The science went more right than the capitalistic hubris could handle. Accidentally making them able to reproduce? That’s science going the extra mile.

You’re defaulting to your “comfort setting” which is a normal human thing.

Playing new games takes mental and emotional energy. There are also a lot more unknowns, which is a significant mental load. Our brains are naturally a bit aversive to this, especially if you’re feeling low-energy.

When you play the same old games you’ve enjoyed for over a decade, it’s a way for your brain to “veg out” as it were. The amount of thinking is minimal, and there’s no emotional suspense–you know exactly what’s coming.

So the answer has more to do with your mental and emotional energy levels. If your life is otherwise taxing in those areas, it’s perfectly fine to unwind with some comfort games at the end of a long day. If you find yourself feeling like this all the time, you might be dealing with depression or chronic exhaustion. And those are too complex to answer without more info.

Hope that helps!

I’ve wondered for years when we’d reach this point. Optics-based processors have the potential to blow way past the limitations of electrical/copper circuits, at least in theory. I’m curious to see where this leads.

My youngest is actually really into the videos posted by railcowgirl, which are recordings from the front of trains in Norway, I think. They work really well for winding down at night.

If you happen to be using an ethernet cable, a PoE hat can work great as well. Just be sure to check the voltages and wattage compatibility, as there are multiple specs for PoE.

If you’re Irish in a rowboat, you’re a paddy.

If I like going really fast, am I a speedo?

Keep trying, even if it means sacrificing all of them.

Exiled Kingdoms is a great 90s-style RPG. Absolutely worth paying for.

OW! My stomach lining!

IN 24 GREAT SMELLING COLORS!

OW! my skin!

Bonus:

I agree. Let’s get rid of limits on party spending. Instead, let’s ban it altogether.

This looks relevant and also way over my head at the moment. Looks like I have some reading to do.

Correction, turns out doing it entirely in Excel was the answer for me. The points I found were correct, but the area calculation in my code was wrong.

I had to visualize it before I could even attempt to solve it. Still did it mostly intuitively based on the visualization.

Apparently this is wrong. Not sure what I’m missing here. correct, my code was borked I guess (maybe an overflow or something?).

Thanks for your thoughts! For the input data, I did notice that every substitution goes from 1 element to 2-8 elements. I suppose I could take that into account, and order them from “most efficient” to “least efficient”, and that way I might be able to stop iterating earlier?

I also haven’t looked into whether there are any combinations that are impossible to build from (or inversely to break down into e).

Those two are probably good avenues to try.

Thanks again!

Did you also try to implement a sort that ended up being magnitudes less efficient than calling .sort(), or are you normal?