Comments for Paul Kuliniewicz

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by Paul Kuliniewicz

Paul Kuliniewicz — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:08:00 +0000

In your defense, T. Rex didn’t do a very good job explaining the halting problem.

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:52:31 +0000

Then I think this illustrates quite well how little I learned from this dinosaur. :)

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by Paul Kuliniewicz

Paul Kuliniewicz — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:53:07 +0000

Not really. The halting problem proves that there are some problems that computers fundamentally cannot solve; it’s actually the computational equivalent to Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. The P versus NP question is, roughly speaking, about whether there are problems that are inherently difficult to solve but easy to verify a solution to.

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by Ryan

Ryan — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 02:47:58 +0000

I thought the halting problem was related to P and NP?

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by Paul Kuliniewicz

Paul Kuliniewicz — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 22:52:38 +0000

Ryan: I think you mean the halting problem.

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 22:50:04 +0000

I once had a dinosaur try to tell me about P and NP complete problems, but I never really figured out what the heck he was talking about.

Comment on Super Mario Bros. is NP-complete (sort of) by fluffy

fluffy — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 03:21:52 +0000

Suddenly I want to have a gigantic computing cluster that does nothing but a breadth-first search on game states (with controller inputs as the edges) to find an optimal speedrun of a game to get the provably-best TAS.

Comment on Going dark on Wednesday by Paul Kuliniewicz

Paul Kuliniewicz — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:09:18 +0000

Or, you know, the plugin I installed to make the site go dark on Wednesday could wind up not working.

Comment on Reading is dangerous (if you’re writing Haskell) by Paul Kuliniewicz

Paul Kuliniewicz — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 01:24:09 +0000

Update: it appears that this is a bug in GHC; according to the Haskell Report (i.e. the language specification), reading integers isn't supposed to support exponential notation at all.

Comment on Neutronium Demo Video by Harold

Harold — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 21:32:43 +0000

Very neat.