Ganondorf and Fi have some small talk on the beach.
I’ve been experimenting with using screentone for the environment. I screentoned the sky too but I thought that was too much screentone so I decided to get rid of it. It looks like there’s a moire effect (for Ganondorf) on my screen but then again my screen is pretty damn HD. If you see any, sorry about that.
Hey, gorgeous work u got! Absolutely love your Fi! I was thinking about pocket Fi meeting the susuwatari from ghibli, those cute soot sprites. And congrats again on your wonderful art, hugs from brazil!
LOL I love that wedding scene in Dragonball when Chichi grabs onto Goku's arm and at first he looks freaked, but then laughs and blushes. I think that was a moment that showed he really was starting to fall in love with her -- or at least starting to like being touched like that.
yup you’re right! he looks really shy on that part it’s cute xD also he was blushing a lot here too
lamo he’s so confused it’s cute! xD
but it’s kinda funny how it doesn’t show him blushing in the manga…but he does look excited to make her his bride!//♥
The other thing I noticed about this scene is that when kami offers him his job goku says “it’s boring and that’s not the kind of adventure he’s looking for” yet he gladly takes chichi and goes off and marries her so I think he sees that as much more exciting and she’s part of his new adventure xD Even though he doesn’t know what he’s getting himself into he still rather spend time with this girl he barley knows then stay up and be guardian of earth XD
Hello again! I’m back with lots of arts and news! (They’re mostly from personal projects tho, but I’ll do a post about it later~). The asks are about this post, now, some notes:
- I must have some kind of special hability or something to do things the wrong way, the thing was to draw characters with certain clothes and it looks as if I made a point to hide the clothes with the arms aaaaa
- On the same note, I first drew Muffet with her normal clothes. “Why?” you may wonder. I could say something like “I did it in order to get the hang of the character” or something like that, but no, the sour truth is that when I start drawing I just get so inmerged in what I’m doing I don’t think straight, and since I was watching a reference of Muffet with her normal clothes (because I don’t think I ever drew her before, at least not the UT version), I completely forgot about the actual goal of the drawing c’:
-The two last ones were requested by @askbloomtale (I didn’t want to flood you all with many posts so I decided to put them all in one).
I thought I’d share my understanding of the P versus NP problem. I had heard a lot about it but never really got into it, and I think it’s interesting to understand what’s going on there because : 1) Some people know about the problem but don’t know what it’s really about 2) People have no idea what researchers search 3) The answer to this problem could mean a lot of things (not just maths-wise) I’ll try to make it clear for everyone, so let’s go !
First some context : back in the day, when computer science started to develop real fast (i think 20th century), we were quickly confronted to the problem of complexity. Every computer had its own capacity and power and it was really hard to tell whether a given algorithm was fast or slow (because it was run differently on every machine) So people needed tools to measure an algorithm’s efficiency, that was the birth of complexity theory and calculability (note that Turing contributed a lot to these) To keep it simple, the idea of complexity is to count the number of operations depending on the size of the input data (size of matrix for instance) You can also consider spatial complexity that basically tells you how much memory is needed for the algorithm to perform correctly
So now we are on the late side of the 20th century and people start optimizing their algorithms. Given a problem, there may be more than one way to find solutions and you obviously want to minimize complexity. And people start noticing something very intriguing : somehow, a certain class of problems seems to have this property that finding solutions requires very high complexity (exponential) but verifying whether we have a solution or not is rather simple (polynomial complexity)
For instance, say we want to solve some equation f(x)=y given a certain function f (x may be anything). Well it occurs quite often that finding solutions (that is an algorithm that takes y as input and returns x such that f(x)=y) is really hard complexity-wise but verifying whether z is a solution of our equation (that is checking if f(z)=y) is rather easy
And that’s exactly the problem underlying the question P=NP : does this class of problems actually admit algorithms that can find solutions in polynomial time ? (in which case we haven’t been smart enough to find out which) This is what P=NP claims. If P≠NP, then this means that this property is inherent to this class of problems, and that finding solutions requires more than polynomial time…
A reformulation of the P=NP claim is as follows : it is as “easy” (again, think complexity) to find a solution randomly as to search for it. Indeed, if i were to find a potential solution, and I check it and it turns out it was a solution of my problem, if this took me polynomial time, then P=NP implies that there exists an algorithm that could have found it in polynomial time as well.
At this point i may have lost a few readers (which i hope not haha) but don’t leave now, even if you didn’t really understand, just remember this : if P=NP, checking and finding solutions to a problem takes the same time
So what is nice about P=NP ? Well obviously, since it is generally easy to come out with an algorithm that checks solutions in polynomial time, that would imply that clever algorithms exist out there, waiting to be discovered, that could find our solutions in roughly the same time. This is particularly important in optimization problems (typically finding a road network that connects a certain number of cities and minimizing total length)
However, though a world where P=NP would be reassuring, most people believe that P≠NP, for some reasons I won’t explain here (one main argument though is the fact we still haven’t found some of these quick algorithms after all the research lead so far)(but i think the people that say that just arent clever or patient enough hahaha)
But lets take some time to enjoy what’s also nice about a world where P≠NP ! I like that it is a way of saying “Human beings aren’t that smart”. It would, just like discovering that the Earth isnt the center of the universe, remind us of how common we are. We are not that special after all, right ? And at the same time, if P=NP, then it means that all the problems we will ever come up with are pretty easy after all and “computable”. So P≠NP gives a sense of humanity because it tells us we aren’t as simple as a computer simulation. We aren’t particularly clever but we surely are unique, and I like how this problem reminds us of this hahaha
Also there’s a 1 million us dollars bounty on P=NP
I hope you read until the end and enjoyed this post, and id be glad to go into further discussions ! And please tell me if you want more content like that, that would be nice