optimizing max/min X requires luck
optimizing avg X requires talent/hard work
elaborating: assume you want to minimize the completion time for a game of minesweeper. if your objective is to minimize your best completion time a good strategy is to click aggressively in the hope that you hit upon a lucky/easy configuration earlier and then you can click away to a glorious finish. on the other hard if you want the minimize the average completion time (assuming that not completing incurs an infinite penalty) the key to achieving this objective is to have talent/ and persist with tough configurations, whereas for minimizing the best completion time the best strategy is to be carefree with the clicking early on in the game.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I hate minesweeper
Nice post!
point5: no offence meant.. but hatred is often a manifestation of insecurity and incompetence .. i hope thats not the case here
e.g. i hate chess because i suck at it
BTW, do you still manage sub-90sec timings? I last played a few months ago, and realized that my optical mouse sucks for playing minesweeper; the crappy mouse I had at iit was much better.
no -- im playing gnome-mines on linux which is significantly suckier -- consistently manage 100-115 range .. playing on a lousy windows-me machine with a pathetic mouse was better --
maybe senile degeneration or measurement errors from windows-me :-)
It always has to be extreme analysis with you...
One day, it is a rant on consumerism and consumption (on which I am sure the "utility" theory would do you good), the other day on mathematically "arbit" theories.
The middle path of cautious insanity, ever?For a change?
diya: the middle path only leads to ambiguity and confusion. being at the extremes helps clearing the confusion. and btw .. cautious insanity is exactly what it seems -- an oxymoron.
Post a Comment