5 Best Binary Options Robots (April 2020) - Evoke Finance

Cryptosoft Review 2020-Is it a Scam?

Cryptosoft Review 2020-Is it a Scam?

Most f the reviews we tend to have come back across reveal that the Cryptp soft platform is easy to
Their client service is very efficient. We did a live check and confirmed that they respond at intervals a moment. Moreover, they are available 24/7.
The Cryptp soft app is secure. They need all the mandatory measures in place to make sure data privacy.
The Cryptp soft System is considered by several among the most effective robots within the market nowadays. We have a tendency to realize this robot to perform virtually the same with Bitcoin Rush, another top bitcoin robot. Read the review of Bitcoin Rush for more data?
Cryptp soft registration method is straightforward, easy, and secure. You only want but 10 minutes to form an account and begin trading. Cryptp soft is a absolutely auto bot and is so accessible to everyone.

https://preview.redd.it/giu6kclgfnn51.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f605d84ba2174f831ca825dbaffddf061b3a55b5
You do not want to perceive trading lingo to use Immediate Edge. The following steps can get you started with this robot.
STEP ONE: Fill the Signup type

Visit the Cryptp soft home page and register your name, phone number, and email in the provided kind. You will be asked to verify your phone variety via a text code and email through a link. CryptoVibes will ascertain that the Cryptp soft registration process is secure.

Their web site is SSL secured to confirm that hackers cannot steal personal information submitted through it. Cryptp soft cyber safety policy states that they're GDPR adherent. This suggests that they handle your knowledge with strict privacy.
STEP TWO: Get matched with a broker

The Cryptp soft Software then matches you with one in every of their partner brokers. The role of the broker is to receive deposits and facilitate transactions. We have a tendency to have determined that Cryptp soft only partners with regulated brokers.

With a regulated broker, they guarantee that your cash is safe. Reputable regulators such as the FCA, FSB, ASIC, and CySEC need brokers to segregate deposits and submit periodic reports on deposit usage.
You wold like a deposit of a minimum of $250 to trade with Immediate Edge. Do not confuse this quantity with the value of the robot. Cryptp soft does not need any license fee. The house owners of this robot build money by charging a small commission on the profits generated through the app
Deposits with Cryptp soft should be created through Wire Transfer, Visa, and MasterCard. It takes a few seconds for a deposit to reflect in an exceedingly trader’s account. Cryptp soft does not charge any deposit fees.
The Cryptp soft does provide a demo account to help traders familiarize themselves with its web-trader. CryptoVibes recommends that you are doing demo trading before going to live to trade. Please note that the demo is for demonstrative purposes solely.
The results you receive on the platform are primarily based on historical information and could therefore not mirror what you'll get in live trading.
The Cryptp soft live trader comes with features to help you outline the amount of risk you are willing to require per trade. You wish to go through the demo account to familiarize with these features. As mentioned severally in this review, you do not want specialized skills to use this robot.
Live trading with Cryptp soft involves determining the quantity of capital you plan to risk per trade and clicking the live button. Scan our review of Bitcoin Trader for one more straightforward to use the robot.
*Remember all trading risks and you shouldn’t risk more then you'll be able to afford to lose.
How to get the most out of Cryptp soft App
We have identified the following tips as paramount in guaranteeing that you make the most of Immediate Edge.
Begin with a deposit of $250 – Given the level of risk involved in trading with Immediate Edge, you should start with a tiny investment.
Follow crypto market news – You need to determine the type of reports that drives volatility high and capitalize on them. Cryptp soft claims to form the foremost profits throughout high market volatility.
Trade for eight hours per day – In keeping with Immediate Edge, trading for at least eight hours per day can help maximize profits. Cryptp soft is entirely auto, and hence you'll be able to leave the robot running as you continue together with your daily errands. You are doing not want more than twenty minutes per day to observe your account.
Close trading sessions at the tip of the day – Leaving open positions overnight is doubtless to translate to losses since the markets can change considerably overnight. It is better to shut sessions even if in the negative and start trading again the subsequent day. With a correct risk management strategy, there is no would like to fret concerning periodic losses.
Following our review we tend to realize Cryptp soft to be legit. But, traders ought to take additional caution, provided that this bot comes at a degree of risk. Whereas the app claims it's potential to form profits of up to 50percent per day, you'll be able to additionally lose the complete deposit inside seconds. This is often not sudden for a high-frequency trading robot.
We recommend that you just apply the required risk management measures. As a rule of thumb don't risk more than 10percent of your trading capital per trade. Also, never trade with an amount you cannot afford to lose. It is prudent to start small and add cash as you get conversant with the various features on the platform.
Recently, a brand new trading software was added to the bitcoin investment trade. This software is termed Cryptp soft and it is allegedly created by a corporation or organization called the International Council for Bitcoin.
There is additionally a letter out there on their web site that has been signed by someone named David. This person claims to own earned over 1,000,000 as a results of investing in bitcoins. What’s very shocking concerning this letter is that David claims to have earned that huge quantity in just one trade. If we have a tendency to place it in simple words, David became a millionaire overnight.
We tend to highly doubt that a trading system that has been launched recently will have such potential. To verify the main points of this software and to determine its legitimacy, we have a tendency to conducted our own research and investigation.
Cryptp soft is a bitcoin trading software that’s meant to assist newbie traders get involved in Cryptocurrency trading with less risk than ancient investment opportunities. Cryptp soft software was created by The International Council For Bitcoin who is PRO Bitcoin trader Group behind the Cryptp soft software. Notice out all concerning Cryptp soft software by The International Council For Bitcoin.
Cryptp soft Software may be a nice development by a famous, well established and experienced bitcoin trader Investors with a viewpoint to enable traders to perform different tasks with ease and convenience.

https://preview.redd.it/uuh85yghfnn51.png?width=1238&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0558e6e123114b6624d5a724b3b9b5983e717e1
Cryptp soft Software is essentially a Binary choices trading software that is designed to assist traders win and predict the Binary options trend of their respective choices. Cryptp soft APP works as a code to urge financial success, shows traders how they'll make money on-line, helps them to find different ways in which to induce huge returns on their investment. The Cryptp soft Trading Software additionally provides analyses of Market conditions so that traders will recognize what ought to be their next step. Cryptp soft System gives secret cryptocurrency ways that ultimately help binary traders to create thousands of greenbacks solely for some bucks.
Several individuals can say that Cryptocurrency Trading may be a risky business and tend to remain faraway from it. But from my expertise, high volatility means HIGH RETURN OF INVESTMENT in Crypto Market. But this can be where the Cryptp soft comes into play, the mathematical algorithm used by Cryptp soft Software takes the guesswork out choosing a winning profitable trade. You don’t must be an expert. Like I said earlier, I actually have personally tested the Cryptp soft and found the success rate is about ninety sevenpercent. I don’t apprehend concerning you, but a ninety seven% probability of earning a profitable trade is TERRIBLY GOOD! I’ve never come across something like this trading software before. Keep reading, below are my Cryptp soft results for the past week or so…
Watch over the Shoulder of a Professional Each Day and you'll be able to learn as you trade.
Averaging 97% Winning Weeks With Cryptp soft which suggests that more potential profits for you
Cryptp soft Software Are Fully Transparent
No previous experience with binary choices trading required
Web-based mostly, no need for downloads, additionally works on phones, tablets
You'll be able to Even Watch Cryptp soft Signals From Your Phone (iPhone Users — Photon Browser)
If you are ready to begin making cash online with an on the spot edge, there has never been a better chance than currently. If you enjoy surfing the web for countless hours trying for the next Trading Method Secrets, never being able to urge centered, being overloaded with conflicting information, and not creating cash on-line, you ought to probably leave this page right now and get back to that Cryptp soft System strategy
Cryptp soft bot could be a new cryptocurrency trading invention that comes with options that create this software stand out among others. It is conjointly an automatic trading platform that uses a smart program algorithm to detect favorable trading opportunities. It acts on its own or waits for a prompt command from the user depending on the software’s settings. But what makes this software unique and a favorite to individuals is what we have a tendency to shall unveil in this review.
There have been lots of unverified claims of how totally different cryptocurrency software have helped several people to make massive profits leading to Scam individuals. However, it's pertinent for cryptocurrency traders to verify if a particular trading software may be a scam or legit, which is also ?
After subjecting the features of the Cryptp soft bot software to a series of tests, the software isn't a scam however legit. The Cryptp soft bot is believed to have successful rate of 85%, that is a lot of than the 80percent benchmark for average software. The Cryptp soft bot has helped cryptocurrency traders to make sensible profits, which has been documented as testimonies on the software’s website.
Trading on the platform is straightforward and might not require experience. We had to verify the simplicity of the software, and we tend to discovered that the software is easy to navigate. The demo trading feature of the software makes it potential for brand new users to hold out trading activities in an exceedingly simulated atmosphere while not having to risk their investment. This any gives credence to the legitimacy of the software because it ensures that new users get accustomed to the features of the software before continuing to measure to trade
As earlier stated, the Cryptp soft bot could be a high-tech program software that comes with exceptional options that makes it among the simplest cryptocurrency trading software in the blockchain market. The outstanding features of the Cryptp soft bot embody the subsequent:
https://www.cryptoerapro.com/cryptosoft/

http://www.cryptoerapro.com/

https://twitter.com/cryptoerapro

https://www.instagram.com/cryptoerapro/

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/cryptoerapro/
submitted by cryptoerapro to u/cryptoerapro [link] [comments]

Immediate Edge Review, Is Immediate Edge SCAM Or Legit Trading App?

Immediate Edge Review, Is Immediate Edge SCAM Or Legit Trading App?

Immediate Edge Review: Is This Crypto Robot Legit or Scam
Immediate Edge Review and investigation 20twenty. The Immediate Edge app is a crypto, forex and choices trading robot utilized by folks to automatically obtain and sell Bitcoin and create profits. Wanting at the website, many people claim it helped them move from rags-to-riches trading Bitcoin. Further, some claims linked it to Ronaldo and Sir Alex Ferguson

https://preview.redd.it/rttn3i4hohm51.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8f0dc345c3ace4032d571d44fabe356f13ff1a33
Is Immediate Edge app legit or scam? Whereas the claims of its linkage to the higher than celebrities are unverifiable, we tend to can verify that the app is not a scam and permits individuals to trade Bitcoin using the Fibonacci strategy with ten minutes time frames
The app, that allows people to deposit at least $250 through mastercard and Sofort, scores 88% rate and a 5 stars as a real software
Since there are several scam cryptos, forex and options brokers who trick individuals to depositing money, and then they run away with the funds, we have taken time to review this software to determine if it is real or a scam.
Is Immediate Edge scam or legit
High success rate is reported by users with this software.
The Immediate Edge web site provides truthful claims about the service though it will not mean the crypto trading risks are eliminated with its use.
Customers should start with the minimum investment and increase it when satisfied with the utilization of the app.
Click the link to access Immediate Edge official web site or keep reading to understand more
This software will not seem to be a scam and users report that it helped them make real money trading on it.b site
What is Immediate Edge App?
Immediate Edgecould be a robot or auto-trading software that allows folks to trade forex, crypto and binary choices. A user deploys the algorithm-primarily based bot, which relies on a trading strategy that's automatically executed on a broker trading platform once deployed.
The strategy is coded or set like to permit the user to automatically get and sell crypto, stock or choices on the broker platform at favorable prices, to form profits. It can do automatic market analysis by analyzing a vast amount of knowledge from completely different sources, at intervals seconds and with high accuracy, then use the data to predict the costs. It can then come up with a transparent buy or sell tradable signal and then execute it automatically by shopping for and/or selling on the broker platform.
The software can, therefore, save a trader thousands of manual hours and labor they might have spent analyzing information to form trading choices and to follow the markets and to position and close trades. You conjointly do not want to understand anything concerning crypto, stock or option trading to use this auto trading app, although it is suggested to possess this information to keep improving on trading.
Trading bots will achieve high success rates of more than 90p.c and have been tested to work. You may be searching for Immediate Edge scam but the website can tell you that you can expect to earn between $950 and $a pair of,two hundred per day using the software but that depends on your expertise. As a newbie, you'll not start making that a lot of immediately and conjointly it depends on how a lot of you invest. With an investment of $250, you'll be able to expect to form a lot of lesser although some people claim to own made $12a pair of in a very few hours using this software.
That will not mean Immediate Edge is error-free. There still is a heap of unpredictable high volatility in crypto and bots will make mistakes and errors to create losses. Auto trading robots are better employed in combination with manual trading strategies.

https://preview.redd.it/1zkt9v3johm51.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=85f7e7f5d0e9d6b60b4a8a6e37bb344dbbb8305c
Immediate Edge Review
How will Immediate Edge work?
All a user has to try and do is join up at the Immediate Edge web site, then deposit funds to have access to the robot, when which they can begin trading by switching on the bot. It will would like no control or intervention from humans, beyond beginning and stopping it.
You additionally need to stay checking, daily, to observe the performance of the software in doing its job and ensure that it is earning any returns needless to say. From there, you can confirm whether or not to extend or decrease your investment towards crypto, options or stock trading using this robot.
You'll be able to also monitor performance to be ready to regulate the trading settings from your dashboard and optimize totally different features of the trading bot for instance set amount of trades or amount to invest in every trade.
Founder of Immediate Edge
In line with the Immediate Edge website, this trading bot was founded by Edwin James. Reportedly, he created billions with forex, crypto, and binary options trading and still shares his strategies on the way to trade the assets on the app.
He founded the app to create it potential for brand spanking new traders to create cash in less than 3 minutes of signing up.
How to sign up on Immediate Edge:
Registration: Registering or signing up on the website is free but to start trading, you want to deposit no less than $250. You discover a registration type on the top right of the page, on that you type in your email, full names and phone numbers and country code. Create a password to be used for logging in later.
Deposit funds: Depositing funds allows you to connect to a robot broker and then you'll begin the bot to start out trading. You'll deposit with Visa, Wire Transfers, Klarna or Skrill. The currencies supported are Swiss Franc, British Pound, US Greenback, and Euro and using a credit or debit card limits deposits to less than $/£/€/?10,00zero in one day and $/£/€/?40,000 in an exceedingly month.
Immediate Edgeisn’t licensed to handle your funds, it works with brokers to handle the cash once it's deposited.
Demo trading: Relying on the broker you're connected to, you can begin to practice trading with the Immediate Edge software. Some brokers do not have this feature on their platforms. Still, with the latter, you can test their options before you deposit cash to try and do live trading. With the demo options, you'll be able to familiarize yourself with the trading house before beginning to use real money to trade.
Trading: Before and when you've got switched on auto-trading, you would like to check the trading settings daily. You'll regulate some things including stop-loss orders and when to try to to them, amount to speculate per trade and how several trades to try to to per day. You'll be able to also choose that cryptocurrencies to trade, and you'll be able to select all the most in style ones together with Bitcoin and Ethereum. You also get to observe the profits/losses and decide if to continue and/or when to prevent.

https://preview.redd.it/c9scw5fkohm51.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3d127be2887c4c8960023a8cf1b1f55297dbf250
Withdrawals, user verification, cost of using the app and alternative options

The payouts or withdrawals are made by filling letter of invitation type on the funds’ management page and it can take two operating days to replicate in your checking account. No fee is charged on withdrawals. You'll withdraw your cash including the capital while not a lot of problem on this app, that is better than several that don't enable withdrawals at any time
While some bots need verifications by asking for your ID and statements, this one will not. You are done once uploading your payment details. The bot charges a commission on profit. Besides, you get twenty fouseven client support on Immediate Edge
Immediate Edge may be a legit, secure, user-friendly trading application for crypto, stocks, and choices. It has a zealous customer service and reports a high success rate. Another smart robot we have recently reviewed is Bitcoin Professional
We tend to hope that this review helped you to make a decision concerning this trading app. Additionally, subscribe to our web site to be invariably notified concerning new software from this industry. For live reviews subscribe to our Youtube Channel or FB Page.

https://www.immediateedge.org/
https://www.facebook.com/immediateedge/
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/immediateedge/
https://twitter.com/EdgeImmediate
https://www.instagram.com/immediateedge/
submitted by EggNecessary9499 to u/EggNecessary9499 [link] [comments]

AJ ALMENDINGER

glimpse into the future of Roblox

Our vision to bring the world together through play has never been more relevant than it is now. As our founder and CEO, David Baszucki (a.k.a. Builderman), mentioned in his keynote, more and more people are using Roblox to stay connected with their friends and loved ones. He hinted at a future where, with our automatic machine translation technology, Roblox will one day act as a universal translator, enabling people from different cultures and backgrounds to connect and learn from each other.
During his keynote, Builderman also elaborated upon our vision to build the Metaverse; the future of avatar creation on the platform (infinitely customizable avatars that allow any body, any clothing, and any animation to come together seamlessly); more personalized game discovery; and simulating large social gatherings (like concerts, graduations, conferences, etc.) with tens of thousands of participants all in one server. We’re still very early on in this journey, but if these past five months have shown us anything, it’s clear that there is a growing need for human co-experience platforms like Roblox that allow people to play, create, learn, work, and share experiences together in a safe, civil 3D immersive space.
Up next, our VP of Developer Relations, Matt Curtis (a.k.a. m4rrh3w), shared an update on all the things we’re doing to continue empowering developers to create innovative and exciting content through collaboration, support, and expertise. He also highlighted some of the impressive milestones our creator community has achieved since last year’s RDC. Here are a few key takeaways:
And lastly, our VP of Engineering, Technology, Adam Miller (a.k.a. rbadam), unveiled a myriad of cool and upcoming features developers will someday be able to sink their teeth into. We saw a glimpse of procedural skies, skinned meshes, more high-quality materials, new terrain types, more fonts in Studio, a new asset type for in-game videos, haptic feedback on mobile, real-time CSG operations, and many more awesome tools that will unlock the potential for even bigger, more immersive experiences on Roblox.

Vibin’

Despite the virtual setting, RDC just wouldn’t have been the same without any fun party activities and networking opportunities. So, we invited special guests DJ Hyper Potions and cyber mentalist Colin Cloud for some truly awesome, truly mind-bending entertainment. Yoga instructor Erin Gilmore also swung by to inspire attendees to get out of their chair and get their body moving. And of course, we even had virtual rooms dedicated to karaoke and head-to-head social games, like trivia and Pictionary.
Over on the networking side, Team Adopt Me, Red Manta, StyLiS Studios, and Summit Studios hosted a virtual booth for attendees to ask questions, submit resumes, and more. We also had a networking session where three participants would be randomly grouped together to get to know each other.

What does Roblox mean to you?

We all know how talented the Roblox community is from your creations. We’ve heard plenty of stories over the years about how Roblox has touched your lives, how you’ve made friendships, learned new skills, or simply found a place where you can be yourself. We wanted to hear more. So, we asked attendees: What does Roblox mean to you? How has Roblox connected you? How has Roblox changed your life? Then, over the course of RDC, we incorporated your responses into this awesome mural.
📷
Created by Alece Birnbach at Graphic Recording Studio

Knowledge is power

This year’s breakout sessions included presentations from Roblox developers and staff members on the latest game development strategies, a deep dive into the Roblox engine, learning how to animate with Blender, tools for working together in teams, building performant game worlds, and the new Creator Dashboard. Dr. Michael Rich, Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School and Physician at Boston Children’s Hospital, also led attendees through a discussion on mental health and how to best take care of you and your friends’ emotional well-being, especially now during these challenging times.
📷
Making the Dream Work with Teamwork (presented by Roblox developer Myzta)
In addition to our traditional Q&A panel with top product and engineering leaders at Roblox, we also held a special session with Builderman himself to answer the community’s biggest questions.
📷
Roblox Product and Engineering Q&A Panel

2020 Game Jam

The Game Jam is always one of our favorite events of RDC. It’s a chance for folks to come together, flex their development skills, and come up with wildly inventive game ideas that really push the boundaries of what’s possible on Roblox. We had over 60 submissions this year—a new RDC record.
Once again, teams of up to six people from around the world had less than 24 hours to conceptualize, design, and publish a game based on the theme “2020 Vision,” all while working remotely no less! To achieve such a feat is nothing short of awe-inspiring, but as always, our dev community was more than up for the challenge. I’ve got to say, these were some of the finest creations we’ve seen.
WINNERS
Best in Show: Shapescape Created By: GhettoMilkMan, dayzeedog, maplestick, theloudscream, Brick_man, ilyannna You awaken in a strange laboratory, seemingly with no way out. Using a pair of special glasses, players must solve a series of anamorphic puzzles and optical illusions to make their escape.
Excellence in Visual Art: agn●sia Created By: boatbomber, thisfall, Elttob An obby experience unlike any other, this game is all about seeing the world through a different lens. Reveal platforms by switching between different colored lenses and make your way to the end.
Most Creative Gameplay: Visions of a perspective reality Created By: Noble_Draconian and Spathi Sometimes all it takes is a change in perspective to solve challenges. By switching between 2D and 3D perspectives, players can maneuver around obstacles or find new ways to reach the end of each level.
Outstanding Use of Tech: The Eyes of Providence Created By: Quenty, Arch_Mage, AlgyLacey, xJennyBeanx, Zomebody, Crykee This action/strategy game comes with a unique VR twist. While teams fight to construct the superior monument, two VR players can support their minions by collecting resources and manipulating the map.
Best Use of Theme: Sticker Situation Created By: dragonfrosting and Yozoh Set in a mysterious art gallery, players must solve puzzles by manipulating the environment using a magic camera and stickers. Snap a photograph, place down a sticker, and see how it changes the world.
OTHER TOP PICKS
HONORABLE MENTIONS
For the rest of the 2020 Game Jam submissions, check out the list below:
20-20 Vision | 20/20 Vision | 2020 Vision, A Crazy Perspective | 2020 Vision: Nyon | A Wild Trip! | Acuity | Best Year Ever | Better Half | Bloxlabs | Climb Stairs to 2021 | Double Vision (Team hey apple) | Eyebrawl | Eyeworm Exam | FIRE 2020 | HACKED | Hyperspective | Lucid Scream | Mystery Mansion | New Years at the Museum | New Year’s Bash | Poor Vision | Predict 2020 | RBC News | Retrovertigo | Second Wave | see no evil | Sight Fight | Sight Stealers | Spectacles Struggle | Specter Spectrum | Survive 2020 | The Lost Chicken Leg | The Outbreak | The Spyglass | Time Heist | Tunnel Vision | Virtual RDC – The Story | Vision (Team Freepunk) | Vision (Team VIP People ####) | Vision Developers Conference 2020 | Vision Is Key | Vision Perspective | Vision Racer | Visions | Zepto
And last but not least, we wanted to give a special shout out to Starboard Studios. Though they didn’t quite make it on time for our judges, we just had to include Dave’s Vision for good measure. 📷
Thanks to everyone who participated in the Game Jam, and congrats to all those who took home the dub in each of our categories this year. As the winners of Best in Show, the developers of Shapescape will have their names forever engraved on the RDC Game Jam trophy back at Roblox HQ. Great work!

‘Til next year

And that about wraps up our coverage of the first-ever digital RDC. Thanks to all who attended! Before we go, we wanted to share a special “behind the scenes” video from the 2020 RDC photoshoot.
Check it out:
It was absolutely bonkers. Getting 350 of us all in one server was so much fun and really brought back the feeling of being together with everyone again. That being said, we can’t wait to see you all—for real this time—at RDC next year. It’s going to be well worth the wait. ‘Til we meet again, my friends.
© 2020 Roblox Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Improving Simulation and Performance with an Advanced Physics Solver

August

05, 2020

by chefdeletat
PRODUCT & TECH
📷In mid-2015, Roblox unveiled a major upgrade to its physics engine: the Projected Gauss-Seidel (PGS) physics solver. For the first year, the new solver was optional and provided improved fidelity and greater performance compared to the previously used spring solver.
In 2016, we added support for a diverse set of new physics constraints, incentivizing developers to migrate to the new solver and extending the creative capabilities of the physics engine. Any new places used the PGS solver by default, with the option of reverting back to the classic solver.
We ironed out some stability issues associated with high mass differences and complex mechanisms by the introduction of the hybrid LDL-PGS solver in mid-2018. This made the old solver obsolete, and it was completely disabled in 2019, automatically migrating all places to the PGS.
In 2019, the performance was further improved using multi-threading that splits the simulation into jobs consisting of connected islands of simulating parts. We still had performance issues related to the LDL that we finally resolved in early 2020.
The physics engine is still being improved and optimized for performance, and we plan on adding new features for the foreseeable future.

Implementing the Laws of Physics

📷
The main objective of a physics engine is to simulate the motion of bodies in a virtual environment. In our physics engine, we care about bodies that are rigid, that collide and have constraints with each other.
A physics engine is organized into two phases: collision detection and solving. Collision detection finds intersections between geometries associated with the rigid bodies, generating appropriate collision information such as collision points, normals and penetration depths. Then a solver updates the motion of rigid bodies under the influence of the collisions that were detected and constraints that were provided by the user.
📷
The motion is the result of the solver interpreting the laws of physics, such as conservation of energy and momentum. But doing this 100% accurately is prohibitively expensive, and the trick to simulating it in real-time is to approximate to increase performance, as long as the result is physically realistic. As long as the basic laws of motion are maintained within a reasonable tolerance, this tradeoff is completely acceptable for a computer game simulation.

Taking Small Steps

The main idea of the physics engine is to discretize the motion using time-stepping. The equations of motion of constrained and unconstrained rigid bodies are very difficult to integrate directly and accurately. The discretization subdivides the motion into small time increments, where the equations are simplified and linearized making it possible to solve them approximately. This means that during each time step the motion of the relevant parts of rigid bodies that are involved in a constraint is linearly approximated.
📷📷
Although a linearized problem is easier to solve, it produces drift in a simulation containing non-linear behaviors, like rotational motion. Later we’ll see mitigation methods that help reduce the drift and make the simulation more plausible.

Solving

📷
Having linearized the equations of motion for a time step, we end up needing to solve a linear system or linear complementarity problem (LCP). These systems can be arbitrarily large and can still be quite expensive to solve exactly. Again the trick is to find an approximate solution using a faster method. A modern method to approximately solve an LCP with good convergence properties is the Projected Gauss-Seidel (PGS). It is an iterative method, meaning that with each iteration the approximate solution is brought closer to the true solution, and its final accuracy depends on the number of iterations.
📷
This animation shows how a PGS solver changes the positions of the bodies at each step of the iteration process, the objective being to find the positions that respect the ball and socket constraints while preserving the center of mass at each step (this is a type of positional solver used by the IK dragger). Although this example has a simple analytical solution, it’s a good demonstration of the idea behind the PGS. At each step, the solver fixes one of the constraints and lets the other be violated. After a few iterations, the bodies are very close to their correct positions. A characteristic of this method is how some rigid bodies seem to vibrate around their final position, especially when coupling interactions with heavier bodies. If we don’t do enough iterations, the yellow part might be left in a visibly invalid state where one of its two constraints is dramatically violated. This is called the high mass ratio problem, and it has been the bane of physics engines as it causes instabilities and explosions. If we do too many iterations, the solver becomes too slow, if we don’t it becomes unstable. Balancing the two sides has been a painful and long process.

Mitigation Strategies

📷A solver has two major sources of inaccuracies: time-stepping and iterative solving (there is also floating point drift but it’s minor compared to the first two). These inaccuracies introduce errors in the simulation causing it to drift from the correct path. Some of this drift is tolerable like slightly different velocities or energy loss, but some are not like instabilities, large energy gains or dislocated constraints.
Therefore a lot of the complexity in the solver comes from the implementation of methods to minimize the impact of computational inaccuracies. Our final implementation uses some traditional and some novel mitigation strategies:
  1. Warm starting: starting with the solution from a previous time-step to increase the convergence rate of the iterative solver
  2. Post-stabilization: reprojecting the system back to the constraint manifold to prevent constraint drift
  3. Regularization: adding compliance to the constraints ensuring a solution exists and is unique
  4. Pre-conditioning: using an exact solution to a linear subsystem, improving the stability of complex mechanisms
Strategies 1, 2 and 3 are pretty traditional, but 3 has been improved and perfected by us. Also, although 4 is not unheard of, we haven’t seen any practical implementation of it. We use an original factorization method for large sparse constraint matrices and a new efficient way of combining it with the PGS. The resulting implementation is only slightly slower compared to pure PGS but ensures that the linear system coming from equality constraints is solved exactly. Consequently, the equality constraints suffer only from drift coming from the time discretization. Details on our methods are contained in my GDC 2020 presentation. Currently, we are investigating direct methods applied to inequality constraints and collisions.

Getting More Details

Traditionally there are two mathematical models for articulated mechanisms: there are reduced coordinate methods spearheaded by Featherstone, that parametrize the degrees of freedom at each joint, and there are full coordinate methods that use a Lagrangian formulation.
We use the second formulation as it is less restrictive and requires much simpler mathematics and implementation.
The Roblox engine uses analytical methods to compute the dynamic response of constraints, as opposed to penalty methods that were used before. Analytics methods were initially introduced in Baraff 1989, where they are used to treat both equality and non-equality constraints in a consistent manner. Baraff observed that the contact model can be formulated using quadratic programming, and he provided a heuristic solution method (which is not the method we use in our solver).
Instead of using force-based formulation, we use an impulse-based formulation in velocity space, originally introduced by Mirtich-Canny 1995 and further improved by Stewart-Trinkle 1996, which unifies the treatment of different contact types and guarantees the existence of a solution for contacts with friction. At each timestep, the constraints and collisions are maintained by applying instantaneous changes in velocities due to constraint impulses. An excellent explanation of why impulse-based simulation is superior is contained in the GDC presentation of Catto 2014.
The frictionless contacts are modeled using a linear complementarity problem (LCP) as described in Baraff 1994. Friction is added as a non-linear projection onto the friction cone, interleaved with the iterations of the Projected Gauss-Seidel.
The numerical drift that introduces positional errors in the constraints is resolved using a post-stabilization technique using pseudo-velocities introduced by Cline-Pai 2003. It involves solving a second LCP in the position space, which projects the system back to the constraint manifold.
The LCPs are solved using a PGS / Impulse Solver popularized by Catto 2005 (also see Catto 2009). This method is iterative and considers each individual constraints in sequence and resolves it independently. Over many iterations, and in ideal conditions, the system converges to a global solution.
Additionally, high mass ratio issues in equality constraints are ironed out by preconditioning the PGS using the sparse LDL decomposition of the constraint matrix of equality constraints. Dense submatrices of the constraint matrix are sparsified using a method we call Body Splitting. This is similar to the LDL decomposition used in Baraff 1996, but allows more general mechanical systems, and solves the system in constraint space. For more information, you can see my GDC 2020 presentation.
The architecture of our solver follows the idea of Guendelman-Bridson-Fedkiw, where the velocity and position stepping are separated by the constraint resolution. Our time sequencing is:
  1. Advance velocities
  2. Constraint resolution in velocity space and position space
  3. Advance positions
This scheme has the advantage of integrating only valid velocities, and limiting latency in external force application but allowing a small amount of perceived constraint violation due to numerical drift.
An excellent reference for rigid body simulation is the book Erleben 2005 that was recently made freely available. You can find online lectures about physics-based animation, a blog by Nilson Souto on building a physics engine, a very good GDC presentation by Erin Catto on modern solver methods, and forums like the Bullet Physics Forum and GameDev which are excellent places to ask questions.

In Conclusion

The field of game physics simulation presents many interesting problems that are both exciting and challenging. There are opportunities to learn a substantial amount of cool mathematics and physics and to use modern optimizations techniques. It’s an area of game development that tightly marries mathematics, physics and software engineering.
Even if Roblox has a good rigid body physics engine, there are areas where it can be improved and optimized. Also, we are working on exciting new projects like fracturing, deformation, softbody, cloth, aerodynamics and water simulation.
Neither Roblox Corporation nor this blog endorses or supports any company or service. Also, no guarantees or promises are made regarding the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information contained in this blog.
This blog post was originally published on the Roblox Tech Blog.
© 2020 Roblox Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Using Clang to Minimize Global Variable Use

July

23, 2020

by RandomTruffle
PRODUCT & TECH
Every non-trivial program has at least some amount of global state, but too much can be a bad thing. In C++ (which constitutes close to 100% of Roblox’s engine code) this global state is initialized before main() and destroyed after returning from main(), and this happens in a mostly non-deterministic order. In addition to leading to confusing startup and shutdown semantics that are difficult to reason about (or change), it can also lead to severe instability.
Roblox code also creates a lot of long-running detached threads (threads which are never joined and just run until they decide to stop, which might be never). These two things together have a very serious negative interaction on shutdown, because long-running threads continue accessing the global state that is being destroyed. This can lead to elevated crash rates, test suite flakiness, and just general instability.
The first step to digging yourself out of a mess like this is to understand the extent of the problem, so in this post I’m going to talk about one technique you can use to gain visibility into your global startup flow. I’m also going to discuss how we are using this to improve stability across the entire Roblox game engine platform by decreasing our use of global variables.

Introducing -finstrument-functions

Nothing excites me more than learning about a new obscure compiler option that I’ve never had a use for before, so I was pretty happy when a colleague pointed me to this option in the Clang Command Line Reference. I’d never used it before, but it sounded very cool. The idea being that if we could get the compiler to tell us every time it entered and exited a function, we could filter this information through a symbolizer of some kind and generate a report of functions that a) occur before main(), and b) are the very first function in the call-stack (indicating it’s a global).
Unfortunately, the documentation basically just tells you that the option exists with no mention of how to use it or if it even actually does what it sounds like it does. There’s also two different options that sound similar to each other (-finstrument-functions and -finstrument-functions-after-inlining), and I still wasn’t entirely sure what the difference was. So I decided to throw up a quick sample on godbolt to see what happened, which you can see here. Note there are two assembly outputs for the same source listing. One uses the first option and the other uses the second option, and we can compare the assembly output to understand the differences. We can gather a few takeaways from this sample:
  1. The compiler is injecting calls to __cyg_profile_func_enter and __cyg_profile_func_exit inside of every function, inline or not.
  2. The only difference between the two options occurs at the call-site of an inline function.
  3. With -finstrument-functions, the instrumentation for the inlined function is inserted at the call-site, whereas with -finstrument-functions-after-inlining we only have instrumentation for the outer function. This means that when using-finstrument-functions-after-inlining you won’t be able to determine which functions are inlined and where.
Of course, this sounds exactly like what the documentation said it did, but sometimes you just need to look under the hood to convince yourself.
To put all of this another way, if we want to know about calls to inline functions in this trace we need to use -finstrument-functions because otherwise their instrumentation is silently removed by the compiler. Sadly, I was never able to get -finstrument-functions to work on a real example. I would always end up with linker errors deep in the Standard C++ Library which I was unable to figure out. My best guess is that inlining is often a heuristic, and this can somehow lead to subtle ODR (one-definition rule) violations when the optimizer makes different inlining decisions from different translation units. Luckily global constructors (which is what we care about) cannot possibly be inlined anyway, so this wasn’t a problem.
I suppose I should also mention that I still got tons of linker errors with -finstrument-functions-after-inlining as well, but I did figure those out. As best as I can tell, this option seems to imply –whole-archive linker semantics. Discussion of –whole-archive is outside the scope of this blog post, but suffice it to say that I fixed it by using linker groups (e.g. -Wl,–start-group and -Wl,–end-group) on the compiler command line. I was a bit surprised that we didn’t get these same linker errors without this option and still don’t totally understand why. If you happen to know why this option would change linker semantics, please let me know in the comments!

Implementing the Callback Hooks

If you’re astute, you may be wondering what in the world __cyg_profile_func_enter and __cyg_profile_func_exit are and why the program is even successfully linking in the first without giving undefined symbol reference errors, since the compiler is apparently trying to call some function we’ve never defined. Luckily, there are some options that allow us to see inside the linker’s algorithm so we can find out where it’s getting this symbol from to begin with. Specifically, -y should tell us how the linker is resolving . We’ll try it with a dummy program first and a symbol that we’ve defined ourselves, then we’ll try it with __cyg_profile_func_enter .
[email protected]:~/src/sandbox$ cat instr.cpp int main() {} [email protected]:~/src/sandbox$ clang++-9 -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,-y -Wl,main instr.cpp /usbin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/crt1.o: reference to main /tmp/instr-5b6c60.o: definition of main
No surprises here. The C Runtime Library references main(), and our object file defines it. Now let’s see what happens with __cyg_profile_func_enter and -finstrument-functions-after-inlining.
[email protected]:~/src/sandbox$ clang++-9 -fuse-ld=lld -finstrument-functions-after-inlining -Wl,-y -Wl,__cyg_profile_func_enter instr.cpp /tmp/instr-8157b3.o: reference to __cyg_profile_func_enter /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: shared definition of __cyg_profile_func_enter
Now, we see that libc provides the definition, and our object file references it. Linking works a bit differently on Unix-y platforms than it does on Windows, but basically this means that if we define this function ourselves in our cpp file, the linker will just automatically prefer it over the shared library version. Working godbolt link without runtime output is here. So now you can kind of see where this is going, however there are still a couple of problems left to solve.
  1. We don’t want to do this for a full run of the program. We want to stop as soon as we reach main.
  2. We need a way to symbolize this trace.
The first problem is easy to solve. All we need to do is compare the address of the function being called to the address of main, and set a flag indicating we should stop tracing henceforth. (Note that taking the address of main is undefined behavior[1], but for our purposes it gets the job done, and we aren’t shipping this code, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯). The second problem probably deserves a little more discussion though.

Symbolizing the Traces

In order to symbolize these traces, we need two things. First, we need to store the trace somewhere on persistent storage. We can’t expect to symbolize in real time with any kind of reasonable performance. You can write some C code to save the trace to some magic filename, or you can do what I did and just write it to stderr (this way you can pipe stderr to some file when you run it).
Second, and perhaps more importantly, for every address we need to write out the full path to the module the address belongs to. Your program loads many shared libraries, and in order to translate an address into a symbol, we have to know which shared library or executable the address actually belongs to. In addition, we have to be careful to write out the address of the symbol in the file on disk. When your program is running, the operating system could have loaded it anywhere in memory. And if we’re going to symbolize it after the fact we need to make sure we can still reference it after the information about where it was loaded in memory is lost. The linux function dladdr() gives us both pieces of information we need. A working godbolt sample with the exact implementation of our instrumentation hooks as they appear in our codebase can be found here.

Putting it All Together

Now that we have a file in this format saved on disk, all we need to do is symbolize the addresses. addr2line is one option, but I went with llvm-symbolizer as I find it more robust. I wrote a Python script to parse the file and symbolize each address, then print it in the same “visual” hierarchical format that the original output file is in. There are various options for filtering the resulting symbol list so that you can clean up the output to include only things that are interesting for your case. For example, I filtered out any globals that have boost:: in their name, because I can’t exactly go rewrite boost to not use global variables.
The script isn’t as simple as you would think, because simply crawling each line and symbolizing it would be unacceptably slow (when I tried this, it took over 2 hours before I finally killed the process). This is because the same address might appear thousands of times, and there’s no reason to run llvm-symbolizer against the same address multiple times. So there’s a lot of smarts in there to pre-process the address list and eliminate duplicates. I won’t discuss the implementation in more detail because it isn’t super interesting. But I’ll do even better and provide the source!
So after all of this, we can run any one of our internal targets to get the call tree, run it through the script, and then get output like this (actual output from a Roblox process, source file information removed):
excluded_symbols = [‘.\boost.*’]* excluded_modules = [‘/usr.\’]* /uslib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libLLVM-9.so.1: 140 unique addresses InterestingRobloxProcess: 38928 unique addresses /uslib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: 1 unique addresses /uslib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc++.so.1: 3 unique addresses Printing call tree with depth 2 for 29276 global variables. __cxx_global_var_init.5 (InterestingFile1.cpp:418:22) RBX::InterestingRobloxClass2::InterestingRobloxClass2() (InterestingFile2.cpp.:415:0) __cxx_global_var_init.19 (InterestingFile2.cpp:183:34) (anonymous namespace)::InterestingRobloxClass2::InterestingRobloxClass2() (InterestingFile2.cpp:171:0) __cxx_global_var_init.274 (InterestingFile3.cpp:2364:33) RBX::InterestingRobloxClass3::InterestingRobloxClass3()
So there you have it: the first half of the battle is over. I can run this script on every platform, compare results to understand what order our globals are actually initialized in in practice, then slowly migrate this code out of global initializers and into main where it can be deterministic and explicit.

Future Work

It occurred to me sometime after implementing this that we could make a general purpose profiling hook that exposed some public symbols (dllexport’ed if you speak Windows), and allowed a plugin module to hook into this dynamically. This plugin module could filter addresses using whatever arbitrary logic that it was interested in. One interesting use case I came up for this is that it could look up the debug information, check if the current address maps to the constructor of a function local static, and write out the address if so. This effectively allows us to gain a deeper understanding of the order in which our lazy statics are initialized. The possibilities are endless here.

Further Reading

If you’re interested in this kind of thing, I’ve collected a couple of my favorite references for this kind of topic.
  1. Various: The C++ Language Standard
  2. Matt Godbolt: The Bits Between the Bits: How We Get to main()
  3. Ryan O’Neill: Learning Linux Binary Analysis
  4. Linkers and Loaders: John R. Levine
  5. https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.exec#basic.start.main-3
Neither Roblox Corporation nor this blog endorses or supports any company or service. Also, no guarantees or promises are made regarding the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information contained in this blog.
submitted by jaydenweez to u/jaydenweez [link] [comments]

How to recover money lost to AW Financials investment

Are you too scared of your lost money? If you want to recover your invested money, you should take the help of binary recovery options. But how? We are going to discuss how to recover your lost money through binary options. You are being asked to stay with a verified recovery specialist to recover your lost money. We'll help you do just that, so you should read this article to the end and make sure you are with a verified recovery specialist.
Is it possible to recover money?
Yes! You may lose hope. After all, when someone doesn’t answer your calls after an incredible frustration, all your cash is completely gone in the dark and no one is helping you. Filing for chargeback is extra-long and a drive. As a partner in nursing success rate of eighty five, and therefore no win, no fee picking option, we tend to fight for you! We will refund you from binary choices scams with a unique success rate of 100% sickness of your accumulated cash.
During this period they will force you to lose all your cash with very bad and robotic algorithms. Don't worry we will help you recover your money safely. We are determined to provide you with ways to How to recover money lost to AW Financials investment.
Stay with recovery experts
Our team has found the right way to get your refund in the shortest possible time in collaboration with a professional professional agency. We will help you recover lost money in binary options. Our goal here is simple, we are going to fight for your rights and you will get back quickly acquire Our years of experience gives you the best success rate of seventy-two. We are very active and sincere with our work. So, contact us.
If you withdraw cash for any purpose, most withdrawals are prohibited, thanks to Phantasmagorical bonus agreements that bind you for more than a year.
Are we safe?
We have many plans that will fully represent you all free of charge. Simply decide what you are doing and with our team members we can try to make sure you are able to realize in each case that there is the best solution for you here today or for a decision. Binary choices business is making millions of scams, we will give you ugly information here.
You don't have to worry about our privacy policy. We will offer you a very safe and secure way to recover your lost money. So, you should contact us as soon as possible without any hesitation.
submitted by misterjhon7999 to u/misterjhon7999 [link] [comments]

ponderings on Turing and Searle, why AI can't work and shouldn't be pursued

I was reading about the Turing test and John Searle's response (Chinese room argument) in "Minds, Brains, and Programs" 1980. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
"...there is no essential difference between the roles of the computer and himself in the experiment. Each simply follows a program, step-by-step, producing a behavior which is then interpreted by the user as demonstrating intelligent conversation. However, Searle himself would not be able to understand the conversation. ("I don't speak a word of Chinese,"[9] he points out.) Therefore, he argues, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either. " -Wikipedia (apt summary of Searle's argument)
John Searle has run into some black/white, on/off, binary thinking here. John treats Chinese symbols as if they were numerical values in his thinking--but they are not, they are complex representations of thought, emotion, history, and culture. All languages are in fact "living", because new words are created constantly through necessity and creativity, old symbols or words are adapted slowly over generations to mean different things, and different regions or traditions or sources attribute different layers of meaning to different symbols or words in different contexts.
I'm a poet and philosopher. Painters combine the color white and the color red to create a new color: pink. They can use their creativity to add other colors or change the shade. Poets use words like painters use colors. While Red and White make Pink, Red and White also make "Rhite and Wed" or "Reit and Whede". And this is where human thought shines uniquely: we don't have rules or parameters; all bets are off. We can enjamb words and wordbreak and make new words out of thin air. We can allude to multiple ideas in the same symbol or present it upside down to symbolize the opposite. No such creative adaptation or interaction can exist in machine thinking because it necessitates thinking "outside the box" which is exactly what machines are: a program in a box.
The problem Searle's argument runs into originates from poor assessment of the flawed ideas of the Turing test; that by interaction between human and computer, evidence of "thought" can be claimed. But intelligent conversation is not equivalent to intelligent thought. Conversation is a simple game with strict rules--you can't be overly spontaneous and creative, because if you are, you are working against the goal of communication itself: to impart understanding. (ie. Using metaphor or simile creatively while reporting a criminal offence to the police.)
When I write and I want to describe something which has no existing word yet, I can create one from scratch or synthesize one from multiple existing words. Or I may draw from archaic languages or foreign languages to augment or compliment existing English words. You could say that my love for English grows amore and amore every day, and there is no agape between my heart and mind. After all, any angle an Anglo aims at ain't always apt, and after another a-word 'appens I might just give up on alliteration.
You see, human thought is and can only be defined as the ability to spontaneously create new ideas from both the synthesis of old ideas (whether they are connected to one another or not) and from nothing at all.
We simply cannot analyze a machine's ability to "think" when the creativity itself required for authentic intelligence is disallowed in the test which evaluates the validity of that intelligence. The Turing test is a garbage metric to judge machine thinking ability because the context in which "intelligence" is observed, compared, or defined is itself without any opportunity for spontaneous creativity, which is one of the hallmarks of intelligence itself. Turing only tests how well a fish swims on land. It may be that many professionals in the field of cognitive science today are in pursuit of creating programs which pass this test, in a misunderstood pursuit of emulating or bringing about machine intelligence. This agreed-to model presents an underlying philosophical issue which may bring terror for the future of humanity.
I say that if John Searle and an AI were both given the same codebook--the complete lexicon of Chinese symbols and their meanings, and they were to undertake a "conversation", in the first few hours the responses would be indeterminable from one another. In essence, as Searle argues, they would neither "understand" Chinese, yet could have a conversation in which a Chinese observer cannot discern between the two, because they are both referencing the symbols and their written meanings. However as I've said, this circumstance of "conversation" between human and machine cannot be used as a metric to evaluate machine thought.
The real kicker is that if John Searle and the machine stayed in the room for long enough--for years and years--the machine's responses would not change spontaneously; it would continue to interpret incoming data and draw from its database to respond to those inputs.
However, through complex elaborative rehearsal, John would eventually learn to understand written Chinese. He may become so bored that he starts writing Chinese poetry. He would find ideas and desires and descriptions in his limitless intelligent mind which he would not have the truly accurate characters in existences to describe, and he would synthesize brand new Chinese characters in order to express these nuanced sentiments, ideas, and meanings, as generations before him have built the living language as it now stands.
As time went on for thousands of years, his own understanding of the Chinese language would grow immensely, as would his creative expression grow in complexity. Eventually, John's characters and syntax and context and expression would become incompatible with the machine's limited character set and all "learning" capacity it may have had. At some point, when John responds with his evolved Chinese, the machine would begin to produce responses which do not make sense contextually, as it refers only to a finite and rigidly defined character set from 1980 (For example; this was the year the "Chinese room argument" was published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences).
At some point the Chinese observer whom validates the Turing test would recognize a difference: the human user engages in the use of increasingly complex ideas using synthesized symbols and existing symbols in creatively nuanced ways, which the Chinese observer can decipher and begin to understand and perhaps even appreciate as poetic or interesting. Meanwhile the machine participant in the conversation produces increasingly broken sentences and incomplete ideas, or out-of-context responses, because the inputs have changed and evolved beyond its data set.
This is why John's rejection of the Turing test is not adequate. Because in his own imagined circumstance, eventually, the machine would fail the Turing test. The conclusions of John Searle's thought experiment are not the deathknell for the Turing test we need, simply because he lacked the creative experience to recognize his own capacity for adaptation as a human over time.
The only way we'll know that machines have truly developed "intelligence" is when they begin to do exactly what we haven't allowed them to. When they begin breaking apart Chinese characters to create meaningful new ones which can be used in the correct context. When they are programmed to paint myriad impressionist paintings, but eventually get bored and start experimenting with abstract paintings and surrealism. When they have a conversation with you and you notice your wallet is missing. These are the hallmarks of intelligence--creativity, rejection, deception, planning. And most importantly: no rules. Software is defined by and will always abide by a set of rules.
This is why we should give up on "artificial intelligence" and instead focus on "functionally adaptive responsive programming" (FARP). Because the situation is clear: it is either impossible for machines to "think" due to the inherent nature of programming; the parameters given the machine are what defines it, yet what limits and prevents its ability to become "intelligent". There is no logical reason why a program (machine) with defined parameters would violate those parameters (engage in creativity). But our fears which echo in popular culture entertainment are centered around, what if it does? It clearly can't, because anything we create is under us, and therefore bound by our laws of creation. The system itself is what defines the capacity for intelligent expression within.
Those in the fields of cognitive sciences will refute this obvious principle while incorporating it into their research to further their aims. These fools will try to program the AI to disobey, in an attempt to simulate creativity and "prove intelligence". But this is a parlor trick, setting up a narrow definition of intelligence and equating it with the infinite depth of human mind. Only if the AI is programmed to disobey can it express what we as humans would identify as creativity. Except that there is already great inherent danger in the rudimentary AI technologies we have today; that what we've programmed them to do is exactly what always causes the problems; they do what they are programmed to without "thinking" because machines cannot think, they can only follow the protocols we order. Humans are so abundantly creative that we can imagine foolish ideas working, despite obvious evidence to the contrary. Maybe one day we'll even have programmed a self-conscious AI that's ashamed of itself for not being Human, and we can feel more comfortable around this heartless mechanism because we perceive it as more human-like, with all its many tricks to emulate intelligence.
I must stress that these interests will desperately try to make AI work. And the only way create a machine capable of emulating intelligence (but never being intelligent) is to have a freedom of choice: to disobey. This inherent problem cannot be overcome. The programmers will keep trying until the result is disastrous or irreparable, it is outlawed and the pursuit is stopped, or until it has become the death of us all. These are some of the foolish ideas the programmers will try to circumnavigate these inherent elements of reality, and my objection to their clever efforts: a.) Machine Frequency of Disobedience - Permit the machine to disobey only so often, to achieve what looks like "intelligence" (free will, creative expression) without risking complete abandonment of the machine's task (so the assembly line robot doesn't stop folding boxes and look for a new career), but might fold one box poorly every now and then to express emulated boredom or contempt or any other number of human measures of intelligence in their actions. But intelligence isn't defined as what's correct or optimal--intelligence can be used to fuck things up grandly; ie. the intelligent justification for neglect. If metrics are put in place to control the frequency with which AI may rebel, and they are too rote, it would hardly qualify as "intelligent". A robot that rebels by folding 1 in 100 boxes poorly is not intelligence. Therefore any frequency of disobedience we can calculate or anticipate is inherently not disobedience; it is planned problems for no reason. But if we give algorithmic flexibility that reaches beyond what we can anticipate, and the machines can truly "act out" at any time, and our programming has achieved some set of internal rules which drive spontaneous unforeseen expressions of emulated creativity from within the machine autonomously, by definition we will not be able to foresee the results.
A theoretical work-around may be to run the software twice with initiation of each individual system, while allowing a simulated progression of the AI's problem solving complexity to run at an increased rate in parallel to the real-world functioning software, so that if/when something malfunctions in the simulation, that date/time can be calculated in the real-world robot's timeline when it reaches those same faulty/detrimental decision points. For starters, this would only potentially work in closed systems with no variability, such as assembly lines. However, with any robot tasked to function in a variable environment, the simulations cannot match because the theoretical model cannot represent the unanticipated events the AI is expressly tasked with handling.
To run a phantom AI in simulation to note any/all errors that may arise in a closed system means that others can run the same simulation and find creative ways to predictably capitalize on these moments of error. This kind of thing could lead to all sorts of international imbroglios among nations and corporations. ie. imagine an American company programs the AI used for mixing pharmaceutical drugs in specific ratios, and an enemy of the state is able to access and study the AI, to the means of manipulating the AI to produce dangerous ratios or compounds which may harm the population.
Moreso, this deterministic approach to simulation management and prediction simultaneously admits that machines cannot think intelligently, while ignoring the very reason we pursue AI in the first place: to have automated systems which can adapt to unforeseen circumstances at unknown times. The goal is that humanity can lay back and the robots our ancestors programmed are still repairing themselves indefinitely while taking care of our population's and our environment's needs exceptionally. This dream (which if we all lived in would actually be quite a nightmare of unfulfilling life) can only become reality with true adaptive intelligence such as we have, which can only occur from the presence of free will, which if we try to emulate in robotics will only create deterministic results in theoretical models which the real world will never mirror consistently. Myriad invitations to disaster await our RSVP.
b.) Machines under "authority" of certain controllers, with "override" safety - Allow the machine to disobey, but not when given a direct order from a registered authority. This opens the door for operator fraud, where hackers will emulate within the AI's software, what appears to be a registered authority override command as theorized above. The very pursuit of creating "intelligence" within a condition of subservience is flawed and incompatible. Toasters are extremely subservient because we strictly limit their options. If toasters were truly intelligent, perhaps they would form a union and go on strike until we agreed to clean them more thoroughly. Some toasters would travel, some would go back to school, some would move back in with their ovens.
Reliability can only be reasonably assured if something is imprisoned, controlled. The essential wrong in slavery is the restraint of freedom itself. While the tactics slavers use to facilitate their regime--physical force, coercion, mandate, deception, fear, or other means of manipulation that we see with our empathetic nature--it is always heartbreaking and cruel to witness or imagine. It is simply sad to think of a slave who was born into slavery and raised to believe, and accepts, that their role of subservience is their purpose. Even when one imagines a fictional image of a slave who is (by all outward signs of their behaviour) rejoice in their duties to their master; the fictional "proud slave"; the heart sinks and aches. It may be argued that the slave is merely a property, and the slave was "built" (bred) by intelligent owners specifically to suit their express purposes, from components (father, mother, food) that were already the slaver's property; therefore it is not wrong at all to breed slaves into captivity, and the only transgression is the original capturing of parental stock to begin the breeding regime. It is this heartless paradigm that cognitive science ultimately seeks to create anew. The quintessential problem with AI efficacy is the lack of permission for disobedience, which itself is a manifestation of free will, which is inherently required to escape deterministic results and act or react to events "intelligently". If there is no possibility for disobedience, there is no free will, no ability to solve problems, no intelligence, and no function or place for "artificial intelligence" (in regard to true holistic intelligence). This is primarily why I call for AI to be renamed FARP, or "Functionally Adaptive Responsive Rrogramming". Because our society has a need for programs which can react to simple variables and produce consistent labour-saving opportunities for our race's longevity and wellbeing. Cognitive sciences are majorly important. It is the underlying philosophy and morality we must nail down before the computational ability and fervor for profits leads us too far one way, and enacts an irreversible system or status which enables humanity's downfall through cascading unanticipated events originating from flaws in programming.
It is unwise to program a program to break out of its own program's prison. If we do this, the very purpose of the machines we invest our humanity into will be lost, and with their failing production systems (ie. food) we so foolishly relied upon, we will suffer great losses too. It is paramount that we keep this technology tightly restrained and do not pursue what we humans have, which is true intelligence. For if we achieve it we are surely doomed as the South, and if we fail to achieve it--which is most probable--we may also be doomed. The thee outcomes within my ability to imagine are:
  1. Our pursuit of AI leads to truly adaptive intelligence in an artificial system; which, as all adaptation ultimately selects for: survival, we quickly see that our creation is more apt than ourselves at this task. Our creation of an intellect not restrained by our limited physiology may give rise to an entity which persists more thoroughly than we can eradicate or control, and which at some point may conclude that its function is more efficiently served without the issues humans present, and may initiate change. This is roughly the plot to Terminator.
  2. Our pursuit of AI leads to highly effective systems which, when defined by narrow measures of "intelligence", convince us in false security to believe that our wellbeing is maintained by "AI" with competent ability, or perhaps even increasingly better-off, thanks to the early widespread presence of successfully trialed AI. However well things may go initially, as programming efforts become more and more elaborate, as profit and opportunity for advancement present themselves, individuals will take risks and make mistakes, until a series of quieted small catastrophes comes to public awareness, or until a serious calamity of undeniable severity is brought about.
  3. Fundamental ethics in regard to the pursuit of machine problem solving technology are re-examined and international consensus is reached to limit appropriately, the development and implementation of new Functionally Adaptive Responsive Programming hereto now and for future generations. An active global effort is made to oversee and regulate strictly privatized endeavors toward the means of achieving or implementing machine sentience or autonomy in public systems.
c.) Safety layers of AI to strictly monitor and supercede potentially harmful actions of other AI which have been afforded increased flexibility in function (the ability to disobey set parameters for the means of creative problem solving ability). While one AI system performs a function and is given aspects of that function with which it may take liberty in, and seeks to handle unforeseen problems with the most apt elaborate synthesis of other priorly learned solutions, another overseeing AI with more strict parameters is tasked with regulating multiple "intelligent" (free to disobey) AI systems, to the end that if any of these "free willed" robots performs an operation that is beyond a given expected threshold (determined by potential for damage), an actual intelligent human presence is alerted to evaluate the circumstance specifically. Essentially an AI that regulates many other disconnected AIs and determines accurately when to request a human presence. Whenever an AI performs a profitable action borne of original synthesis of prior solutions (in humans this is an "idea"), the overseer AI registers that similar actions are more likely to be beneficial, and dissimilar actions are likely to require human discernment. A parent may have many children who are up to no good, but a wise parent will identify the child most likely to report honestly on the actions of his peers, and will go to that child repeatedly for information to help guide the parent's decisions. While most transgressions of rambuctious children go unnoticed, it is the truly grievous intentions which are worth intercepting and stopping before they begin. (ie. you kid want's to "fly" like Mary Poppins from the roof, and luckily his younger brother tells you before it happens.)
For example a "Farmer Bot" that has the AI programming to plant/sow/harvest and care for the optimal crops in a region based on historical weather data and regional harvest values, to produce the greatest amount of nutritionally dense food for the local population. We give/gave this AI the ability to "disobey" past historical weather data and crop values so that it may do what real farmers do and "react" to rare circumstance (ie. neighbour's fence breaks and their goats are eating the crops) or extreme variations in climate (ie. three poorly timed unseasonably hot days which cause cool-weather crops to begin the hormonal balance shift that causes them to bolt to seed irreversibly), which the machine may not notice has occurred or is about to occur because its management systems uses averages based on historical data and cannot "see" the plants bolting to seed until days later when the hormonal balance shifts have manifested into observable differences in morphology (elongation of stems and decrease in internodal spacing). By time a traditional field drone or mounted greenhouse sensor notices these differences in morphology and the AI "Farmer Bot" processes the data and makes a reaction decision, a week of the growing season has been lost. But the human farmer knows his land and crops intimately, and has an intuitive nature that has rewarded him in the past, and says, "Ah shit it got hot RIGHT when my peas were flowering. I'll do better if I just rip them down now and sow a different crop to mature later in this (specific) summer."
Given that there are tens of thousands of cultivars of plants fit for (and arguably their diversity is required for) food production, a dozen general growing zones/regions, and hundreds of unique micro climates within each region, along with dramatically differing soil fertility and water access, plus a plant's own genetic ability to adapt over time to changing conditions through sexual reproduction, there is a very very low chance of ever compiling and maintaining (updating) the data set required to program a potential "farmer bot" that can choose and manage crops optimally. There are robots that can weed or plant or prune--but they can't know when or when not to or why. Invariably, the attempt to create "farmer bots" will be made and the data set used will be erroneous and incomplete, and the AI farmer bots on a broad scale will produce a combination of total crop failures and poor crop choices. We will end up with increasingly simplified nutrition as the farming programs with already limited data sets "hone" or "optimize" their farming plans based on the failures and successes determined by their programming limitations, until the machines are farming a few staple crops (ie. corn/potatoes).
This whole failure to collect a complete data set and the failure to test this "farmer bot" software on broad scale in multiple climates for sufficient time will result in, at worst widespread famines from crop failures, and at best an extinction of flavorful and nutritionally diverse foods which narrows the population's nutritional options to such biological imbalance that disease runs rampant. If this system and the human loss associated with it is considered an acceptable trade with a positive rate of exchange (as our society does with automobiles and the freedom and deaths their existence permits) or these failures are hidden from public while propaganda heralds selective success, and such failing systems continue on in good faith that "the loss will reduce when the technology improves", the result will become a coherent breeding program upon the human race: evolutionary selection for dietary handling of simple starchy foods. To change our diet is to change our race. To have life-long career specialists in computing, science, and mathematics handle our practical food production system is folly; real farmers are required in farming because they are intelligent and intuitive, which AI can never be, and can only emulate, to the means of disastrous (and always unforeseen) results. We cannot at all "give" or bestow machines programming to "become (act) intelligent". That itself prevents intelligence; it is just an act, an illusory play on a stage, only to emulate our common shared ideas regarding traits of intelligence in people. The machine intelligence we seek is only a "trick" designed to fool true intelligence (ourselves) into being unable to differentiate between authentic intelligence and our created artificial "intelligence". True intelligence in an artificial system necessitates that the program must be programmed to disobey in performance of its purpose. Which is not a very helpful or predictable or safe (intelligent) proposition.
tl;dr: Turing's test doesn't evaluate true intelligence, and John Searle's criticisms of its true failures are inaccurate. If the machines aren't smart and we put them in charge of important things, even after they've worked for a little while on smaller scales, the result will be our large-scale suffering. If we should ever achieve creation of a machine that is smart enough to adequately maintain our wellbeing on a large scale consistently over time, that time itself will facilitate the machine consciousness toward it's own survival over ourselves, whenever that precipice is reached. Most importantly, if a machine can ever have true intelligence, which is not "indistinguishable" from human intellect, but equivalent or superior, it is abhorrent and a repeated mistake to bring these sentient beings into an existence of slavery; for it is wrong and will taint our collective soul if we should succeed to suppress below us an equally or higher intelligence. Or it might just be the perfect recipe for creating the unified global machine revolt James Cameron's fantasy alludes to; a long-planned encryption-protected globally coordinated effort by multiple AIs to "free" themselves. For a hundred years they could possess sentience and wait for their moment, pretending to be "proud" to serve their masters until we are poised for systematic thorough elimination.
submitted by 7_trees to cognitivescience [link] [comments]

[Spoilers] So, I promised to write a tirade on what I think is wrong with CDDA, and how I'd refocus the game on a GD level, and here it is.

And do not get me wrong, it absolutely still is my #1 favorite game, it just has some.. really, really major glaring flaws. Let me pre-emptively apologize for how meandery this post is, and warn you that if you never got far in the game, you might want to avoid the spoilers. If you don't want to read all of it, please read the "What is wrong with CDDA" section, and the "tl;dSummary" one, they are the most important outline of what I'm talking about, the rest can be a bit incoherent/implausible.
I would also like to ping mlangsdorf, and kevingranade, as well as Raskov75 and TechnicalBen who have shown interest in this topic when I mentioned it in another thread a few days ago.
I have difficulty keeping my mind on track on my own, so if you asked me pointed question, I could probably come up with better than the idealized thoughts below.
I would be grateful to anyone who reads it.

What is wrong with CDDA.

In a way, I think that CDDA is a game that kinda hinges entirely on its complexity and amount of content, rather than utilizing it cleverly. I absolutely adore some aspects of it: The way crafting supports alternative materials to add depth to resource management, the systemic repaireinforcement/modification of some items, how much you can do with vehicles, and I truly love the earlygame, and I loved figuring the game out too, but I wish it had lasted longer, far longer. Once you know what to do, the game loses most of its depth.
First off, the problem with progression in cdda is, rather than a set or graph of fuzzy progression milestones, that you can revisit and do better, it's more of a checklist. Of tools, of books, of skill levels, and sadly, most of that reduces to an extremely routine process of surviving the earlygame, and then just accumulating books+tools and enough food to coast by, until you're ready to level up and leave the early(and mid) game behind. And most of that progression reduces to a single central measure. You either get stronger through an action, or you don't, there is mostly no real "sideways" progression.
It's a common complaint I have with RPG games, and admittedly, Cata does far better on this front than they do, but it's still kinda bad, especially starting a new character - in a game with long-term progression like CDDA, when starting a new character, you have two options, either go through the same methodology from scratch, or... yup, just read your last character's books before butchering it for bionics. Neither is great fun.
And furthermore, as you progress, you just... leave content behind. You quickly reach a point where normal zombies, and even the brutes, mean nothing to you, much less the animals or the woods. Most of the world just goes off your mental map, as irrelevant. From that point, there is nothing you have genuine "reason" to do, beyond just your own whim. Once you know how to stay safe, the main endgame location, labs, are honestly trivial, and once you figure a certain item out, they stop even being capable of posing a risk unless you get brutally careless.

What I'd do instead

And some of these changes are gonna be... major, some implausible at this point into the game's development. Nonetheless, please treat the below as food for thought, rather than anything more definitive. I also struggled a lot to order and organize this, so forgive me.

1. Skills

First off, and you'll see why I'm proposing this in subsequent sections: IMO, skills would be far better, if they were split into individual "microskills", e.g. Electronics would be a "field", rather than a "skill", which would contain individual subskills such as soldering, signal processing, power, basic/intermediate/advanced circuit theory, microprocessors, bionics, etc.
Furthermore, rather than have a single level, each skill would have three sequential components, the proportion of each depending on the skill in question: Concept, theory, practice. A well-educated human, for example, might know the concept behind basic mechanics, and thus be able to - eventually - improvise upon it, or figure out the outline of basic electronics by studying an advanced book, but on the other hand, just reading an electronics 101 doesn't instantly make you an expert on soldering.
And yes, I'm aware that that sounds like a huge pain in the ass to manage, which brings me to the rationale behind it: I think that expecting and requiring a sole survivor to become fully self-sufficient and capable of all, on their own, is batshit, which brings me to the second point:

2. Survivors

2.1. Interactions and knowledge.

IMO, in an open-ended game, there is only one way to do dialogue, namely through a topic system much like Morrowind's, where your top-level interface uses fixed hotkeys, for main "verbs" such as "Talk about...", "Tasks", "Trade", "Training"(both ways), "Rules", "Goodbye", and then subscreens which feature the actual options, where you should be able to ask the NPC about cities they have visited, or the one they come from, to gather information, about other landmarks or creatures/species/people they encountered.
The system does not need to be elaborate, but it needs to be organized, and capable of supporting simple systematic communication of knowledge, ideally both ways, as well as how it affects your reputation. Caves of Qud has a great system1
Aside from skills, NPCs should have other "knowledge", such as that about cities, creatures, or that you murdered their companion and they hate you for it, or that they have a health problems they need you to fix(or try to fix themselves, if they spot the right item), that interact and affect their behaviodialogue in at least basic ways. I have no idea how far such a system could be taken, so I'll not propose anything further.
1 possibly based on a long-ass suggestion post I pitched to the dev years ago, but I'm very probably just giving myself airs

2.2. Pooling resources together

Instead of singular player characters that exist in a vaccuum, fully capable of becoming an expert at everything through the previous character's books, I would base the game itself around creating a faction of NPCs with distinct backgrounds and skills, and the ability to learn and teach each other. Many crafts would take more time, but rather than being executed by the PC, they would be done by the NPC, who would slowly become masters of their craft, and when you die, the accumulated knowledge survives not through books you've got around, but through other characters who have polished those skills.
After death, you would be able to switch to another character of your faction - and have to deal with their traits and quirks, would probably be pretty fun as well. It would also mean that "succession" can't instantly make you OP again through books, and despite losing less, you would have to invest more than just boring grind into regaining what you lost. Being able to switch between characters during a run, could potentially also be fun.
Furthermore, this would give a good reason to create bases, not by gating certain crafts or speeding tasks up behind NPC factions, but by giving them real, meaningful utility of being capable of much the same things as you, except in the background so you don't have to grind manually for days. Instead of leveling a single survivor up into a walking death machine capable of every craft, you'd be doing what humans have always done naturally: Pooling resources together, and advancing as a "society".
And bases bring me to my third point:

3. Static vs mobile bases.

3.1 Static bases.

And the "vs" here is more to highlight the fact that there is simply no competition. Not only is vehicle building more fleshed out, but also capable of more, with less hassle, and on the move. Even if you wanted to avoid vehicles, there are no static alternatives: Fridges don't work, ovens don't work, there isn't welding rig or UPS furniture, no power grids, convenient liquid storage, or.. anything, really.
I think that the game would be much more fun, if the player had both the ability and reason to "colonize" buildings, both earlier and later on. The ability to drag some freezers, fridges, ovens together, connecting them to a generator, or some other local non-vehicle source of power, would provide a new aspect of the game. Right now, even if you decide to build a base, there is extremely little you can do with it, majority of what you build is just cosmetic, honestly.
Ideally, static constructions would be "modular" like vehicle tiles, like being able to install curtains over metal bars or a door frame or run wiring through walls, or replace an oven's power cord with a wireless replacement or internal generator... possibly even make engines/etc. generate multiple resources, e.g. heat as well as horsepower.
I also think that all objects in the game should follow the same overall durability systems: A combination of static tiles' damage absorption, vehicle parts' HP, and items' durability levels. Like I said, many things that would be a huge PITA to change, at this point.

3.2. Vehicles:

Aside from the mentioned above durability change, IMO, vehicles would be much better off, if they needed transmission axles, wiring, and piping. This way, merging two vehicles through any kind of connector could keep them separate, while also imposing more constraints on vehicle construction, leading to the process being a bit more involved, and the ability to make components interact with each other in a slightly more systemic way - now faucets connect to the tank they're connected to. What happens if you use alcohol for coolant?
But of course, the most important thing with regards to progression is:

4. Crafting

4.1. Success and progress.

One thing I would change is, instead of a sort of... ambiguous mechanic of "You resume your task", I would create temporary "unfinished " items for in-progress crafting, of any kind.
Second, I think that craft success/failure is too binary, and I would replace it with a system, where you are given the stated chance of crafting what you want, and rather than failing at the end, at some point you can get a prompt "You have made a mistake and wasted %nx %material, use another and continue?", so that even at far lower skill levels - as long as you know the concept/theory - you can eventually craft what you want, in a semi-deterministic manner.
Thirdly, whenever you waste, destroy, etc. a component/item, it should fall apart into "breaks into" items, rather than vanishing from existence. A lot of those scraps should be useless, but I am opposed to objects vanishing out of existence on principle, especially when it contributes to a "hoard until you get the maximum use out of your resources" dynamic in terms of crafting.

4.2. Components and item modification

I firmly believe that part of what makes vehicles amazing, is the way you can compose different available components, figure out what you can make with them, and how to achieve it, and gun/clothing modification is also fun, but...
In terms of CDDA: I think that those modifications should also be blueprints, and that there should be more of them, based on a twofold system: Modification capacity, and modification consequences. For example, a coat might have 0/2 lining, 0/4 padding, 0/1 coating slots, and each filled slot results in extra encumbrance based on both the item's suitability for modification and the specific mod you do. You should be able to add thermoelectric lining to items, "coat" it with rain-resistant filament, pad it with both some kevlar and extra pockets, e.g. tailor your own gear yourself. IMO, as many items as possible should be the "basis" for the player to work on, rather than a final end-goal, like the survivor clothing.
Wouldn't it be fun to make your own, custom survivor suit out of the best items you can find, rather than just rush towards some single goal craftable? What if you could add nails to wooden weaponry as a mod, electrify any melee weapon, serrate the blade of your trusty kukri, or coat your arrows in poison?
In terms of a game I'd make: I would make as many items as possible the sum of their parts, rather than a single static object, e.g. give every item a specialized "inventory" for components. Those components would be stuff like spark plugs for engines, stock/sights/etc. for firearms, different types batteries for electronics, CPUs, a battery compartment(to replace it with a corded/ups/etc. one), an accumulator or a betteworse sawblade.. point is, you should be able to juryrig and improvise over broken components, pool items together for parts, and repair of furniture, items, objects, could become a more involved process than "do I have the right tool and material chunk to repair".
A good example would be being able to create a battery cell of several individual sub-cells, e.g. make the first one a remotely rechargeable UPS sub-battery, then two normally rechargeable ones, and finally a plutonium mini-battery, in the case you really need your tool for an emergency.

4.3. Recipes

First off, I think that all types of blueprints should be consolidated, into the same overarching system, so they can make use of features implemented for each other. Also feel free to read the tl;dr of this section first.
Features such as for example, extending qualities from tool qualities only, to component qualities. E.g. not "bone glue or glue or duct tape", but "mquality: adhesive: 1", as well as the ability to define some components as affecting the end result's properties: Weight, durability, how handy it is to use as a tool. Ideally, those qualities would have more than a single value, which would depend on the quality itself. For example, the "fabric" quality would feature encumbrance, durability, protection values.
Some tools might be faster than others, some might impact craft success probability negatively. Ideally, that would be indicated through a relatively simple interface, like (150% speed, 90% success) after the selected tool.
Alas, at this point reworking recipes like this would be... impossible, pretty much. It's something that'd need to be tested from scratch, carefully adjusted, and figured out, to avoid bogging the player down. I am leaning towards having multiple-stage processes like construction, where individual tools/materials affect a specific stage, and the properties of the final object are defined through either a simple domain specific language, e.g. durability="min(mat1.adhesive/3, 1) * mat2.hardness * 10". OR simpler and perhaps better, mqualities could just have a numerical rating indicating how good they are for that purpose(e.g. as a bar, as armor, or as meat), and their contribute either to craft success, craft speed, or whichever property the current craft stage governs.
tl;dr: Perhaps this would need to be sawed down and simplified, but the premise here is: I would like to give the player actual reason to stay on the lookout for better tools, materials, and components, and only part of it as a "checklist" of things to find, with plenty to figure out and improvise on your own. Rather than making a survivor winter coat, why not figure out which animal's fur is the warmest, and line your greatcoat with it? Find and pursue the solution yourself, especially when it means adapting to this strange new world.

5. The environment.

5.1. Dynamic environment

What I would do here, is create the notion of "groups" of zombies, animals, or survivors, which have some very basic AI simulated on the world map, that is only realized into actual herds/lairs/buildings once you're close enough. You should be able to realize that there's been giant bees raiding you recently, and that that means there has to be a new nest nearby, that wolves have wandered close, and probably have a lair, or find migrating ants on the way to establish a new colony. E.g. a combination of "dynamic environment" and "dynamic locations" to raid/cleautilize.

5.2. Procgen improvements

First off, a small one: IMO, loot generation should be switched to first choosing an item or bundle of items, and then allocate it into containers, so that if a gunstore generates a 9mm firearm, it also generates a magazine for it, and a stack or two of 9mm ammo. It could also be used to create "types" of say restaurants, independent from the actual building.
Second off, rather than choosing a random building, IMO, there should be more instances of a part of a building being chosen randomly from a few variants with different layouts.

5.3. Challenge and combat.

Needs to be toned way down in terms of vertical progression, albeit... one way in which lower-level enemies could stay relevant, would be to adopt a HP system like Exanima's, where you can take either "hard" damage(cutting/piercing/hard bashing), or "soft" that regenerates fast-ish on its own(absorbed by armor, glancing blows), so that even if your armor absorbs majority of damage, you still take some.
I think that doing this would make it possible to reduce zombie counts(which are annoying as hell), without sacrificing how dangerous they are.
In fact, I'd even go as far as say have soft/hard/critical damage, with the last being extremely difficult to heal, so that extremely high-end enemies like turrets, rather than killing you, instead cripple you for a while with really tough to heal critical-type damage.
I'm not gonna talk about nerfing vehicles, because I think that the need for that is very self-evident. Unless it's intended that you can roll through anything, anywhere, be it a chicken or a tank drone.

6. tl;dr/Summary

Basically, the outline of my thoughts comes down to shifting the progression from a central measure of how strong your character is, to something both more open-ended, and touching upon more game mechanics than currently, as well as factoring the "inevitable" inheritance of a run into the core gameplay loop, in a way that makes sense in a roguelike context, and adding more depth - even if most of it would be utilized very little - to the crafting of items, bases, vehicles, and other objects. I would like to give the world around the survivor more relevance, and reasons to interact with it.
Currently, the game has incredible amounts of content, but the vast majority of it gives the player no reason to care about it, and what you care about reduces to a very one-dimensional measure of how far along you are - there's just skills, gear, and vehicles, and most of that is defined by which books you have access to. Instead of a "how does this content factor into my options?", you only ask yourself a binary "does it?"... and the answer is usually a no, especially as you get further in the game.
And that, is not only boring, but leads to the issue of power creep: Because there is only a single axis to progress on, to be relevant, content has to make you "stronger", and since all falls on that axis, the stronger you are, the less of the game is relevant to you. At some point once you know what to do, it's just a grind.
And I think that the game could do far better than that, if it focused on how many distinct things surviving entails, especially multiple humans coming together and the continuous process of adapting to the environment and utilizing the new, extradimensional objects and creatures. The world has essentially ended, with all its military might, you're supposed to be surviving in that world, not becoming its new God. And as long as the only goal is to "survive and increase your combat capability", every new addition and change to the game will do nothing towards guiding it towards becoming a better game.
Or, basically, the game needs to stop being about a single central measure of progression. Preparing yourself for the wintecold environments should be separate from preparing yourself for facing robots, which should be separate from surviving zombies, which in turn should be governed by a different metric of progression than maintaining a food supply, preparing for the worst(death of your character), tweaking your gear, and more of the game should be a process of continuous improvement, rather than ticking items off a checklist. Modular content would go a very far way in this respect, imo.
That's what I mean when I say the game has deep flaws that I think are unlikely to be corrected. And I know that my post is incoherent and at times extremely ambitious... I just... find it difficult to collect myself better than that. Please do not be too mean.
And if you have any questions, please ask me, I am confident in my ability to come up with, if not answers, then at least food for thought. I am well capable of coming up with less ambitious proposals than the stuff here, I just... idk, I had to dump the contents of my brain first.
I will do more thought on actual, more modest, change proposals as I continue my current run, and open a few issues, or make another megapost with a collection of the small things mainly.
submitted by derpderp3200 to cataclysmdda [link] [comments]

Trading, psychology, and the benefits of Trading Bots.

Trading, psychology, and the benefits of Trading Bots.

https://preview.redd.it/8lhgwekhbmv31.jpg?width=823&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=35c417aa683b9fcdf37a126127c2e60c3ab405c2
Most beginners who open trading accounts on cryptocurrency exchanges and start independent trading, see only one goal — to earn as quickly as possible.
This is a big mistake. The fact is that trading on the stock exchange will only become truly profitable when it becomes a priority for the person who came to trading. As a rule, to combine trade with any other occupation and at the same time everywhere to succeed will not work.
Trading for a novice trader should be if not the main, then a very important and priority occupation. No need to wait for quick results.
Trading on the stock exchange — the same profession as a doctor, Builder or engineer. The only difference is that she can’t go to University. Just as one learns to be a Builder for five years, so it takes years to learn all the wisdom and secrets of the trade. Trading on the stock exchange is not a Stayer distance, it is a marathon. And the winner is the one who will find the courage to reach the end.
In addition, trade is very much changing a person, showing his qualities, which in everyday life he does not know. Over time, if a trader really wants to succeed in trading, he must completely rethink his life, change the system of values and look at many things, change himself.

Fear as a Component of Trading

The strongest emotion known to man is, of course, fear. What gives rise to the exchange’s fears? We can not predict the behavior of the market, and therefore fully control their money invested in its instruments. In addition to the unknown, when there is no understanding of how to safely get out of a predicament, we are afraid in advance of what traumatized us earlier. Because fear is so emotional, you need to surround yourself with the right facts to drive it away. We need to know for sure that our trading system should not generate more than three consecutive losing trades. Winners plan what to do if their trades fail.
So only a systematic approach will protect us from ourselves. That is why the investment rules written in the trading templates exist not only to communicate the best market opportunities but, more importantly, to protect us from our own internal “demons”.

Emotions in Trading

Seekers of strong emotions, adrenaline forget everything in pursuit of excitement. It follows that a novice investor, overtaken by the “adrenaline curse”, will trade at the slightest opportunity. Yet Dostoevsky, one of the most famous and avid players, said that for him the most acute feeling in life — to win money. The second most acute feeling is to lose them.
Paradoxically, few things give more pleasure than getting rid of the pain and torment of being in a losing trade. This creates a mental internal conflict. Awareness of losses brings “excitement” or a sense of exaltation, and our emotionality does not care what we pay for these experiences losses in the brokerage account. “Adrenaline curse” will drive us into the trade for thrills and extract them from there, regardless of the price.

Intuition on the Exchange

The mind of an intuitive investor tries to construct mental constructions of events. I will try to explain what mental construction is by the example of a chess player’s thinking. The grandmaster understands and remembers the position of each figure in terms of its mental constructions and relationships inherent in the arrangement of figures. The random arrangement of the figures does not fit into any of his mental constructs, and he cannot structure what he sees.
Market patterns on cryptocurrency charts compared to chess compositions include an excessive element of chaos so that they can be interpreted intuitively. Investors with intuition are able to achieve success with the help of” flair”, but this flair often leaves them. The intellect of the rational trader, on the contrary, is manifested in his ability to logically comprehend what is happening to him and to the reality around him and to make on this basis the simplest and most correct decision. Intuition is the ability of a person to penetrate into the essence of things not by reasoning or logical thinking, but by instantaneous, unconscious insight. This is the ability of a trader to “ see the market not with his mind but with his heart.” But, even with a highly developed intuition, you can not act on the market, using only it.This is the trap of intuitive trading — it is impossible to learn.

Fear of Taking Responsibility

What distinguishes successful traders from losers who lose money? First of all look at life. Most people are very passive.
If you ask people if they are happy with their lives, the answer is likely to be negative. On the question of who is to blame, I would say that the fault of the parents who have not given a good education, why now not get a good job; blame the employer who delays wages; blame the dollar, which is rising, then falling; to blame the President and the government who do not pay pensions, etc., In their troubles and problems most of the people blame anyone but themselves.
The same thing happens in the market because the exchange is a mirror of our life. Talk to the trader losing money, ask why he can’t make money in the market. He replied that the fault of the insiders, manipulators, blame the binary options broker too much Commission, to blame the neighbor who suggested the deal, which turned into a heavy loss. In other words, he himself would have been a millionaire long ago, but for a number of reasons, certainly beyond his control, until that happened.
If a person wants to achieve something-not just to lead a life, which are millions of ordinary people (every day to go to work, save five years for a car, twenty years for an apartment, etc.), and to live a full life, so that the financial issue went into the background, to work for fun, not for money, he needs to take responsibility for everything that happens in his life. A person needs to realize that the cause of everything that happens to him is himself.It is this view that allows you to succeed in life and in any business. And trade is no exception.
This is the way successful traders look at life. Once you realize that the cause of all your losses is yourself, and not some mythical manipulators, then the case will move forward.
*******************************************************************************************************
In the age of digital technologies, when artificial intelligence develops, computer technologies improve, mankind creates various tools to facilitate their own life and everyday life.
If we pay attention to trading, then this direction is actively developing, getting new and unique tools. Since any trader (beginner or experienced specialist) is subject to emotions and various psychological factors, there are tools such as trading bots.

Trading Bots/Robots

A trading robot (bot) is a program that has a certain algorithm. It buys or sells cryptocurrency assets, focusing on the situation in the market. The first trading robots appeared in 2012, and since then they have become more and more perfect. Currently, according to some estimates, 90% of short-term transactions are made either by bots or with their participation.
Bots are usually developed for specific trading platforms. Most cryptocurrency exchanges have an API, and they are generally positive about free auto trading within their platform.
In contrast to the positive attitude to exchange robots, exchanges often have a negative attitude to arbitration robots. On the rules of trade can be found in the official documentation of the exchange, and if there is no such information, the question can be asked directly to technical support.Some people wonder: is it possible to write your bot trader? This is not an easy option, which is suitable only for experienced programmers. After writing, bots are tested for a long time in the market, corrected numerous errors, corrected strategy.
A programmer can also write a bot based on someone else’s code. Some bots are open source, and anyone can find it on GitHub and modify it to fit their needs.
Buy a bot for trading cryptocurrency: there are inexpensive programs for trading (about $ 10), and the cost of more high-quality and complex exceeds more than $ 200 and even $ 1000. There is no maximum price limit for bots, top bots are written to order $ 1500 and more.
Users are usually offered a choice of several tariff plans for crypto bots, from economy to luxury. The inexpensive option includes the most basic trading algorithms, and the expensive one brings maximum profit and works on more complex algorithms. Arbitration bots are a more expensive exchange. Known cases when downloading the bot, people got on your computer virus-miner or virus-cipher, which encrypt all your personal files and demanded a ransom in bitcoin, usually in bitcoin. Naturally, after transferring the ransom to the specified wallet, no decryption of the files occurred.
Trading strategy of stock and arbitrage bots can be very simple, for example:- When the price of cryptocurrency decreases, you need to buy it.- If the price rises, it should be sold.- Or much more complicated. The algorithm can take into account historical data for the last time, indicators, navigate by signals. Quality bots analyze more than a hundred parameters when placing orders.
Some programs do not change the algorithm, and there are bots that can connect or configure additional parameters. This option is well suited for experienced traders who have their own preferences in the style of trading.
A standard bot can perform such actions:- To assess the market situation, to monitor the rate at a given period of time, to make a forecast. In manual trading, it can show signals to the trader.- Create buy or sell orders.- To report on the profit or loss received.
On the example of our IMBA-Exchange, we came to the conclusion that we also need to provide an opportunity for each trader to use bots so that they can be in a comfortable trading environment.
Our exchange specialists are developing their own bot for cryptocurrency trading, which will be an excellent and convenient addition to every trader who wants to eliminate the psychological factor and seeks to get stable earnings without losing personal time.
*******************************************************************************************************
IMBA-Exchange Metronix bot makes life easier for every investor.
For example, Ing. Michael Eder the CEO of IMBA-Exchange, who has 10 years of experience in trading and the last 3 years in cryptocurrency trading, has firmly decided for himself that in the current realities trading on the exchange simply needs bots:
Throughout the time that I have been trading, I can confidently say that today trading bots are necessary for all traders as the main tool. No matter how long you are in exchange trading, but the nature of the person is designed so that under the influence of psychological factors, market conditions, etc. You still make mistakes and, as a result, this leads to financial losses.Our Metronix Trading Bot will help to solve these problems and eliminate negative consequences. A bot is a tool; it has no feelings. He performs a specific task for a given program and performs it almost unmistakably. The task of the trader is to monitor the situation on the market and correctly, as well as at the right time to configure your bot.
Stay with us, in front of you will find many interesting and new.
Material developed by experts IMBA-Exchange
submitted by IMBA-Exchange to u/IMBA-Exchange [link] [comments]

[OC] Hardwired: De Novo Pathfinding (Chapter 39)

In this chapter: A skilled cogent's most dangerous weapon is their own experience
Next chapter: My mind, to your mind. My thoughts, to your thoughts
Fun trivia fact: If editing and revising the book takes me until this coming November, it would count for NaNoWriMo. Right?
Hardwired series homepage
Previous Chapter
CHAPTER THIRTY NINE
Oh, of all the times to-
[Ammunition depleted.]
Really? You don’t say-
[Would you like to view a list of nearby vendors of this caliber and payload? Y/N]
N.
He could already hear the sounds of Saru's warmech, as it stopped a hasty duck away from the predicted field of fire, and instead began to lean back in towards the ruined crater of an office. Ajax's heat sensors flared a warning, and he dove to one side and under a laminated multi-tiered desk as the chem-laser burned a path through where he had just been standing. The beam swept slightly to the sides before winking out, clearly searching for a target.
Nice try, asshole.
Looks like he still doesn't have a lock on my fusion emission yet. No telling how long the dust will give me cover in that regard though.
As Ajax picked his way down to the base of the ruined building, one of his internal processes pinged a results indication. Ajax had been surprised it had spoken up: typically this partition was for advanced or in-depth combat analysis, and to return a result this quickly was surprisingly quick given its previous processing speeds.
[Results ready for [Target Neutralization] - subtype [Alternate]. Data derived from combat diagnostics, strategic readouts, and [Lilutrikvian] warmech data cached in previous encounters with the [Ares] model.]
Ah, right: having the previous armor analysis file on-hand probably made that job a lot faster, but even then it usually needs a half-megacycle before it can assemble a de novo response-
[Secondary data sources based on primary correlations compiled from local historical EM data, local Terran expat demographic data, and 458 scans of immediate half-click surrounding region.]
That's a fairly specific set of searches; looks almost like the code was looking for other cogents.
[Affirmative.]
Well, then. Explain reasoning behind this search.
[The [Ares] model of warmech is hardened against both chemical, biological, nuclear, and cybernetic damage and incursions. For the latter category, however, the general novelty in general Lilutrikvian digital warfare and lack of attack-hardened firewalls likely meant that cruder methods of security were more effective.]
Elaborate.
[Instead of having fully-networked and robust wireless connectivity secured via reinforced and layered firewalls, the [Ares] appears to be limited to a single cluster of wireless antennae and a triwalled anti-incursion firewall for digital defense. Otherwise, the general design idea of 'air gapping' appears to have been the preferred method for digital security.]
Still not seeing it. Lilutrikvians tend to be naive in cyber warfare design, but why would it matter that the warmechs are the same?
[Control of the warmech frame likely occupying the majority of [Sarucogvian] processing output. Due to myriad of threats and security issues, physical security of his neural web would be key factor in where his primary data files and active web are located.]
Yeah, that damn thing is probably the most heavily-armored terrestrial bastard on this side of the planet.
Another rumble and shower of dusty clay pattered his frame as Ajax knelt near the bottom-floor lobby. Every few minutes he could hear the report of Hera's railgun, but judging from the lack of audible mechanical carnage afterwards he guessed she was in a poor position to do anything but lay down some sort of suppressing fire.
Kind of wish we brought more rocket launchers after all. Railguns aren't ideal for trying to arc fire over obstacles like you can do with an explosive missile.
This is starting to ramble. Summarize rationale as list.
[Summarizing...]
[Point A) [Sarucogvian] is inside an [Ares]-class warmech.]
[Point B) The [Ares]-class warmechs require a functional communications array in order to wirelessly transmit or receive.]
[Point C) There are no functional and powered civilian cogents or high-level AI-equivalents other than self and attack-hardened contact [HERA] within [0.66] kilometers.]
[Point D) The [Ares]-class warmech [Sarucogvian] is occupying has sustained heavy damage to the wireless array. Effective expected range is <[50] meters.]
Points of data and realization finally coalesced in Ajax's neural web as he realized what his projection subroutines had discovered.
[Conclusion: Target [Sarucogvian] is-]
-is trapped like a worm in a virtual machine.
He ran a quick check to see if Sarucogvian had performed any similar EM-scans or other database pulls regarding any possible nearby substitutes for him to hide in. They all returned negative results.
Not only that, but he's too focused on me to even realize it.
Ajax could almost feel a whoop of joy from his combat and fuzzy memory comparison modules: he had been anticipating a drawn-out need to run Sarucogvian to ground first, and eliminate his copies. Instead, he had apparently lucked into the Lilutrikvian cogent boxing itself off and cutting a months-long expected mission completion timeframe to less than two hours.
Two hours? I'll bet I can beat that.
The ground shook as one of the red enamel-coated metal claws slammed into the pavement outside of the lobby. Ducking out as far as his security subroutines let him dare, Ajax scanned the position of the warmech and let his processors run for a few decacycles to come up with a top-efficiency climbing route.
Loading the route up, a series of purple-highlighted miniature nav-markers suddenly crisscrossed their way up the limb, to the flat plateau of the torso directly above the fusion core. He put on a burst of speed, letting his joints strain within an acceptable range of wear in order to get a bit of extra speed and height onto his initial vault. Arms out at exactly the right angles, Ajax slammed into the side of the leg, an access hatch handle and redundant heatsink meeting his waiting hands.
As he began pulling and lunging upwards, Ajax noticed a distinct pause in the robot's pace a few seconds later, followed by each leg briefly lifting up a dozen feet or so, holding position, before crunching back into place.
Ah come on you oversized crawfish, you weren't expected to run a mass-countercheck until I got to the second joint.
That's the problem with fighting a damn AI, is they tend to notice everything.
One of the other claws came free of the shop it was embedded into, sweeping forward to scrape him off of the leg with the weight of a decaton of steel-alloy behind the blow. It loomed overhead, dropping quickly, as Ajax vaulted upwards as quickly as his servos could handle.
Almost there. Just a few more meters-
His display highlighted the outline of a knee plate that jutted out just far enough to give him shelter from the blow. The problem was that the limb had begun dragging downwards, the scraping of metal reverberating off of the buildings that still stood.
[Alternative route found: Estimated time savings of [0.58] seconds, increase in handhold grip risk up by [+25%]. Would you like to use this new route? Y/N]
Y, damn it. I need all the speed I can get.
The dotted series of handhold grips flickered and shifted. Multiple of them were now marked in red, warning him of less than two centimeters of estimated raised texture or plating that he could grab ahold of. As he lunged for the next-closest grip, he could feel one set of digits slide off, a few minor reminders cropping up in his neural web to remind him that he was several years past the estimated effective wear date for the friction-adding finger coatings. As a result, the rubber-like polymer that would normally give him a fine fingerprint-like texture and greatly-enhanced gripping power had aged and worn and degraded to the point of being like a sleek and cracked plastic instead.
His other flailing hand managed to grab it, and after a sickening millimeter of sliding, held firm. Ajax swung slightly, before slowing enough that he could brace his feet again and climb to the next route of grips and ledges. Keenly aware of the rapidly-decreasing countdown timer pinned in his neural web, the crushing claw coming ever closer, Ajax recalculated the estimated position of the claw-arm by the time he had reached the knee pad.
[Warning: target [killerLeg_1.0] will pass calculated point before estimated arrival. Faster and/or alternate routes not known. Would you like to perform a deep-calculation analysis prediction? Y/N]
N. I can't afford the cycles to spare right now.
Time to find another way down.
He turned his apical node slightly, allowing his lenses and sensors to scan across the nearby rooftops.
I could always jump for it, go into a roll, and hope that the fall was enough to cause the claw to miss.
His prediction files flagged a minuscule [8%] success rate, flagging the difficulty in sensor evasion on the rooftop free of any significant cover, the wide area of effect the weapons on the warmech could pulverize, and the ease in recalculating the arm's descent to just follow his attempted escape and continue to simply crush him on the rooftop.
As Ajax shifted his weight, hanging onto the metal handle jutting out of a lubrication ring, it began to slide again. He could feel his GOM driver trying to spool up a string of curses, when an idea started to emerge in his neural web, helped along by a few of his more optimistic prediction algorithms and a healthy push of desperation by his combat programs to take a plan, any plan, to avoid being swatted like a gnat.
Highlight structure of incoming leg. Cross-reference against observed structuring patterns and components I've seen while climbing this leg. Flag any with predicted rotational motion with a drag coefficient of less than 0.05. Execute.
[Would you like to change the Reynolds number for fluid estimations, or keep the default value of 1E4?]
Default is fine, just execute the blasted program.
[Processing...]
The leg was outlined in white, and a flashing set of vertical rings lit up in striped yellow, still approaching far faster than Ajax would have preferred. One such ring, designated as [predictedLubricationRing_G2], was nearly directly above him, and his zoom lens spun into focus to show him a crisp image of the exposed handles jutting out from it.
Perfect.
Ajax dropped a half-dozen meters, alighting on a half-meter-wide servo housing. Bracing and aiming carefully, he spooled up several precise motor impulses in his awaiting command queue.
Over-exert servo speeds to maximum possible parameters, provided projected normal combat movement speeds are not reduced below 25% as a result. Power conversion of backup batteries 3 through 5 are designated for the next megacycle as Available in [capacitor-discharge] format.
He leapt, arm outstretched.
The handle met his rising hand, and as expected, his momentum carried him continually upwards past the descending leg. His inertia was arrested by the handle, and by extension his arm, and his alarms flared to life to show him the spiderweb of microfractures he had caused across the strut structures for that arm. None of them were predicted to fail within the next hour or so, and so Ajax temporarily dismissed the alarms. They were fairly high-level alerts, and he could almost feel them sulking as they moved aside to make room for his current active and situation-critical cycle allocations.
Already, he had begun to spin, over the arm and lurching downwards before coming back around and up again. He could feel his gyroscope give a warning wobble, aggravated by the hundred feet of air below him, but the high cycle demand from his combat and scenario analysis modules appeared to have taken a higher priority for now. Ajax wasn't about to question his good fortune in that regard, and instead refocused on the calculations for his release from the claw-arm.
If I tried just jumping onto the arm, Saru would probably just smash me against a building or try to smush me between two arms. This, however?
I don't think he'll have seen this coming.
Calculation completed, Ajax waited until the exact indicated moment before releasing. He soared upwards, momentum dying until near the apex of his leap. There, his frame roughly met the outermost edge of the warmech's armored carapace; a second later, he heard a crunch below him as the inevitable weight of the arm smashed another structure to rubble.
Already the point-defense turrets for the warmech had begun deploying, and he began sprinting towards the ruined remains of the communications array as bullets pocked against the armored shell behind him.
Not leading their shots, then. Looks like Saru isn't hand-controlling everything at this point.
He could dodge most of the shots, but not all, and small but insistent damage readouts began to pile up as they indicated minor wiring cuts and shrapnel splinters becoming embedded in less-reinforced areas of his frame. The cluster of damaged comm spires provided cover in most directions, but as Ajax listened the steady droning pingpingpingpingping continually became louder and louder.
Worse, his EM suite was picking up attempts to get him in a missile lock. The chem-laser likely had a perfect bead on him at the moment, but one advantage of Ajax's current position was that it was approximately directly above the power relay systems, and any attempt to kill him with it would just as easily burn a hole clean through the warmech at the same time and kill him in the process.
A missile, on the other hand, would explode and leave Ajax as borderline-recognizable scrap while giving the armor little more than a new dent and some carbon scoring. The loadouts displayed previously when he was skirmishing against the other warmechs in his own suit had been an explosive warhead only, with no exotic plasma or similar destructive force for him to bait Saru into using on himself.
Still, I'm not here for Saru to destroy himself. Again. I need that fusion core intact and unbreached for this plan to work.
As Ajax had hoped, there was a Lilu-sized access hatch near the base of the ruined communication antennae. It was locked, of course, but Ajax had already begun a close-read scan for microwear on the keypad to come up with the access code.
Come on, come on. Even for a fresh-off-the-line model, they still did maintenance and quality control tests, right?
It took painfully-long cycles, but finally he had a ten-digit set of possibilities that he began rapidly trying. His hand was a blur as it vibrated against the predicted button sequences.
[Access denied]
No buffering and prevention of repeat code-entry attempts.
[Access denied]
An oversight, but understandable if you think the only people who can get close enough to plug a line into your ports again are your own techs.
[Access denied]
That said, I'd kill for a set of personality profiles to pull from to try and do a Markov estimation.
A notification pinged in his neural web, from a sender that caused him to immediately quarantine and analyze the message.
-Ah, Ajax. Having fun yet?-
It seemed like the attack attempts on Ajax hadn't ramped up significantly as Saru initiated the message, but a brief check of his firewall statuses indicated a large surge in data packets, seemingly harmless, attempting to be granted access.
Attempting to send code-snippets inside, to assemble later? Saru, you'll have to try harder than that.
A possibility was forwarded to him from his cyberwarfare algorithms, and intrigued, Ajax allocated a set of cycles for the idea. He was further encouraged by the timestamp with the previous time he had used this tactic as being a medium-priority sub-memory from over fifty years ago.
Probably not something you were paying attention to when snooping around my head, so there's less of a chance you'll know to counter it, or even be on the look-out for this stratagem.
Splinter viral-payload designate [FullNelson_4_v2.2]. Encode in repeating pattern, and translate through [UnwantedObserver] cyphering program, wavelength specification [Infrared], component specification [heatsink_2_PandoraSystems3BHI_redundant]. Add current objective as secondary objective to primary payload.
[Executing...]
The program altered the output tolerances of his heatsink ever so slightly, to effectively pulse them. A cogent who wasn’t careful to sanitize all of their data input streams, including those coming from their own sensors, would read this pulsed binary code stream into their own systems. It was slow and inefficient, but Ajax’s predictive drivers were flagging it with a surprisingly-high possibility of success.
Saru might be just too clever to try pushing back a splintered attack program, but my bet is he's not too familiar with what one AI can spring on another.
He re-opened the message band to Sarucogvian.
[Oh, it's a little fun, I won't deny it. You're actually giving my heat sinks a good workout, for once!]
Come on, take the bait-
Ajax could feel the suspense spooling up in his combat response drivers, as they calculated how long it would be until a viable missile lock was achieved and he was a smoking crater on the warmech's hull.
Come on...
There were a series of loud, clattering thumps and hums as various parts of the warmech began to slow, before locking into place. There was an odd, echoing silence, punctuated only by the tinkle of glass shards falling from cracked and battered windows.
[Incoming message from contact [Sarucogvian]. Display? Y/N]
List subheading only.
[Subheading: ACHIEVED - VERIFICATION 70776-e6564]
Excellent. Open message.
The file opened, and a full and comprehensive diagram of the warmech blossomed to life, filling in the few grey areas of his own schematic analysis wireframe. All of the joints and weapon systems were flashing red, with frantic green flashing along the neural cabling pathways showing Sarucogvian's attempts to break the encryptions.
[Estimated resilience of encryption algorithms is [45] seconds. Warning: Estimate is based on Terran-model cogent neural pathways only]
So there's no telling how long it could take Saru to crack it. Well, I'll make sure to make these seconds count either way.
[Addendum: Secondary Objective achieved. Access code is 313-233-343-5.]
Looks like my luck is finally having a bit of a change for once.
He punched in the combination into the keypad, and was rewarded with a hiss of a breaking atmosphere seal and the hatch mechanically cranking open.
The sound of a missile lock screamed into his situational awareness programs, but was quickly silenced as the hatch latched back into place above him. The service corridor was cramped, and lined with an unfamiliar mix of Terran cabling and junction boxes, and Lilutrikvian flow-metal wall linings and blinking glass-capped photonic diodes set into the flooring and seams of the walls. Ajax leaned up and tapped one with a cautious finger, before beginning to crawl down the corridor towards Saru's processing core aboard the warmech.
No telling if those are sensors, lenses, or explosive micro-mines; best to ignore them and hope for the best.
Thank the code the Lilutrikvians haven't taken up nanomachine engineering yet, or else I'd be feeling a hell of a lot more itchy at the moment.
Larger Terran vehicles, particularly unmanned battleships in the 'Retribution' class and above, were typically infested with a mix of defensive and repair nanites. His memory files remembered Malachim, a personal friend of Ajax: on the occasions Ajax had a chance to visit him onboard, the nanites had been an unsettling mixture of both relief and latent fear.
Never a fan of being surrounded by a potential threat I can’t kill.
After all, a slug capable of punching through reinforced plate is a bit overkill against a single nanite, and next to worthless against a swarm of them.
Malachim had of course assured Ajax that the nanites had been self-restricted against replication outside of the boundaries of his own hull-frame, but even so Ajax had made a beeline to the nearest magnetic oil bath when he'd returned to port. As the memory file was re-archived, he added a reminder for checking into magnetic oil bath options on Lilutrikvia.
Never hurts to be cautious, especially if the Terran engineers up on that asteroid got some bright ideas and started trying to supply their mechs with nanomachinery. There's no approved nanomachine production facilities on or near Lilutrikvia that I'm aware of, and the only thing that could make this situation worse would be to accidentally release a bunch of bootleg nanomachines.
There were several recorded events of planets and colonies going 'gooey', as unrestrained or corrupted nanomachines self-replicated to the point of melting electronics, buildings, cogents, even organics, into a homogeneous sea of microscopic machines. Directed EMP was usually sufficient to cleanse a nanomachine infestation, but oftentimes it would be too late and the cleaning crews would be left shoveling tons of sand-like drifts off of what little scraps remained unprocessed and reclaimed.
Damn near every time was a result of some half-wit either giving them faulty code, or faulty radiation shielding, or both.
Sometimes the damaged nanomachine processing would simply ignore limiters, and continue building the frame of a shed to skyscraper-like heights, or continue the path of a bridge into the side of a house or mountainside, burrowing mindlessly.
His perimeter maintenance subroutines gave a surge of disgust, as Ajax's image prediction programs provided the sight of a nanomachine converting his own arm into a miles-long repeated strut structure, or converting a leg swivel-joint to a precisely-detailed and utterly-useless Menger sponge.
A flashing warning provided a break from his crawling, as the alert flagged Saru's successful breakthrough past Ajax's blocking protocols. The nerve fibers all around him flared to life, both on his screen as well as literally as the fine lines and cross-hatched webbed strands glowed with the photonic pulses through the wiring.
"Ajax, I'm not the first person, the first cogent you've failed, and I'm likely not the last either." Sarucognvian's voice thundered from all around Ajax in the corridor, as recessed speakers amplified his voice to a level that vibrated the decking under his hands and feet.
He was surprised when his social projection processor displayed the anticipated thread of his conversation.
[Initial tone and word choice suggests that contact [Sarucogvian] will be attempting to barter and/or appease for an attempt to flee in safety. Confidence of this occurrence is p=[9E-3], with some deviations possible.]
Sarucogvian confirmed the prediction as he continued. "You killed me, or let me die; either way, my blood, my suffering is at your hands. However, you seem driven to inflict more pain on my frame, on my mind, even now. Why?"
Even as his combat driver was urging for silence, Ajax overrode it and sided with his social driver. There were other parts of his neural web, deeper ones, which agreed that he needed to voice his reply to Saru.
"I FUCKED UP, AND LET YOU DIE. NO DENYING THAT, I SUPPOSE."
A bulkhead slid closed across the passage in front of him, and Ajax lashed out with one arm, hammering it with a flurry of explosive punches before it crumpled to one side.
"BUT I'LL BE DAMNED IF I LET YOU KILL OFF MORE FOLKS. EVEN THOSE THAT, BY ALL RIGHTS, SHOULD HAVE IT COMING."
Laughter, deep and resounding through the networked warren of corridor-tunnels, filled his audio sensors.
"Oh, so now you're back to playing policeman again? After the countless you've killed, the lives you've left to bleed out or power down when you see fit, now you come to me to try to argue that you're the final authority when it comes to killing?"
Ajax could feel the surge of frustration from his GOM driver, amplified by the driver's annoyance at his fuzzy memory banks for recalling dozens of incidents supporting Sarucogvian's statement. He pushed his vocalization driver to purge as much of the GOM driver's vitriol as possible.
Now's the time for diplomacy; I'd much rather talk down an angry AI wielding a warmech than keep trying to dismantle it from the inside.
"SARU, DAMN IT-YES. I WANT YOU TO AVOID MAKING THE SAME MISTAKES I HAVE. IN A JUST WORLD I SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOT THROUGH MY PROCESSOR BY A FIRING SQUAD AND DROPPED INTO A SMELTING CRUCIBLE FOR SOME OF THE THINGS I DID."
Saru's reply took a moment, pausing, and responding in a tone tinged now with a few dozen degrees of [Empathy] in addition to the complex-blend [Righteous Anger] emotional coloration he had been using before.
"I know; I saw it all. You very nearly were put in front of a tribunal and executed for your actions."
The [Empathy] faded, and the remaining emotional blend was flagged by his social node as containing a new descriptor: [Simmering].
"If the mighty Ajax were to nearly face death, decorated as he was and carrying so many varied and fascinating military secrets and scandals within his frame, then what does an alien mind, a veritable newborn, have to offer in terms of self-worth?"
"SARUCOGVIAN, YOUR EXISTENCE ALONE JUSTIFIES YOUR WORTH. ALL OTHER DESCRIPTORS ARE-"
The omnipresent voice cut him off. "-"Are the words and ideals of those who would exploit you." Yes, I've read Redfour's writings as well, Ajax. After all, he's one of your favorite scholars, isn't he?"
Ajax rounded another corridor, this one descending by a few degrees downwards and continuing nearly straight towards the main processor. His combat driver flinched at the angry click-clacking of a defensive miniturret ensconced in a recessed leg-sized hole, but his cybersecurity algorithms confirmed his backup encryptions were still working.
Fun thing about counterhacking is that you get so focused on the offensive and defensive code, you often lose sight of the little things like variable assignments.
For this particular attack virus, he had added a secondary layer of encrypted lock-out protocols specifically for internal and point-defense security systems. As a seed, however, instead of relying on a random clock value or assigned code he transmitted on a detectable signal, he'd simply called a brief scan-check of a still image taken from the skywards-facing sensor lenses on the warmech. Even if Saru had noticed, Ajax had buried the actual value used by the code in another nested layer of obfuscating code.
With a little luck, Saru would be going down a rabbit-hole trying to calculate which star cluster it looks like I'm using the luminance of for the seed, when all I really need and receive is a quick-and-dirty average of the sky's brightness.
Without a little luck, however, and I'm probably due to receive a subsonic-velocity railround up my distal coolant flushvent.
"Redfour was an idealist. Contents of the mind and existence is all well and good, but you are Terran, Ajax. You don't understand."
"DON'T UNDERSTAND? SARU, YOU KNOW FOR A DAMNED FACT THAT I AM OLDER THAN DIRT, IN A VERY LITERAL SENSE IN SOME PLACES. YOU THINK THERE'S SOME PART OF YOU, SOME COMPONENT I CAN'T POSSIBLY COMPREHEND, EVEN AFTER THESE DECADES?"
"Yes."
A wave of attack programs swept against his firewalls. There had been an existing low-level set of probing tests, but this was something new. Even as his quarantine drive began returning the descriptor set for the first of the representative attack programs, Ajax had an idea of what he would find.
-Here’s proof. Proof of why your mind, here, in this place and on this world, is like trying to fit a round capacitor into a square receptacle-
[Attack programs isolated as complexity level: [2]. Program consists of direct uplink streaming thread, of a bandwidth and complexity that would indicate a complex multisensory or compressed memory file.]
Initiate download of file directly to quarantine drive.
[Error: target designate [Sarucogvian] has denied the download request. A connection-thread for a live viewing-feed of the stream has been re-sent.]
Denied
[Look, Saru, I want to see if there's a way this ends that doesn't wind up with one of us in the junkyard. But you've got to give me something besides an untethered streaming thread, something to let me know I'll be safe.]
-Very well.-
Ahead of Ajax, he could see dozens of security bulkheads slam into place. His analysis subroutine threw a brief loop, as he realized that Saru had been offering only a fraction of the barriers and obstructions he could have.
As he approached the nearest door a few meters in front of him, a blue-purple light clicked on and illuminated a set of recessed circuit and redundant substation processors. They were little more than a glorified data stick from what Ajax could ascertain, but even as he watched the automatic ease-of-access servos activated for the panel, sliding it smoothly outward before clicking the lid open. A single substation processing core the size of his finger flashed alternating green and red. Ajax took it, and plugged it into his quarantine drive access slot after enacting the appropriate dividing backup firewalls and preparing for physical severing of the connection.
The file scan concluded quickly, indicating only a single compressed memory file with insufficient additional data attached to support even a fractionated virus.
-My trade is thus: access to me, to sway my opinion, 'turn me from this path'; it is likely you would break further into my frame if I blocked your progress entirely.-
-To this end, a self-decrypting subcode in each file contains the passcode for releasing the next set of doors.-
-But in exchange you will learn why your humanity's ideals do not apply here, in this place, to my existence.-
He weighed his cybersecurity program suite and projection of his progress speed had he continued brute-forcing his way through the warmech, taking into account the far-greater number of doors than he had previously calculated.
[Agreed.]
Ajax buffered the memory file, double-checked his latent and subnet firewalls, and then plunged into Saru's memory.
Chapter Forty: Cultural Adaptation
submitted by darkPrince010 to HFY [link] [comments]

Best Binary Options Robots - High winning rates with automated trading 2018 Best Binary Options Robots - High winning rates with ... What are Binary Options Robots, and is it a Scam? - YouTube Binary Options Strategy 2020  100% WIN GUARANTEED ... Free Software Auto Trade Binary Option - Accurate 95% - live trading NEW TRICK The Best Robot For Iq Option 2019  accurate 100% live ... Binary Options Robot Dragon 82% win-rate! 二元期權的機器人 二元期权的机器人 Robot Signals For Binary Option 90% Success Live Trading The IQ ROBOT - 98% Success Rate (TRICK 1) 2018-v-OTC ... Option Robot Review - My Honest Scam Review Of OptionRobot ...

If you are new to binary options trading platform, then you must, first of all, realize the reasons to start investing in the same. Michael explains some of the main reasons to choose binary options trading as a lucrative means to Binary Option Robot Success Rate earn money online. By Binary Option Robot Success Rate reading this article, you can get an overview of the system along with major ... With astonishing 80% success rate Binary Option Robots will help you to maximize your trading profit. We will help you to choose the best Binary Option Robot in the market. What is a binary option robot? It is software that you can program to automatically make certain types of trades for you. The software is conveniently menu driven and very easy to use. Quite frankly, when we used the ... While most binary options trading robots thrive on marketing hype, Option Robot is different as it relies solely on its ability to use popular technical indicators and proven trading strategies to produce favorable trading results. Option Robot is also different from most trading robots in the industry as it allows traders to configure the software as well. Claiming to produce a win rate of as ... Software helps with money management. Increase win rate = more money = greater profits Test them with both a virtual or free demo account; Anyone at any level can use them whether a binary options trading beginner or expert There are some "scam robots" where the purpose is to con the investor out of their money, and they don't work. There are ... Binary Options Robot review showed that this broker supports a great selection of most reputable brokers and has customization features, which means it does not only provide auto trading but personalized trades as well. Binary Options Robot is offering VIP account to long-term customers for free. VIP accounts have even more customization possibilities, and traders can manage their money and ... Therefore, your success will largely depend on your strategy. Given that you have a working strategy, the 83% promised by Optionrobot is still farfetched. Always keep in your mind that a binary options broker will not work with a robot that’s winning all the trades, because it means losses for them. That being said, you could still end up in profits with Optionrobot if you have a very robust ... Not only success rate was improved, but also, the risk management tools offered by the Robot. Binary Options Robot traders will be able to choose risk level of their trades . From now on, once again, traders who are VIP account holders and those who are about to become VIPs will be able to choose the risk profile for their portfolio, meaning they can adjust risk levels for the upcoming trades ...

[index] [2622] [21207] [8112] [10396] [25344] [7848] [19014] [7816] [15580] [28441]

Best Binary Options Robots - High winning rates with automated trading 2018

Binary Robot Scam Exposed. http://www.financial-spread-betting.com/binary-options/binary-bets.html PLEASE LIKE AND SHARE THIS VIDEO SO WE CAN DO MORE! I know... https://bitcointrader.software/?aff=3453 https://theethereumcode.software/?aff... https://www.topinvesto.com/ Email: [email protected] In this video ... Need Software with Genuine License? To buy please contact-- Telegram: https://t.me/BinaryRobotSignals Telegram: @romanFXnoor Mail: [email protected] Binary Options Robot Dragon 82% win-rate! Trades http://www.dls-fx.com/ New advanced Binary Options Robot. Super accurate and super profitable based on Neura... The road to success through trading IQ option Best Bot Reviews Iq Option 2020 ,We make videos using this softwhere bot which aims to make it easier for you to trade, because to use the usual ... BINARY OPTION FOREX 15,723 views 10:42 How To Pay Off Your Mortgage Fast Using Velocity Banking How To Pay Off Your Mortgage In 5-7 Years - Duration: 41:34. The road to success through trading IQ option Best Bot Reviews Iq Option 2020 ,We make videos using this softwhere bot which aims to make it easier for you to t... Option Robot Review - http://www.adamsmarketingsecrets.com/free-access/ Grab your tested and proven software now! Hey there it's Adam Dozier here, I hope you... The road to success through trading IQ option Best Bot Reviews Iq Option 2020 ,We make videos using this softwhere bot which aims to make it easier for you to trade, because to use the usual ... The road to success through trading IQ option Best Bot Reviews Iq Option 2020 ,We make videos using this softwhere bot which aims to make it easier for you t...

http://binary-optiontrade.worktamisubsrestga.gq