American odds can be basically interpreted as “The Net amount you win after making a $100 bet” So if the odds are +150 you win $150 PLUS your initial $100 bet if you win the bet.
Negative american odds means “the amount you have to be to win $100” so odds o −230 would mean you have to bet $230 to win $100
As I said epistemic status “Trivial”
This is something trivial but it’s worth noticing.
The number is way too high for that. I use twitter almost an hour a day (way way too much time) and I don’t hit the rate limit
Daniel was definitely strange in many socially awkward ways
Knowing what I know about Daniel, I could easily psychologically manipulate him into doing terrible acts if need be. I can easily see a person who is a master of being a cult leader (which Ziz is a top tier cult leader) mentally breaking Daniel. He (at least was) a socially awkward person who took things extremely literally and was easy to push around. He’s definitely up there on the “easy” category, and cult leaders like Ziz need somebody like that. Going over Ziz’s tactics, while Daniel is unlikely to have developed multiple personalities, he’d easily enter a few of the states Ziz mentions.
However I have no clue how Daniel would physically be able to commit certain acts his hand eye coordination is bad, and he’s physically not very strong. If he tried to knife me to death he’d get knocked out by my overhand right or heel hooked into submission well before he got enough stabs in (I’m not a great boxer),
That’s fair from a mental POV, but Daniel Blank physically has poor hand-eye coordination and bad reflexes, meaning that if he tried to shoot somebody he’d be extremely likely to miss at all but the shortest of ranges. (the murder in question was definitely gunshot based)
While he could be a part of the conspiracy his ability to have physically committed the actual act is questionable.
Sadly I lack the skills necessary to do such a monumental task otherwise I would apply. What are the “lesser” roles you are looking for?
“I also found that, controlling for rents, the partisanship of a state did not predict homelessness”″
Did Partisanship correlate with rents if so what direction?
Good post, it makes me think a lot of the homeless crisis is more literally “I can’t buy a home”.
At what point is Ai judged to have “superhuman performance”
From what I can tell there are roughly 4 stages of “Ai performance”
Stage 1 : subhuman (this covers a lot of ground) The Ai is unable to perform as well as a top human in the field (such Ai’s can still be useful)
Stage 2: The “superhuman” stage: Ai’s outperform humans on normal variations of the task
Stage 3: The “adversarial stage” : Humans find adversarial examples which let them outperform the AI (This is most relevant in games) ex [starcraft 2](
Example of exploitative play allowing human to beat AI (this AI beat then top human Serral in a best of 5)
)
Stage 4 the god phase: Even in adversarial examples humans are outperformed by the computer (ex Chess)
Obviously Ai’s can skip stage 3 entirely, and that does happen but I hear conflicting results on stage 3, many people argue we have superhuman results in starcraft 2, but unless there is an Ai more advanced than blizzcon alphastar, it appears we are on stage 3 (humans can reliably beat the AI with anti-AI tactics, but normal play loses). Is stage 3 generally considered “superhuman”?
Alphastar vs serral link (is there a way to collapse these?)
The main way I have gotten around these in practice has been to wager non-monetary items, things like “Whoever loses has to file the other’s taxes” The method tends to work much better when you live in the same house (since housework is a very tradeable thing and is always in demand). This obviously has the weakness that it tends to work best for 50⁄50 wagers and is worse at the full continuum. However there are ways around this (\instead of betting on IF something will happen you can bet on WHEN, or you can bet on HOW MUCH ex “I bet 30 guests will arrive at the party tommrow, ” person 2 : “I’ll take the under on that”)
The oldest Chess engine you can find for free online is cray blitz https://craftychess.com/downloads/crayblitz/ which was the world computer chess champion in 1983. Unfortunately A: it is not UCI compatible and B: the oldest version available is the 1989 version. I asked Harry Lewis Nelson himself yesterday and he said that he doesn’t have the source code for the 1983 version anymore. Unfortunately any farther back and the original author doesn’t appear to be alive anymore. (harry himself is 89)
The oldest chess engine that can be called a champion is kaissa https://www.chessprogramming.org/Kaissa however the best I can do is give you a rewrite in turbo C http://greko.su/index_en.html I figure 1977 is as old as you’re going to get. Hippke can probably do most of the heavy lifting from here.
I agree with the use of stockfish 11 as it appears to be the best engine with poor hardware, NNUE requires more RAM than actually exists on a 1997 machine.
Yeah that’s fair, I’m just so used to American odds for gambling that I mentally use them all the time for these sorts of things.
Probably should have used good old fashioned odds instead.
The reason casino’s show something like “Yankee’s +110 Red sox −120” is so you can easily see the casino’s rake or something.