ConwayLife.com

muzik wrote:

toroidalet wrote: Can someone work on using Hashlife for apgsearch?

isn't that coming in 4.0?

facepalm
I forgot about that.
Will apgsearch 4.0 obsolete apgsearch V1 things?

toroidalet wrote:

muzik wrote:

toroidalet wrote: Can someone work on using Hashlife for apgsearch?

isn't that coming in 4.0?

facepalm
I forgot about that.
Will apgsearch 4.0 obsolete apgsearch V1 things?

No, what about stuff like 1x256?

wwei23 wrote:

toroidalet wrote: Will apgsearch 4.0 obsolete apgsearch V1 things?

No, what about stuff like 1x256?

Nevermind, drc wants it blocked.

Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.

drc wrote:Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.

Why a GRAIN of salt? I already have a lot of salt. Maybe Epsom salt?

drc wrote:Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.

This. There's clearly demand for this type of soup, but let's make sure we don't end up with a lot of different incompatible implementations. If Calcyman, in his role as Catagolue's Benevolent Dictator for Life, decreed the One True Official Way to generate 1×256 soups (and 2×128, and 4×64, and whatever else people want to search), that would be ideal.

wwei23 wrote:Why a GRAIN of salt? I already have a lot of salt. Maybe Epsom salt?

cum grano salis

Apple Bottom wrote:

drc wrote:Of course, my post should have been taken with a grain of salt, but if Adam implements standard generation methods it'll be fine.

This. There's clearly demand for this type of soup, but let's make sure we don't end up with a lot of different incompatible implementations. If Calcyman, in his role as Catagolue's Benevolent Dictator for Life, decreed the One True Official Way to generate 1×256 soups (and 2×128, and 4×64, and whatever else people want to search), that would be ideal.

wwei23 wrote:Why a GRAIN of salt? I already have a lot of salt. Maybe Epsom salt?

cum grano salis

I LIKE my method. I reused the 8x32 code, how do you get better than that?

wwei23 wrote:I LIKE my method. I reused the 8x32 code, how do you get better than that?

Just to repeat it once again:

1) it doesn't really matter WHICH method is used, so long as everyone's using the SAME method; and
2) it would be ideal to have server-side support for these pseudo-symmetries, and therefore
3) whatever Calcyman chooses to implement for 2), if and when he does so, will be THE standard method that all haul submitters should adhere to.

What this is NOT about:

1) "good" methods, much less "better" ones;
2) protectionism, and preferring one's "own" method over others.

It seems that wwei23's convention for 8x32, 4x64, 2x128, and 1x256 was satisfyingly straightforward to implement on the server side. Indeed, 8x32 patterns no longer have the 8 annoying blank rows on Catagolue. (It's sneakily accomplished by treating the soup as C1, and just changing the RLE header and the frequency of '$\n' line-breaks.)

Hence, you can now copy soups such as https://catagolue.appspot.com/hashsoup/ ... 6779/b3s23 directly into Golly.

I'm disinclined to bother with the '1x256X2' and '1x256X2+1' symmetries since they'll require time and effort. The same applies to those monstrous 256-by-256 '25p' soups obtained by taking the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronecker_product of a C1 soup with itself. I can definitely empathise with Daniel's reaction:

drc wrote:facepalm

I feel like all the extraneous symmetries should be removed (and checks done to inhibit more invalid symmetries) until Adam comes up with a standard algorithm for generating those soups

However, these extraneous symmetries are very useful as 'namespaces' where people can test hacked versions of apgsearch without risking damage to the proper symmetries. Saka_Test is perhaps the canonical example of this: if he or she had submitted those hauls to D2_+1 instead, it would have prompted much unwarranted excitement. (C1 would disbelieve the submission immediately.)

I would not have facepalmed if the symmetries had been labeled 'wwtest_{insert symmetry name here}' or something like that. That's why Saka's test symmetry didn't bother me.

calcyman wrote:if he or she

He.

drc wrote:I would not have facepalmed if the symmetries had been labeled 'wwtest_{insert symmetry name here}' or something like that. That's why Saka's test symmetry didn't bother me.

The real purpose of the Saka_Test symmetry was to see if Catagolue would accept:
A. Brand new symmetries
B. Premade "soups"

Plus, I already asked permission from Calcyman to test it. What would be really dangerous was if someone was to edit the code for making C1 soups and replace it with random undiscovered objects. Would they be put into the user's discoveries?

Saka wrote:What would be really dangerous was if someone was to edit the code for making C1 soups and replace it with random undiscovered objects. Would they be put into the user's discoveries?

No, they wouldn't get through the chi-square test unless the attacker commits a plausible haul with very subtle changes. Even then, random undiscovered objects would need to be peer-reviewed, so the attacker would also need to run another maliciously-altered instance of apgsearch capable of reproducing exactly the same results in verification mode, and be lucky enough to not be intercepted by any of the benign apgmerae running on other peoples' computers. So it would take a lot of effort.

If anyone does manage to win the prestigious hitherto-unclaimed 'Hitchhiker' badge through this brand of tomfoolery, I would be simultaneously concerned and impressed.

calcyman wrote: If anyone does manage to win the prestigious hitherto-unclaimed 'Hitchhiker' badge through this brand of tomfoolery, I would be simultaneously concerned and impressed.

Well that's some new info. What does the hitchhiker badge look like and the description? Maybe someone could put it up on the Catagolue page on the LifeWiki

Saka wrote:

calcyman wrote: If anyone does manage to win the prestigious hitherto-unclaimed 'Hitchhiker' badge through this brand of tomfoolery, I would be simultaneously concerned and impressed.

Well that's some new info. What does the hitchhiker badge look like and the description? Maybe someone could put it up on the Catagolue page on the LifeWiki

Yeah, that's what I'm doing.

Also, you can find out what it looks like through an obvious method.


I doubt he'd be willing to share, but are there any other badges that nobody else knows of? Teramyriad doesn't seem to exist.

muzik wrote:Teramyriad doesn't seem to exist.

How do you know? Has anyone reached 10 quadrillion soups that you know of?

A for awesome wrote:

muzik wrote:Teramyriad doesn't seem to exist.

How do you know? Has anyone reached 10 quadrillion soups that you know of?

Nope, but I know that at least there isn't an image associated with it.

Maybe there is a 10^14 badge, who knows. But I doubt it.

Hahaha the Hitchhiker badge looks like a galaxy!!!! I get it..!

Saka wrote:Hahaha the Hitchhiker badge looks like a galaxy!!!! I get it..!

The Whirlpool Galaxy, I think.

Wait, I think there's been some misunderstanding on the LifeWiki page. In particular, the badge is awarded to any users who discover a natural xp8_4b23021eaz57840c4d2 in b3s23/C1:
(I'd correct the LifeWiki page myself, but I don't appear to be a Trusted User™.)

Please remind me not to update wiki pages at 2 in the morning.

That's that fixed, by the way.

calcyman wrote:It seems that wwei23's convention for 8x32, 4x64, 2x128, and 1x256 was satisfyingly straightforward to implement on the server side. Indeed, 8x32 patterns no longer have the 8 annoying blank rows on Catagolue. (It's sneakily accomplished by treating the soup as C1, and just changing the RLE header and the frequency of '$\n' line-breaks.)

Excellent! Are there any plans to support these sizes in apgsearch 4.x, or perhaps to issue an update to 3.x to do so?

Saka wrote: He

lium.

Apple Bottom wrote:

calcyman wrote:It seems that wwei23's convention for 8x32, 4x64, 2x128, and 1x256 was satisfyingly straightforward to implement on the server side. Indeed, 8x32 patterns no longer have the 8 annoying blank rows on Catagolue. (It's sneakily accomplished by treating the soup as C1, and just changing the RLE header and the frequency of '$\n' line-breaks.)

Excellent! Are there any plans to support these sizes in apgsearch 4.x, or perhaps to issue an update to 3.x to do so?

Yeah, but then 1.0 won't be superior anymore!

wwei23 wrote:

Apple Bottom wrote:Excellent! Are there any plans to support these sizes in apgsearch 4.x, or perhaps to issue an update to 3.x to do so?

Yeah, but then 1.0 won't be superior anymore!

Isn't moving forward with newer technology a good thing?

muzik wrote: Isn't moving forward with newer technology a good thing?

Maybe he has difficulty using cygwin and stuff.