Hi,

I am currently a rising junior and finished all of the math classes required for CS major. However, I am also minoring in math. Thus, I wanted some advice on whether to take Differential Equation or Combinatorial Theory or Graph Theory? They all count as a math minor, so I wasn’t sure which one is more suitable.

Thank you!

https://go.crowdstrike.com/rs/281-OBQ-266/images/Report2020OverWatchNowheretoHide.pdf

I'm taking a course in graph theory teaching out of Diestel's book.

One of the most common ways to study mathematical objects is to study a sub-object obeying similar properties as its parent. This is probably first seen when we learned about subspace of vector spaces.

Now with graphs, I understand and have seen how useful it is to characterize a graph based on its subgraphs. However, even after a few lectures, sections, and homework, I still do not see how to "work with" minors, in the sense that they are much more general and variable than subgraphs.

Do you guys have some advice or insight for me?

Hello, I hope you're all doing well today.

Yesterday, or two days ago, I was reading a thread that compared the effectiveness of 3 feats and one of them was a feat that granted +1 AC. The claim was made that more AC is better than suspected-that increasing your AC will increase your survival-ability by an amount greater than just +1 AC if you have a greater amount or 'increasing returns'. I also agreed with the idea, I mean it makes sense that if all AC does is help you not get hit, then it either works or does not. Mathematically, over a large sample size I have found this to be false and I thought I'd share my findings. The short version is that +1 effective AC is always going to reduce damage taken by 5%, at least as shown by the simplified data that I will explain now.

It is often discussed about the effectiveness of AC vs. HP vs. resistances, so the damage done is a constant value and heavily simplified to put ~100% of the focus on AC vs AC+1. The criteria is that a 1 will always miss, a 20 will always hit, and deal 2 damage, and all other attacks if they are equal to or greater than the AC value (meets it beats it) will deal one damage.

The number of rolls at each AC was 100,000,000 to reduce variance. (Took about 50 minutes to run the very simple program 21x100,000,000 in total-2.1 billion). To describe the graph, the left or y axis is indicating a % from 0% to 100%. The bottom or x axis is indicating your effective AC- which is your AC minus their chance to hit, and the number the d20 needs to indicate or beat. The blue line represents the % of damage you would take at that EffAC and the orange line indicates the difference between that EffAC and that EffAC+1.

https://i.imgur.com/0pqAFmx.jpg

You can see looking at the orange line that at EffAC of 2, there is no improvement over EffAC 1, this is because of 'meets it beats it' and so an EffAC of 2 is the same as an EffAC of 1 (2 beats them both). Similarly, there is no improvement at EffAC 21 vs. 20, as it requires a 20 to hit at that point and any point onward. This graph shows otherwise that increasing your EffAC will result in a reduction in damage of 5%.

I suspect this is not surprising to most people, but it's always nice to have something concrete to back it up. I hope you have a nice weekend.

Story Time:
So without much fanfare, the third competitive season ended a couple weeks again. I was intensely disappointed with this season as, from my experience, this most recent season did not seem terribly well done, at least when compared to the previous season.

But I am far too aware that I am simple just one of many, and so I began to wonder how the rest of the PvP community saw Season 3 as a whole this year. Instead of heading to Reddit to make a thread (seriously, there are numerous issues with Reddit's forum system), I thought I would take things a bit more seriously and create a survey for people to fill out.

A couple hours later, I had my survey and I was ready to receive responses. Sadly, at the time of creation, the survey could only hold 10 questions, so there was (and is) a lot of information that I could have asked about but didn't. (I'll know better next time!) Exactly 900 responses later, I had a ton of data!

Thankfully, with my new position at work, I've been able to put several dozen hours into cleaning up the data, doing some preliminary graphing, and (mostly) fighting with the R coding language. Here's some early graphs and conclusions I've been able to pull from the surveys! If I get more surveys, I'll certainly dive more into this and try to draw some more nuanced conclusions, but with only 900 responses, I'm going to have some heavily skewed data and it's probably not worth it.
(Hint: If you want to see more, get your PvP friends to take this survey! The more responses the better!!)

Survey Synopsis:
The survey asked a number of questions concerning the player's performance in this season of PvP. These question were fact-based, although there was nothing to stop the respondent from lying. I expect that the vast majority of people would answer the questions (relatively) accurately. Such questions included:

• The version of the game (Heart of Thorns, Core Game, F2P)

• Earned division

• Tier within this division

• Legendary multiplier (if applicable)

• Win percentage

• Longest win streaks

• Longest lose streaks

The second part of the survey asked the respondents to share their opinion concerning the state of various aspects of the PvP season. The questions were multiple choice with 6 answers available ("Very Poor", "Somewhat Poor", "Neither Good Nor Poor", "Somewhat Good", "Very Good", and "N/A"). In the graphs, these responses are ordered 1 through 5 for

The economy graph currently shows the amount of resources you have produced that turn plus the resources that you had at the start of your turn. But those resources that you had at the start of the turn are not really what I would call "economy". If I float 5 gold every turn, that 5 gold is not contributing to my economy so it makes no sense to count it in that graph. It makes the graph relatively useless for comparing who actually had the biggest economy each turn.

My suggestion is pretty simply: don't count the resources saved up from previous turns as "economy", count only the resources produced that turn. I don't know if you're currently counting gold that could have been produced but wasn't (like from Auride Core), but you also shouldn't count that. Only count the resources actually produced that turn.

I'm talking about the pop-up that comes up during some of the calmer moments, the ones focusing on one player with the player cam and graphs of gold and levels over time.

The clearest information those graphs convey is the general upward trend in both, which isn't much information at all. What usually draws my attention from them though is how the slopes (GPM/XPM) on those lines (especially the gold graph) change at various points, and I think that information's a lot more interesting. It would also be conveyed a lot more clearly if the graph just presented the GPM and XPM over time directly. Maybe even control for passive gold on the GPM graph. I also imagine that might not be too much trouble to change in the code?

But outstanding production nonetheless, keep it up!

For example there's a few practice questions in my discrete math course which give a graph and then ask us to determine whether it is planar or not. It seems almost like a trial and error thing, but I was wondering is there any algorithm or method to make this type of question easier? Thanks

When I look at the graph for Reactors used, the bars line up BETWEEN the numbers. For example, on "No Thanks Necessary", there's a big bar between 4 and 5 reactors, and a shorter bar between 5 and 6. I'm guessing that the first bar is on 4 and the second is on 5, but that's very unclear. The labels should be shifted half a bar left or right to make it clear.

I also see a tiny little bar between 3 and 4, which is where I'm currently expecting to be. I almost had it in 2, but the assembly stage got a bit too insane.

Hey guys,
i just enabled the fps and ping-graph ingame with the known command net_graph 1.
I know this annoys me more than it really should, but is there any chance of getting
the "ping" right over the "lerp" :D Here is an image to show you what i mean,
http://i.imgur.com/zFWZ4PE.jpg
hope you can help me!

Throughout the LCS Riot has been showing gold differences graphs as a game has gone on. This is fantastic and great! I really like seeing information such as this. The only problem is that there is a simple inaccuracy in how it's shown.

http://i.imgur.com/tgnHoWH.png

The above is a gold graph that comes from a recent semi-finals game showing clearly that the difference is "negative gold." Above the X axis (when blue has more gold) it's positive and one might think normally that below the X axis is a negative value but this graph is showing a difference between the two teams. The difference is a positive value, regardless of which team has more gold. It's a little thing yes but it's a simple mistake that can be easily fixed.

Copy-pasted from the same post made on the official forums

Hi everyone, Bob here,

HOLY SHIT I THINK I MAY HAVE CRACKED THE CODE!!!! And by I, I of course mean the fuckin absolute truckload of DD and wrinkle brains that have contributed their DD to this saga. Thanks in advance to all the DD writers included in here, as well as the ones I failed to mention because they just aren’t top of mind at the time of writing.

PS, get jacked, because this DD has been reviewed by some of the greatest wrinkly minds I know before posting, and I'l be keeping this one edited and fresh up to date as we learn more. Hope you learn something, and gain some wrinkles yourself - god knows we need ‘em.

Some of you may have been around long enough to remember my DD on u/criand’s and u/dentisttft’s DDs. This dd looked at the combined theories of some OG apes that got me into my own DD dive. In it, I explored some different movers and theorized its a combination of things. I have had some offline conversations with some of the smartest fuckin people silverback DD-writing wrinkly ass apes on the planet and found some really interesting things I’d like to show you and get your thoughts on. The intention of this DD is to share the really TIT JACKING information I just uncovered and put together, with the help of all the apes mentioned here, which have been my guide either directly or indirectly through this learning process that is Double Down Due Diligence.

Foreward 0.0

First, I think it’s important to realize where this is coming from and who the fuck u/bobsmith808 is. Well, I’m just your average run of the mill no good crayon eating ape. I shit rainbows when the stonks go up and I shit bricks when the stonks go down, but when they go down, I rage buy more because brick by brick I will increase my position in this wonderful company with a bright fucking future, I call gamestop.

Why? Because I like the fuckin stock.

Table of Contents for the DD

I will be breaking this up into a couple posts because reddit is retarded - so retarded you cannot post over 40,000 characters per post. I guess they never anticipated the level of autism we could muster. 🤷🏽‍♂️. I hope you enjoy the first part of this series.

In This chapter:

• 1.0 - Recap on understanding the T+ cycles and how they work, along with some insight to market mechanics

1. 1.1 - T+ Cycles & How They Work

Introduction:

Edit: There seems to be an issue where some users cannot see the text. I am removing the royaleapi link to see if this resolves anything

TL;DR at the bottom

On this subreddit, there are countless posts about overleveled cards and ladder matchmaking. In this post, I will detail how I built and used a computational model of the ladder to determine which model parameters minimized card level differences

The guiding principles that I looked for in a ladder model were this:

• The ladder should minimize card level differences for as many players as possible
• The players should not be clumped around a certain trophy level
• The ladder should work on a long term
• Level 14 players with fully maxed decks (modeled as 112 card levels) should reach the top
• The top of the ladder should be between 8000 and 8500

After testing 28 different models of ladder, the design that most accurately fit the aforementioned principles was a system where card levels (notably not king level) was capped by league and inflation remains unchanged.

How this investigation was done:

Simplifying Assumptions

Since this is a computational model, there had to be some assumptions. For the testing different ladders phase they were:

• There is no 2v2. All players play ladder exclusively
• Players are *always* matched with someone that is within 40 trophies of them, regardless on position on ladder
• All players hit cancel within 5s when king tower matchmaking active
• A season is about 4 million battles for 25000 players
• There is an even distribution of players at king tower 8,9,10,11,12,13 amd 14.
• The card level on a player of each king tower level is evenly distributed*

When 2 players face each other, the chance of the overleveled player winning can be approximated (R^2 for the regression was 0.9933) by the equation 0.0186*lvlDiff + 0.521. With equal levels, I made this a 50/50 coin toss for testing different models. The card level approximation is from 90k real matches.

Data Collection Process

First I created a set of "baseline data" where I ran 25000 players starting at 5000 through a simulation of 10 million battles. I used the inflation that is currently in the game (80% loss from 5000-5300, 90% loss from 5600-6000), turned king tower matchmaking off and reset it to create the starting point for all of the tests conducted. This data is stored in the file 'baselineData.csv'

This is 2 of the graphs I generated from the data:

[https://i

I have some Sheets that I use either monthly, quarterly, or annually that I figured I'd pass along just in case they help someone out. Each sheet has a tab at the front that explains what the different tabs show and how to use the sheet. Please be sure to open the sheet when logged in to your Google account and go to File then Make a Copy in order to edit the sheet. DO NOT request to edit the form as the Google account associated with these is not monitored so I won't get the request.

First is my monthly budget sheet that I've been using since 2017 and it's been through different variations from when I originally found it online, and now it's a completely different animal and unrecognizable from where it started. The main page is your typical annual budget with columns for the months and a bunch of categories and sub categories for ease of keeping track. There is also a neat page of graphs that show various spending habits to give a nice visual of your budget. The page to record credit card charges is optional and isn't tied to the budget or charts, but it helps me keep track and categorize my charges. I'm happy to say that by using this (and disregarding my cash-out refinance and home renovations, which netted to nearly $0), my 2021 budget was just about spot on with about +$300/mo. in income and +$300/mo. in expenses.

Second which I update annually is my retirement calculator. I originally shared this one to this sub about 3 years ago and after a few minor changes and tweaks, I feel like it's a solid spreadsheet for calculating your retirement savings. You simply fill in the orange boxes at the top, and the sheet auto fills with the various calculations. As I mention in my information tab, this is a fairly basic spreadsheet so variables such as taxes, or being born prior to 1954 (change in SS income), are not factored in. I also found information from the SSA about a reduction in SSI which I did factor in, even though I don't think it's considered "official" yet and only a forecast by the SSA.

Third which I update quarterly is my 401k and IRA ROI analysis, which really helps put into perspective compounding interest, and the benefit

[first] [prev] [next]

"You would think I'd set the planet on fire with the way everyone jumped ship out of their council positions," Dreams muttered, staring at the Council's deliberation chamber where it was projected by the holotank. "Look at that. Twelve thousand seats, and all that is going on are four groups of Lanaktallan playing video games by using their high speed ansible links," she grumped, pointing at first one group of a dozen and then another group of four.

"They're playing a 4X galactic domination game with sixty-eight still active players after starting with four hundred," Speaks smiled, pointing at the first group. "Those ones are robbing a bank in a co-op crime simulator," he said, pointing at the second group, "Those are replaying the Black Horizon Campaign of the Clownface Nebula Conflict," pointing at the third group. He pointed at the fourth group that was pantomiming playing musical instruments. "Those six have formed a band and are touring dive bars on Mars."

Dreams sighed and petted Mr. Rings, who was busy peeling apart a puzzle treat by twisting the shell three times until it clicked and removing the third shell layer.

"Has this ever happened before?" she asked.

Speaks nodded. "A few times. Very few. Diamond Dan the Man, ruler of The Ice Bound Fjords on Terra, when he was impeached, gave a speech that ended with 'so long, suckers!' right before he used a jetpack to fly off through the stained glass ceiling and escape in a hovercraft flying a banner that read "U SUK!"."

Speaks snickered.

"He was never seen again, robbed the treasury of hundreds of trillions of Icegeld, stole nearly a half ton of gold, had trillions of dollars in bearer bonds in his pockets, stole copyrights and trademarks and put them in his name, and moved thousands of patents to his name. Rumor says he's still out there somewhere, on a gold throne, eagerly awaiting any contested election in the Ice Bound FJords. He's considered a IBF folk hero," Speaks said.

"Gee, thanks for that," Dreams said. She looked at the four Lanaktallan, who looked completely ridiculous pantomiming stuffing stuff in bags, shooting weapons, or dragging something away. "They don't even care that

TLDR; The breadcrumbs dropped by the disclosure team might have a strong tie to the time component of the time evolution operator of quantum mechanical systems.

Disclosure: I am not a physicist.

Lue has stated twice that he leaves breadcrumbs in every interview.

21OCT2021 - Theories of Everything with Lue https://youtu.be/qfa5rWYHCCg?t=1216&#x200B

>Lue Elizondo - "I've always left breadcrumbs in every interview I ever do for the last four years"

19NOV202 - New Frontier Network https://youtu.be/P4yjMl6mUyc?t=4837

>Lue Elizondo - "And again, I kind of left some breadcrumbs. If people know how I work they'll realize every time I have one of these conversation I always leave breadcrumbs; ALWAYS!"

Operating under the assumption that he and his cohorts have been leaving both intentional and unintentional breadcrumbs for the community to find, you can discover some absolute gold nuggets to many aspects of the phenomenon. This post may reveal one of those nuggets.

You are highly encouraged to dig deep into and re-watch all of the interviews and presentations of Lue Elizondo, Tom Delonge, Jim Semivan, Eric Davis, and Hal Puthoff looking for those breadcrumbs. This post will contain both transcript excerpts, timestamped videos, and web resource links for your reference. Please pardon any misspellings, slight alterations for clarification, or minor errors. Any glaring errors will be corrected if they are found and pointed out.

Please try leaving your preconceived notions of what the true story may be and your personal biases aside. Leaving biases aside means trying to take every word they say literally and applying an analysis as to their intent for saying what they did. The results have lead down a very interesting path of discovery to some very deep and interesting physics. There are several topics of the phenomenon that can be pieced together in this manner that may be posted at a later date.

All persons involved in the disclosure effort have been forthright mentioning that there is something very peculiar about the crafts' ability to manipulate time in various fashions. The evidence for this statement is so overwhelming that there is no need to put every reference to it in this post. This post will contain excerpts of the most interesting comments made on the subject of time manipulation.

A copious amount of questions will be raised to help the reader follow the

I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.

Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.

So I have a relatively minor infection. It’s a bitch but I don’t think I’ll be ending up in the hospital any time soon. I know 3 other people infected right now. I just called 811 to ask if they want to like... track this? Very friendly lady put me on hold to check, came back and said nah - we aren’t doing that. Do you want to listen to this automated message about how to isolate? My god! How messed up are our stats? I guess we are just assuming everyone is respecting quarantine and moving forward this is just going to be like any other disease - no stats needed. What is even the point of these graphs if they aren’t even accurate? Anyway. I’m just sick (punny) of how this is all being treated.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a38696388/2022-toyota-4runner-trd-pro-by-the-numbers/?source=nl&utm_source=nl_cdb&utm_medium=email&date=011122&utm_campaign=nl25897483

"The TRD Pro off-road model may look cool, but its upgrades can't hide this uncompetitive truck's age."

Tl;dr - The author of the article JOEY CAPPARELLA does not know his audience and writes a very flip-floppy article on the 4R that gives no useful advice to anyone and misrepresents the identity of the 4Runner.

Here are some notes on this guy's absolutely ridiculous article. (to skip to my rant, scroll down to "My big issue")

- " The current generation of the 4Runner has existed with only minor changes since 2009 ". Its been around since 2010. 2009 was the last year of the 4th gen body style. I suppose he could be saying that the truck hit the market in 09 as a model-year 10 (which it did in in Fall of 09), but personally I don't refer to the release year of a vehicle, I refer to the model year.

- The first paragraph in general is fine except for my one nitpick above. The writer is setting the precedent that the 4R is old, just look at his first line. Which I agree with and most 4R owners would as well, but he also gives me as the reader the impression he thinks that's a bad thing. Wrangler and Bronco are competitors, but as the 4R does carry a bit of a mall crawler/baby hauler persona, I would say Grand Cherokee is probably also worth adding to the list.

- Second Paragraph: Like in the first paragraph, he is giving me the impression he doesnt like the truck and how outdated it is. His comment on the rear window "like the next best thing, right?" line is trying to add humor, but just doesnt fit well, the 4R hasn't had removeable panels for 30 years and almost certainly never will again. So why make it sound like this is something holding it back from being competitive with the Wrangler or Bronco?

- Third paragraph: He starts off with moderate tone that turns negative as he gets into Toyota's efforts to "keep the model fresh". That line came off as almost condescending to me. But he caps the paragraph off with the line about the and "chunky roof rack" and "badass TOYOTA" lettering. Ok, so those pa