Eh, it’s ok. The visuals are awsome, but the story is to much for one movie and therefore feels very rushed.
Could have easily been 2-3 movies maybe then we would have gotten a better character developement for Snow.
One of the reasons I never progressed as fas as I wanted in Anno 1800. I never play long enough in the phases where I feel like playing it. When starting the next one I have allready forgotten how I set up all my productions and trade routes, etc. and it’s just easier to start a new game.
highly scalled person
You might be on to something, it might have been the lizzard people!
Idk, its not like there’s no housing shourtage/rant gauging in other countries with mor sensible zoning.
Well I ain’t just gonna repeat it…
Nah, TCP is still just kicking the box over, but just kicking it over again, if the reciever doesn’t kick back a box saying they got it.
Esp. because if you have enough people in prison that the results of elections would regularly depend on their votes your main problem is not prisoners voting or not, its having too many prisoners.
Try (100,100,100,100,100,101) or 50 ones and a two, should result in 102 and 4 as a max respectively. I tried using less numbers, but the less numbers you use, the higher the values (to be exact less off a deviation(%-difference) between the values, resulting in higher numbers) have to be and wolframAlpha does not like 10^100 values so I stopped trying.
thanks for looking it up:).
I do think the upper bound on that page is wrong thought. Incedentally in the article itself only the lower bound is prooven, but in its sources this paper prooves what I did in my comment before as well:
for the upper bound it has max +log(n) . (Section 2, eq 4) This lets us construct an example (see reply to your other comment) to disproove the notion about beeing able to calculate the max for many integers.
to be fair it does seem to work for any two numbers where one is >1. As lim x,y–> inf ln(ex+ey) <= lim x,y --> inf ln(2 e^(max(x,y))) = max(x,y) + ln(2).
I think is cool because works for any number of variables
using the same proof as before we can see that: lim,x_i -->inf ln(sum_i/in I} e^(x_i)) <= ln(.
So it would only work for at most [base of your log, so e<3 for ln] variables.
so 0.3 ~= 1-ln(2)=max(1-ln(2),1-ln(2)) = floor(ln(2*e^(1-ln(2)))) = floor(ln(2)+(1-ln(2))) = 1 ?
That would bee engeneer 2, not Mathematician3 xD.
Just out of curiostity, what was you Idea behind that?
they will have to generate proof-of-work (a bunch of math that will takes time to compute) and submit it to mCaptcha.
The user doesn’t have to do anything, your computer has to do the work
Are other Chipmakers better? It’s not like they could just have no chip at all…
Removed by mod