RBerenguel wrote:Well, when you start the first line is this, then it starts being an infinite scrolling text :/
you're assuming I've closed and reopened my browser window I never close my browser tabs/windows (nor restart my computer).
When you go to a website, it sets up a session that will eventually timeout without further action. So if you leave it running, say, overnight, your session may expire in that time. If that happens, it will create a new session, but it won't have login info, etc. from the previous session unless it prompts you for it again.
As they say, this is a feature, not a bug, since you don't want a server to keep all the old sessions alive and eating up memory when people have gone on to a different website or turned off their computers or somesuch.
Google's own sign-ins are usually 15-30 days long: I thought sign-in-with-Google was similar, but it seems to be shorter, is it?
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net
skydyr wrote:When you go to a website, it sets up a session that will eventually timeout without further action. So if you leave it running, say, overnight, your session may expire in that time. If that happens, it will create a new session, but it won't have login info, etc. from the previous session unless it prompts you for it again.
That's my point.. it doesn't prompt to login again, nor does it indicate that I've been logged out. And there's no link.
I never close my browser tabs/windows (nor restart my computer).
ORLY? Please fire up your Terminal, enter “uptime”, and share the result with us
But I also never seldom close browser windows and there are LOTS of tabs I never close. Like the “unread posts” here on L19 and Oooooootakomoku
Grtz, Tom
In my previous Mac (where software updates were a little ness "noisy", i.e. pre-Lion, and boot time wasn't 15 seconds) I could easily rack 180-200 days of uptime. Why reboot?
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net
RBerenguel wrote:In my previous Mac (where software updates were a little ness "noisy", i.e. pre-Lion, and boot time wasn't 15 seconds) I could easily rack 180-200 days of uptime. Why reboot?
I do remember uptimes of 20, 30 days with my Macs but not longer; currently I need to reboot perhaps once a day because of some weird stuff that makes trouble … but I then again I need to run stuff like Parallels friggin’ Desktop for my work, and stuff like InDesign/Photoshop/Illustrator, and perhaps too many fonts and background “helpers” <shrug>.
I guess life would be a lot easier for me if I just needed mail and a browser and number crunching. I envy you.
RBerenguel wrote:In my previous Mac (where software updates were a little ness "noisy", i.e. pre-Lion, and boot time wasn't 15 seconds) I could easily rack 180-200 days of uptime. Why reboot?
I do remember uptimes of 20, 30 days with my Macs but not longer; currently I need to reboot perhaps once a day because of some weird stuff that makes trouble … but I then again I need to run stuff like Parallels friggin’ Desktop for my work, and stuff like InDesign/Photoshop/Illustrator, and perhaps too many fonts and background “helpers” <shrug>.
I guess life would be a lot easier for me if I just needed mail and a browser and number crunching. I envy you.
Well, R, a background Go process local server running, Sketch, Gimp and a MAMP stack can take a toll of my Mac, but having 8 gigs of RAM (and an SSD disk) has improved my life a lot vs having 2 Gb and a normal HDD. I don't envy people who have to use Photoshop & Illustrator
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net
Bill Spight wrote:As I said before, for fuseki skill I think you need at least 25 problems before you start matching the level of the problem to the level of the user.
First of, the whole issue was most likely caused by the bug I fixed a few hours ago. That aside, there is a normal distribution prior for the rank. The lower the sample size the more the prior ends up weighing in the outcome. Hence first few answers regardless if they are right or wrong wont budge the rank too much.
Given your prior, how many straight "correct" answers does it take to get a rating with a mean of 4D? How many with only one "wrong" answer?
Thanks.
The Adkins Principle: At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Bill Spight wrote:Given your prior, how many straight "correct" answers does it take to get a rating with a mean of 4D? How many with only one "wrong" answer?
Thanks.
The prior is a normal distribution with mean of 5.5kyu and stddev of 5 stones. If you were to answer correctly a few tsumegos where 7dans always get it wrong, and 9dans always get it right, your mean would jump to 4dan and well beyond with only a few questions. However since the positions you are shown are those considered easy for your estimated rank, it makes it more difficult to prove strength as you wont be shown difficult enough problems to quickly prove you are 4dan. In practice I would guess around.. 30-40 problems to prove 4dan strength as it is. However proving 15kyu strength should only take about 10 wrong answers.
Bill Spight wrote:Given your prior, how many straight "correct" answers does it take to get a rating with a mean of 4D? How many with only one "wrong" answer?
Thanks.
The prior is a normal distribution with mean of 5.5kyu and stddev of 5 stones. If you were to answer correctly a few tsumegos where 7dans always get it wrong, and 9dans always get it right, your mean would jump to 4dan and well beyond with only a few questions. However since the positions you are shown are those considered easy for your estimated rank, it makes it more difficult to prove strength as you wont be shown difficult enough problems to quickly prove you are 4dan. In practice I would guess around.. 30-40 problems to prove 4dan strength as it is. However proving 15kyu strength should only take about 10 wrong answers.
Thanks.
How about some simulations? For some representative ranks. Like 4D, 1K, 6K, 11K, 16K.
The Adkins Principle: At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
It's now possible to choose what type of problems to study at www.ootakamoku.com , with this in place I can add more pro games, since its possible to differentiate between modern and older pro games.
Ootakamoku wrote:It's now possible to choose what type of problems to study at http://www.ootakamoku.com , with this in place I can add more pro games, since its possible to differentiate between modern and older pro games.
Oota, add a neat Paypal "donate" button
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net
