the "what number comes next?" problem
here's a sequence of numbers:
3198, 11, 734, 11, 1115, 11, 1440...
can you guess what number comes next?
this is a good post and a good explanation, however, it also goes to show exactly how bad ChatGPT currently is at what it is supposed to do, because
at a fundamental level, this isn't asking chatgpt the same question that I put at the start of this post.
this post isn't really an analogy. it's simplified somewhat, but at a fundamental level, this is literally how chatgpt works.
the true equivalent of the sequence at the start would be:
that is true. it is philosophically similar to interpolation to the point where I think conceptualizing it as "fancier interpolation" gets you a good-enough high-level sense of what's going on, but it is not literally just interpolating. it's considerably more convoluted than that in a way that would take a whole compsci lecture to explain properly.
the "what number comes next?" problem
here's a sequence of numbers:
3198, 11, 734, 11, 1115, 11, 1440...
can you guess what number comes next?
this is a good post and a good explanation, however, it also goes to show exactly how bad ChatGPT currently is at what it is supposed to do, because
at a fundamental level, this isn't asking chatgpt the same question that I put at the start of this post.
this post isn't really an analogy. it's simplified somewhat, but at a fundamental level, this is literally how chatgpt works.
the true equivalent of the sequence at the start would be:
the "what number comes next?" problem
here's a sequence of numbers:
3198, 11, 734, 11, 1115, 11, 1440...
can you guess what number comes next?
this is a good post and a good explanation, however, it also goes to show exactly how bad ChatGPT currently is at what it is supposed to do, because
at a fundamental level, this isn't asking chatgpt the same question that I put at the start of this post.
the "what number comes next?" problem
here's a sequence of numbers:
3198, 11, 734, 11, 1115, 11, 1440...
can you guess what number comes next?
I think the funniest part of this post is everyone who knows just enough about languages to correct OP but not enough to understand the whole thing so there are comments like “What the fuck do you mean American is a romance language when it’s Germanic, please talk to a linguist” while not touching on, say, “sanscript”
the case for one view: most people probably watch a video after uploading it, at least to make sure it uploaded properly
the case for zero views: a significant number of videos on youtube weren't uploaded by people. there might be more automated uploads that nobody's ever seen than manual uploads that have only been seen once
This question captivated me, so I did some digging and pulled together a little data on the topic.
I'm putting the results below the cut since I know "here's what the data says" is maybe a bit of a buzzkill response, so I want to let folks specifically opt-in to seeing them if they're interested :)
Method: I did a bunch of searches on Youtube (some for relatively generic terms and some for things more specific to my interests), set a filter on the upload date to limit the number of videos to something I could reasonably scroll through, sorted the videos by view count, and marked down how many videos had no views versus 1 view.
the thing people do where they assume anything I post about is for a video is so consistent and prevalent I hate it so much. I'm going to start blocking anyone who does this (yes even if you do it as a joke)
a naming scheme for polyominoes
polyominoes are shapes made out of orthogonally connected unit squares (like in tetris). I think they're really fun, but one problem is that there really isn't any established method for referring to them. lower-order polyominoes are generally referred to by letters that they resemble, but that doesn't scale well. there are more polyominoes than letters.
so, here's my system! full description under the cut, but here's a spreadsheet with the names for all the polyominoes with up to nine squares, if all you want is the names of these shapes.
Fact: this is going on seximal.net and then eventually it'll become its own YouTube video too
don't make me tap the sign
I don't think anyone is trying to be comedic here this is just a prediction
It was a serious prediction, yes, albeit with a humorous presentation. Like, the polyomino naming scheme absolutely sounds like something you'd put on seximal, and I also have this gut feeling that in a few years' time you'll also make it into a video, like you did with the base naming scheme. I know I'm right about the seximal part. The video is a guess based on no solid evidence
Why yes, I will flaunt the fact that I was right
I'm considering blocking you
the case for one view: most people probably watch a video after uploading it, at least to make sure it uploaded properly
the case for zero views: a significant number of videos on youtube weren't uploaded by people. there might be more automated uploads that nobody's ever seen than manual uploads that have only been seen once
what font do you use in your videos
noto serif
I noticed that in seximal.net/tkpn (the toki pona ASCII syllabary), some syllables in red occur in common non-pu words.
that’s the case for tonsi, kijetesantakalu (both nimi ku suli), and majuna (nimi ku lili).
the text says those syllables don’t occur “in any toki pona words”. since the release of ku, that’s become less meaningful. so if you want to update the page you’ll probably have to reword that too.
been meaning to update that page, I should probably do that at some point
a while back I came up with a toki pona abbreviation system that I think is much cooler than the ascii syllabary, I think I'll add that to the website too
okay, added a thing on the syllabary page mentioning that I made it before the dictionary, and added a brand new page for my cooler abbreviation system
I noticed that in seximal.net/tkpn (the toki pona ASCII syllabary), some syllables in red occur in common non-pu words.
that’s the case for tonsi, kijetesantakalu (both nimi ku suli), and majuna (nimi ku lili).
the text says those syllables don’t occur “in any toki pona words”. since the release of ku, that’s become less meaningful. so if you want to update the page you’ll probably have to reword that too.
been meaning to update that page, I should probably do that at some point
a while back I came up with a toki pona abbreviation system that I think is much cooler than the ascii syllabary, I think I'll add that to the website too
I noticed that in seximal.net/tkpn (the toki pona ASCII syllabary), some syllables in red occur in common non-pu words.
that’s the case for tonsi, kijetesantakalu (both nimi ku suli), and majuna (nimi ku lili).
the text says those syllables don’t occur “in any toki pona words”. since the release of ku, that’s become less meaningful. so if you want to update the page you’ll probably have to reword that too.
been meaning to update that page, I should probably do that at some point
I don't have any intention of telling you "you're wrong actually!!!" For disliking the game, you have very legitimate and fair reasons for it and that's cool
I do though think I disagree on your conclusion that "if you are playing the game, you are playing the game" is not a rule. It's true that it is a non-statement objectively speaking, but I think it's still legitimately applicable in this context. If you read the original rules for "The Game" and decide you do not like them and therefore you do not wish to participate, you are no longer playing the game. That's fact, and the rule "everyone who is aware of The Game is playing The Game" has no impact on it.
That being said, I think the rules of The Game are supposed to act as a social kayfabe. In the same way that wrestling is largely scripted in its narrative events, but the audience plays along for the sake of enjoyment, acting as if you are beholden to the rules of The Game is part of a kayfabe that is enjoyable and fun, to some people. There are people who take this idea way too far and actively get upset at people who break the "kayfabe" of The Game, but I don't think that's a problem inherent to The Game or kayfabe itself. To break the rules of a game means you are no longer meaningfully participating in that game, and in the case of The Game, that's the only concequence of choosing to not participate, which ends up being your goal anyway. It's still valid as a sort of kayfabe-type "rule" in a loose sense, though, far as I see it.
You're right that the "true" rules, when the kayfabe is removed, is that you are supposed to be performatively upset when you lose The Game. That's not fun for you, and I totally get why. For me personally, though, I see it as a way of bonding with strangers, particularly ones that experienced a very similar blink of time in the internet's history. Losing the game isn't a failure, it is the one and only form of interaction with The Game, and it's an entirely passive one. The sometimes-ignored sub rule that you're supposed to exclaim aloud "I just lost the game!" is, to me, a relic of a time when The Game was popular enough that many people would be reminded of it without the explicit discussion of The Game itself, such as just seeing the word "game" on its own in the wild. It was a way of keeping the spirit of the meme alive. That rule's fallen off over time though, because now that The Game is getting more and more niche, it's just kind of out of place since most people probably won't know what you're talking about, and most people aren't particularly serious enough about it to demand participation. The people that are are just.. being dicks, and using The Game as an excuse.
Anyway I hope this doesn't seem like an argument, I'm not trying to change your mind but moreso explain what parts of The Game are meaningful to me that aren't about the explicit goal of trying to make someone feel bad. Sorry this has turned into a whole thing.
wait, what exactly is it that you disagree with? it, seems like you agree with me that "everyone is playing" is an unenforceable nonstatement, which is exactly what I mean by calling it "not a real rule"
if, if you don't play the game, you're not playing the game? that's like. trivially true about all games
Yes! That is my point. It is a very basic simple unquestionable rule that all games share, but it is still true and therefore a rule, and while if this were a literal game it wouldn't need to be explicitly told, as it is used to enforce the kayfabe of The Game it is therefore given meaning.
what exactly does it add though? like. from my perspective, what this "kayfabe" contributes to The Game is that whenever I tell people I'm not playing they argue with me about it and insist that no actually everyone is playing. is there another positive thing this adds to The Game from the perspective of people who actually enjoy it, or is the whole point just to be annoying at me in particular
I mean, I expressed that already. It is, to me, a way of bonding with strangers over a particular moment in time that happened during the internet. A very small amount of people were around to know what The Game was when it was popular. It's a fond memory for me. It is not a fond memory for you. That's never gonna feel good to you, and anybody trying to argue that it should is just missing the point.
The kayfabe isn't about arguing with people to get it right, or enforcing a social Correct Path it's about...
Okay, let me rephrase my own interpretation of the 2nd rule. "If you think about The Game, you lose." That means that the win condition is, in theory, to never think about "The Game" again. If there was a reality where you could physically never stop playing The Game, you could only win by going the rest of your life never thinking about The Game. Therefore, it is all the more difficult to actively choose to not think about it, because you can never put it on pause like you can with other games. Playing pretend that I'm unable to choose to stop, for me, raises the stakes of an already unwinnable game. It's ironic. The phrasing of the original 1st rule is hard-and-fast despite being an impossible to enforce statement, and that is absurdist in a way I can find funny. Trying to force other people to find your joke funny is a shitty thing to do, and is how some people have decided to interpret the rules of The Game, and that sucks a lot. Despite that, and despite being neurodivergent myself, I can still find value in The Game as a low stakes passive meme to share with strangers.
okay yeah this is just fundamentally opposed to my idea of what "fun" is. I just don't personally see the appeal of. pretending to get worked up about something like this, or encouraging strangers (???) to do the same thing. I Acknowledge that this is apparently not a common mindset and that for many people this is an enjoyable experience, it's just. the opposite of enjoyable, for me, and it's very frustrating to constantly see people insist (jokingly or otherwise. I can't really tell most of the time so it doesn't make a difference) that it's Literally Impossible not to participate in this. but if it's something you like, great, have fun I guess
🤝 I believe that is a wrap in that case
I don't have any intention of telling you "you're wrong actually!!!" For disliking the game, you have very legitimate and fair reasons for it and that's cool
I do though think I disagree on your conclusion that "if you are playing the game, you are playing the game" is not a rule. It's true that it is a non-statement objectively speaking, but I think it's still legitimately applicable in this context. If you read the original rules for "The Game" and decide you do not like them and therefore you do not wish to participate, you are no longer playing the game. That's fact, and the rule "everyone who is aware of The Game is playing The Game" has no impact on it.
That being said, I think the rules of The Game are supposed to act as a social kayfabe. In the same way that wrestling is largely scripted in its narrative events, but the audience plays along for the sake of enjoyment, acting as if you are beholden to the rules of The Game is part of a kayfabe that is enjoyable and fun, to some people. There are people who take this idea way too far and actively get upset at people who break the "kayfabe" of The Game, but I don't think that's a problem inherent to The Game or kayfabe itself. To break the rules of a game means you are no longer meaningfully participating in that game, and in the case of The Game, that's the only concequence of choosing to not participate, which ends up being your goal anyway. It's still valid as a sort of kayfabe-type "rule" in a loose sense, though, far as I see it.
You're right that the "true" rules, when the kayfabe is removed, is that you are supposed to be performatively upset when you lose The Game. That's not fun for you, and I totally get why. For me personally, though, I see it as a way of bonding with strangers, particularly ones that experienced a very similar blink of time in the internet's history. Losing the game isn't a failure, it is the one and only form of interaction with The Game, and it's an entirely passive one. The sometimes-ignored sub rule that you're supposed to exclaim aloud "I just lost the game!" is, to me, a relic of a time when The Game was popular enough that many people would be reminded of it without the explicit discussion of The Game itself, such as just seeing the word "game" on its own in the wild. It was a way of keeping the spirit of the meme alive. That rule's fallen off over time though, because now that The Game is getting more and more niche, it's just kind of out of place since most people probably won't know what you're talking about, and most people aren't particularly serious enough about it to demand participation. The people that are are just.. being dicks, and using The Game as an excuse.
Anyway I hope this doesn't seem like an argument, I'm not trying to change your mind but moreso explain what parts of The Game are meaningful to me that aren't about the explicit goal of trying to make someone feel bad. Sorry this has turned into a whole thing.
wait, what exactly is it that you disagree with? it, seems like you agree with me that "everyone is playing" is an unenforceable nonstatement, which is exactly what I mean by calling it "not a real rule"
if, if you don't play the game, you're not playing the game? that's like. trivially true about all games
Yes! That is my point. It is a very basic simple unquestionable rule that all games share, but it is still true and therefore a rule, and while if this were a literal game it wouldn't need to be explicitly told, as it is used to enforce the kayfabe of The Game it is therefore given meaning.
what exactly does it add though? like. from my perspective, what this "kayfabe" contributes to The Game is that whenever I tell people I'm not playing they argue with me about it and insist that no actually everyone is playing. is there another positive thing this adds to The Game from the perspective of people who actually enjoy it, or is the whole point just to be annoying at me in particular
I mean, I expressed that already. It is, to me, a way of bonding with strangers over a particular moment in time that happened during the internet. A very small amount of people were around to know what The Game was when it was popular. It's a fond memory for me. It is not a fond memory for you. That's never gonna feel good to you, and anybody trying to argue that it should is just missing the point.
The kayfabe isn't about arguing with people to get it right, or enforcing a social Correct Path it's about...
Okay, let me rephrase my own interpretation of the 2nd rule. "If you think about The Game, you lose." That means that the win condition is, in theory, to never think about "The Game" again. If there was a reality where you could physically never stop playing The Game, you could only win by going the rest of your life never thinking about The Game. Therefore, it is all the more difficult to actively choose to not think about it, because you can never put it on pause like you can with other games. Playing pretend that I'm unable to choose to stop, for me, raises the stakes of an already unwinnable game. It's ironic. The phrasing of the original 1st rule is hard-and-fast despite being an impossible to enforce statement, and that is absurdist in a way I can find funny. Trying to force other people to find your joke funny is a shitty thing to do, and is how some people have decided to interpret the rules of The Game, and that sucks a lot. Despite that, and despite being neurodivergent myself, I can still find value in The Game as a low stakes passive meme to share with strangers.
okay yeah this is just fundamentally opposed to my idea of what "fun" is. I just don't personally see the appeal of. pretending to get worked up about something like this, or encouraging strangers (???) to do the same thing. I Acknowledge that this is apparently not a common mindset and that for many people this is an enjoyable experience, it's just. the opposite of enjoyable, for me, and it's very frustrating to constantly see people insist (jokingly or otherwise. I can't really tell most of the time so it doesn't make a difference) that it's Literally Impossible not to participate in this. but if it's something you like, great, have fun I guess
I don't have any intention of telling you "you're wrong actually!!!" For disliking the game, you have very legitimate and fair reasons for it and that's cool
I do though think I disagree on your conclusion that "if you are playing the game, you are playing the game" is not a rule. It's true that it is a non-statement objectively speaking, but I think it's still legitimately applicable in this context. If you read the original rules for "The Game" and decide you do not like them and therefore you do not wish to participate, you are no longer playing the game. That's fact, and the rule "everyone who is aware of The Game is playing The Game" has no impact on it.
That being said, I think the rules of The Game are supposed to act as a social kayfabe. In the same way that wrestling is largely scripted in its narrative events, but the audience plays along for the sake of enjoyment, acting as if you are beholden to the rules of The Game is part of a kayfabe that is enjoyable and fun, to some people. There are people who take this idea way too far and actively get upset at people who break the "kayfabe" of The Game, but I don't think that's a problem inherent to The Game or kayfabe itself. To break the rules of a game means you are no longer meaningfully participating in that game, and in the case of The Game, that's the only concequence of choosing to not participate, which ends up being your goal anyway. It's still valid as a sort of kayfabe-type "rule" in a loose sense, though, far as I see it.
You're right that the "true" rules, when the kayfabe is removed, is that you are supposed to be performatively upset when you lose The Game. That's not fun for you, and I totally get why. For me personally, though, I see it as a way of bonding with strangers, particularly ones that experienced a very similar blink of time in the internet's history. Losing the game isn't a failure, it is the one and only form of interaction with The Game, and it's an entirely passive one. The sometimes-ignored sub rule that you're supposed to exclaim aloud "I just lost the game!" is, to me, a relic of a time when The Game was popular enough that many people would be reminded of it without the explicit discussion of The Game itself, such as just seeing the word "game" on its own in the wild. It was a way of keeping the spirit of the meme alive. That rule's fallen off over time though, because now that The Game is getting more and more niche, it's just kind of out of place since most people probably won't know what you're talking about, and most people aren't particularly serious enough about it to demand participation. The people that are are just.. being dicks, and using The Game as an excuse.
Anyway I hope this doesn't seem like an argument, I'm not trying to change your mind but moreso explain what parts of The Game are meaningful to me that aren't about the explicit goal of trying to make someone feel bad. Sorry this has turned into a whole thing.
wait, what exactly is it that you disagree with? it, seems like you agree with me that "everyone is playing" is an unenforceable nonstatement, which is exactly what I mean by calling it "not a real rule"
if, if you don't play the game, you're not playing the game? that's like. trivially true about all games
Yes! That is my point. It is a very basic simple unquestionable rule that all games share, but it is still true and therefore a rule, and while if this were a literal game it wouldn't need to be explicitly told, as it is used to enforce the kayfabe of The Game it is therefore given meaning.
what exactly does it add though? like. from my perspective, what this "kayfabe" contributes to The Game is that whenever I tell people I'm not playing they argue with me about it and insist that no actually everyone is playing. is there another positive thing this adds to The Game from the perspective of people who actually enjoy it, or is the whole point just to be annoying at me in particular