And regular people can circumvent it?
An judge usually has to explain his/her reasons for an verdict, an jury doesn't have to. The costs of inviting candidates, screening them and getting both sides to agree to the jury also has costs attached to it.
The eye has "rods" and "cones". Rods see in B&W (grayscale), and "cones" see in color. We have three types of "cones". Each see only one color: blue, green, red (it's actually more complicated, but they are defectively three types) When the green and red cones activate, your brain interpret yellow. And the other colors are also combinations. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cell
Dogs have "rods" and only two types of "cones": blue and yellow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog#Senses They also interpret combinations, like us, but have less info to combine.
Me too, but mostly because it would mean we had a way to do interstellar travel. I'm pretty sure you'd need a very long baseline between the images for the angles to work properly
You should read more about Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) and Game Theory in general.
The word "solve" is well defined in this context, and is used accurately by OP. You "solve" a game by finding the policy that maximizes the expected return.
Obviously we can only talk about "expectation" because the outcome is random. But that doesn't mean that an optimal policy doesn't exist.
Optimal policies are also often random, expressed like "in state S, perform action A with probability P and action B with probability 1-P". A policy then boils down to a table, with a row for each state and a column for each action, where each cell is the probability of performing that action in that state.
Even more interesting are partially observable Markov decision processes, where your agent doesn't even know what state it is in. Instead, you get observations that hint to the true state, and you model the state as a probability distribution over possible concrete states. Solving these POMDPs is quite a bit more difficult than traditional MDPs.
It is possible to solve some MDPs (and POMDPs) by hand, but in practice we often use reinforcement learning to learn the policy table by simulating games.
You're wrong about it being 100% luck (you have choices that alter the outcomes).
You're correct that the game cannot be solved by the definition of a solved game (being one where the outcome can be predicted from any position if both players play perfectly). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solved_game
I still prefer AlomWare Toolbox, because it can autotype things from different triggers other than just hotkeys or hotstrings, such as the text in PC notifications when they appear.
> There is something I like about win32 gui programming
Totally agree with you. I use an excellent PC app called AlomWare Toolbox, and it's the epitome of Win32 design (https://www.alomware.com/images/tab-automation.png), and despite it doing so much it's only about 3 MB in size because of it. No frameworks with it either, just a single executable file. I wish all software were still like this.
Looks great! I had both a Psion 3c and Series 5mx, but both broke due to their folding design. It was the hinges on the 3c, and ribbon on the 5mx. A damn shame as they were great little computers. I still fire up the 5mx emulator on Windows to this day to revisit my old apps and play with it. :)
