For anyone else reading personally ceiling APs can't be overstated. My father-in-law is crazy about internet, but I've realized he was crazy like a fox when we did our to-the-studs renovation. He treated APs like a fire alarm or a CO monitor: one per room.
My brother-in-law thinks he's crazy, and obviously it only really works if it is practical to run the wire and you can afford the number, but for my relatively small house it is insane how little I think about my internet. It is one of those quality of life things I never would have realized with having someone come and do it for me.
I guess the only thing is some of the ceilings get a little crowded with lights + fire alarm + CO alarm + HVAC in/out + AP, so for small rooms it can be a challenge to figure out where to put things. But in that case I mean ... you don't need one per room. My father-in-law is crazy like a fox ... but he's also a little crazy like a crazy person.
The boom of Romantasy seems to be attributed at least partially to GenZ. So depending on how you classify reading Sci-Fi/Fantasy/Romantasy GenZ is definitely still reading.
The other guy gives a solid explanation so don't use mine as a replacement or to assume the other is wrong.
To me there are two ways to approach the problem I think you are thinking of (sample variance I think).
(1) The sample variance depends on the sample mean which is sum(x_i) / n. Given the first n-1 of n samples, you would then know the final value (x_n = n * sample_mean - sum(x_i)_(n-1)) so at the very least n-1 could be understood as a "degrees of freedom". There are only n-1 degrees of freedom. Other higher sample moments can be roughly understood with the same degrees of freedom argument. This could be wrong though, it was just something I remember from somewhere.
(2) The more mathematically inclined way is that biased_sample_variance = sum((x_i - sum(x_i) / n)^2) / n. The mean of the biased_sample_variance (across many iterations of a set of samples N), is not the population variance, but (n - 1) / n * population_variance (i.e. it is biased). So you multiply the biased_sample_variance by (n / (n - 1)) which gives the unbiased sample_variance equation: sum((x_i - sum(x_i) / n)^2) / (n - 1). The math is rather fun in my opinion, once you get into the swing of things.
I sure do hope I understood your question correctly.
During the pandemic I decided to work through Zork, and ended up completing the first three Zork games with minimal "looking things up" (actually, much to my chagrin I had to look up something precisely once per game, and in each case it was a small puzzle right near the and of the game, almost perfect!).
I'll go ahead and second Planetfall though, which I saw someone else mention. For anyone else curious, I would put it on the "easier than Zork" side and is a rare text adventure I completed without any look-ups. I really really liked it. Save often. RTFM (in particular you'll want to look up the list of allowed verbs any time you get stuck). Those are the two helpful hints I would give to anyone thinking to themselves that they might want to try a classic text adventure.
Actually maybe more helpful would be to play something like Space Quest which has the same sensibility as text adventures (in that they often feel cruel to the user intentionally...) but is somewhat more accessible. Space Quest in particular shares a lot of DNA with planetfall all the way down to starring space janitors.
Space Quest is rated the maximum "Cruel" under this system, as it's easy to render the game unwinnable with no feedback that you're in this state. Almost all modern adventure games are less cruel.
I’m looking at you KQ5 - “Failing to rescue this rat will result in yet another DMW. This is probably the single most infamous puzzle in King's Quest 5”
Planetfall was great, it’s the only infocom game I managed to complete. I think I might enjoy a mind forever voyaging more now than I did at the time, but I remember being terribly confused. Hitchhiker’s Guide is so manifestly unfair that it loops back around to being funny again, but I couldn’t even manage the babelfish, so I didn’t get much play out of it.
Out of curiosity, do you think you realized any benefit from some of the puzzles entering into common knowledge by now? And/or the Seinfeld Effect?
I could see how that would be true. By on the other hand in objective terms it’s pretty obscure pop culture knowledge so could also see it providing zero benefit
My experience with using LLMs for things like MIT Mystery Hunt is touch and go.
On most of them I've tried it doesn't seem to do much, but I do now use them to try and get crossword clues where I know bits that are often too abstract for crossword solvers.
e.g. "a word that is six letters, is related to royalty, and has a state abbreviation in it" (this isn't a real clue, just an example of a clue that an LLM is much better suited than something like Nutrimatic or a crossword solver)
I would be curious to hear if / how others us LLMs for abstract riddles/puzzles like that though.
Reminds me a bit of Alkemstone. I went snooping about old games magazines from the early 80s and there was an advert for the prize for that game (it really is just a maze with a series of clues). The ultimate solution was to be a location of the Alkemstone (presumably a fake gem) which one would exchange for the prize.
I think the guy who created it died long ago and the legal office which was meant to verify the prize is also maybe defunct (?). I'm also skeptical the "stone" would be wherever it was meant to be at this point anyways (similar to a number of the boxes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_(treasure_hunt) are theorized to be now inaccessible or destroyed).
Anyways, people are still trying to solve it. Last I heard someone claimed that they and their friends had paired all the clues in some way and were close to solving it, but they were very cagey about it. That was over a year ago I think.
My brother-in-law thinks he's crazy, and obviously it only really works if it is practical to run the wire and you can afford the number, but for my relatively small house it is insane how little I think about my internet. It is one of those quality of life things I never would have realized with having someone come and do it for me.
I guess the only thing is some of the ceilings get a little crowded with lights + fire alarm + CO alarm + HVAC in/out + AP, so for small rooms it can be a challenge to figure out where to put things. But in that case I mean ... you don't need one per room. My father-in-law is crazy like a fox ... but he's also a little crazy like a crazy person.