I started this SC2 map about half a year ago, and am getting ready to start working on it again. I'm quite proud of it, as I have only had one programming course and have learned almost everything from tutorials and practice.
This is a very different map and it would be really great to complete it. I am hoping that before the end of the year I will have published on b.net.
The year is Stardate 9157, and the entire universe has been discovered geometrically. As the explosion generated by Nashian equilibrium reverberates through the geometric universe, a new robot is created
The Luck Robot whose powerrs of introreverted Nashian equilibrium are self-sustaining. The Luck Robot is capable of transforming any material object into Good Fortune.
hot showers may cost us billions, is the scientific result. questions remain.
lol.
so this is a pretty funny set of rifts i ran today after meditation with my new colleague "Tiki" who is a very traditional yogi in India. I also was involving a friend of mine from Thailand, who works as a barber and does poker-related stuff.
The results were really funny to me. This Monk has previously completed a level 70 Greater Rift with more than 5 minutes remaining.
Today we struggled through some lower tier rifts despite having vastly improved the build and gear.
We got good items at the end, but the runs were just super glitchy and rough.
It seems it is scientifically possible to run below expectation on "RNG" for any length of time, probably this makes perfect sense when we think about "denumerable infinities" (basically bigger infinities).
Any sample size is relatively infinitesimal...
For instance if we say that 1/infinity is "the first infinitesimal", and 8000/infinity is the "8000th infinitesimal" we could just use a denumerable infinity of a factor 8000 times larger than the (unit) infinity in the first case. then the second case would be identical to the first case.
thus we see there is a logarithmic principle with sizes of infinity as with for instance "base ten" numbers.
it seems to be the conclusion that "LOVE" is a reciporical of bad luck. so if you "LOVE" someone you are doomswitched until event X.
So I've been practicing Zen meditation now for 7 years and have gotten to the point where nothing can die without negatively affecting me. My average day is running something like -30BB/100 as science. I've gotten so far into it with Thai masters that literally nothing can wrong in the universe without it making my life more challenging. It's impossible to turn a blind eye to anything. I've been in such bad straits for so long now that the Chinese have literally sent Shaolin to my town to instruct me in "not being so bad".
But what I've learned from this is that even if you can have a 10:1 KDA average in DotA2 and not be able to get above 800 MMR (without overdosing on drugs), real life is surprisingly easy. The last time I overdosed on drugs I did die or something and ascend into heaven and was above 800 MMR but was reset when I was res'd by the Shaolin, and am below 700 MMR again.
But living a healthy IRL is really easy. Sure to be GM in anything takes work and practice, talent and motivation, and so on. But even high Diamond league SC2 equivalent is well than more than enough to live a super healthy life.
Probably 50-100 hours of knowledge and 1000-2000 hours of practice can make us super healthy individuals with just aerobic and anaerobic training. It's ultimately cheaper and possibly easier to eat healthy, get plenty of rest, and then train for an hour or two five days a week.
Interesting almost every Starcraft player, DotA player, etc. ever has put in 50-100 hours of knowledge and 1000-2000 of practice, which would be like the equivalent of high GM in most health concerns.
So it seems like high diamond Starcraft II or DotA 2000~3000 MMR is more than enough to be a hometown high GM or national mid GM in fitness. Of course I've also done karate, and I think most people would be satisfied with a black belt, which probably does not take more than 500 hours maximum (unless you are really hardcore). I don't know how much time I really put into my black belt in TKD but I think it was probably not as much as 2k hours.
But I've got 2k hours on my dota account, and am still < 700 MMR, which shows that dota is really hard compared to IRL.
But yeah, my IRL human is doing pretty well. I've written a book at around ~70k words somewhat unedited, created a video game at probably an hour or so playable time, but quite sophisticated.
My IRL human has recovered from schizophrenia, psychosis, anxiety, phobias, different health concerns and is almost completely grade A again except for a pinched nerve in the neck.
But what I've noticed is Diablo has failed us. Whether you're blind or not, high level Starcraft is accessible to you. Whether you're psychologically inept or not, mathematical poker still beats microstakes, whether you have bad luck or not, you can succeed in most games of luck, possibly even become infinite in hearthstone with practice.
But it seems Diablo is truly the most difficult game of all time. I cannot find any other way to power up in Diablo other than patience and grinding and running rifts. Since I am running -30BB/100 or so in all things thanks to the years of zazen, I cannot seem to find items, power up my character with sets, or anything like that. I always roll the wrong sets, wrong characters for seasonal items, wrong uniques, wrong ancients, legendaries, sets, and so on.
Despite it being my ultimate and final goal of all time, it seems I just cannot get on the top of the Diablo III ladder, and it proves to me this is the most difficult thing ever.
There is a bunch of stuff I want to do after I die. I don't want to sit around for eternity telling stories about my impending death. Wouldn't it be great
EU(afterlife) > EU(life) the afterlife provides happiness I could just randomly die
All my problems could be solved the humour of my impending death "wouldn't it be great if failsafe died before/after X"
As you know there are -? to ? R numbers. Therefore there are 2? R numbers and density of R is interval-identical. Then there is ? R numbers between [0,1].
R is the real numbers of course.
So then we are dealing with a simple construction that everyone understands:
±(... _ _ . _ _ ...)
And we just fill in the blanks with numbers: 0, 1, 2, ..., 9
But which numbers come up with most? There are obviously one of each number so it is just a question of selection.
Notice however that . denotes a property of revolving around 0, and could be just as well: