some flourishes)?
For reference, the first few minutes of these links:
Being the IT guy for the elderly people in my family, these days 90% of the issues they are having is with the scummy shit that Microsoft is pulling constantly.
E.g. my mother even has Office 365 and still constantly gets offers to upgrade to Office 365 shoved in her face. With the pathetic shit that MS is pulling these days I wouldn't put it beyond them to somehow be able to sign up & pay twice for Office.
Can the people working at Microsoft chime in whether they feel any shame? I'm sure it's great for their metrics but it's shows 0% respect for users and also themselves. Some journalist should ask Satya how he feels about being the CEO of the largest panhandler organization in the history of mankind.
Walkable communities would get people actually talking to each other, for a start - just from the serendipitous encounters with other people irl (like what happens in Europe).
