1335
Comments (62)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
DeathBattleFan123 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not defending this shit-tastic code or its equally shit-tastic fake prediction. But you should know there's a thing called a Monte Carlo simulation. The simple description of it is to set up a simulation with (sensibly) randomized inputs and then to run the simulation a million times, and once you've got the results, look to see if they converge on an answer or have an otherwise identifiable pattern.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
DeathBattleFan123 1 point ago +1 / -0

Indeed, that's one reason this code is shit -- the way they re-order one of their internal lists during execution is non-deterministic (ie probably skull fucked by the os thread scheduling). Nevertheless, assuming an acceptably-random value is generated whenever your rand() function is called, it's worth pointing out that the whole point of a Monte Carlo simulation is to show that a model converges on an answer or a pattern of answers, regardless of what random values are used from pass to pass. In this case, the failure to maintain determinism is more of a bug than it is an inherent design flaw, and ultimately has no bearing on the accuracy of the answer.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0