I imagine the PRNG they use for this is a rather thorough implementation. Unless perhaps it is even necessary to used a cryptographic chip to generate true randomness.
pseudocode my man, pseudocode. ignite the imagination, and let the reader run wild.
however, now my imagination is now running, and thinking about how overkill "true" random might be for this application. something "random" like an orbital sander would probably be enough. you're just trying to get away from side-to-side, left-circle, right-circle, up/down patterns. you're doing this to 3 different surfaces, so they would grind out any slight patterns which is the point. seems like a try crypto random would be as "effecient" as my roomba appears not to be.
>still in the middle of the computer revolution
Are you implying it will end? Either Moore's law leveling off or an externality (unrest/war/climate change) that ends it?
How do I find more people that think like you to associate with? My circles either A. were totally ignorant of stuff like Cat Person because they don't read a whole lot of anything or B. latch on to stuff like Cat Person and engage with populist ideal narratives. I've basically isolated myself from most people I used to talk to and engage with because I couldn't take lying for politeness sake about how I perceive reality anymore.
help me out here, I don't understand how the spoiler effect returns if the third party candidate becomes competitive. Wouldn't that just mean they have a chance of winning? Suppose Dave Chappelle ran in 2020 and 40% of people voted for him and they all had Biden ranked at #2. 15% rank Biden #1, and 45% rank Trump #1 with no #2 marked. Biden wins, no?
edit: found your explainer elsewhere, currently reading.
edit edit: Huh, that is weird.
That's a pretty good example, because it illustrates a disconnect between how people expect IRV/RCV to work and how it actually works.
Biden would be eliminated first, because he had the fewest 1st choice votes in the first round.
The Dave Chappelle voters' 2nd choices for Biden don't matter: they're thrown out because Biden was eliminated.
So, it comes down to Chappelle with 40% and Trump with 45%. If none of the Biden voters listed Chappelle as their second choice, then Trump wins. If enough voters had Chappelle as their second choice, then Chappelle wins.
The lesson from this example is: it's quite possible that your second choices don't matter, because they're eliminated too early. We could come up with other examples that show that it isn't always safe to put your first choice first, either. IRV/RCV is non-monotonic, which means in some cases you can cause a candidate to lose by ranking them higher.
I see you recommended a few books and also said that 'a good book on negotiations will differentiate between strategies where the relationship is important and where it isn't'. What is one such book?
I'm new to negotiations, having been avoidant my whole life. I've started with GTY and Chris Voss's masterclass, but I know there's more out there. Someone here on HN mentioned once that 'salience models' are the now the cutting edge of negotiation theory, but I haven't been able to find much useful beginner/intermediate stuff on that.
