Once we accept this there are a lot of different directions we can take. We can try to make it infeasible (but very possible) for a human to work out the locations of the mines at one stage of the game, but easy to work them out at another (when the player makes a move). Not sure what approach I'd take here.
Or we can go back to my old set of assumptions and try to work out a physical process for easily creating the random bits needed to play. If we do that, we're not really asking if it's possible (it is) we're asking what the easiest way for a person to set up and play within the normal assumptions of the game would be.. which is a far less mathematical problem.
I thought about it a bit and I think it just comes down to whether or not we allow the player to use physical mechanisms to introduce (as good as) random bits or not.
Without random bits it's clearly impossible, since the player by definition knows all the seed information and in theory can work out the positions of all the mines.
maybe procedural generation could be theoretically possible without biasing it based on where the player starts or revealing information to the player unduly but l0l
i don't thihnk artificial intelligence necessarily leads to replicating the human brain in the sense we like to think of anthropomorphic robots but sure maybe it will have something to do with it all
on second thoughth min constraints going inwards might be more efficient if you're focusing solely on finding solutions that work, and in the sense that if you can't find a solution to the most vague then getting more specific wouldn't help. but eh. easier to disprove more specific things. ill just hhave to see
I think we just need better insight into the human mind. My guess is that following some breakthrough in artificial intelligence that happens in our lifetime, a lot more of these mysterious human mind functions will "just click"
i'd like to think if we had a ton more knowledge and intelligence we could reduce humor to cause-and-effect/logic but i think we don't atm or someone more far wiser than i would have found it.
but i aspire to be a joke.
anyway gotta go return to my hermit cave to play more with the minesweeper thing and perform other necessary activities, but i hope to see some fabulous nonsense in this thread if i check it again
Also is it just me or does trying to solve humor with any kind of analytic approach seem to completely go against the spirit of humor in the first place. It's like you automatically become a joke if you try to approach humor logically.
We need a rigorous definition of the question before we can do a rigorous mathematical proof. Problem is, we haven't decided what the best set of constraints is yet.
i went out of my way to find a gif from Humanity Has Declined that was tangentially related to the topic of the other thread or the digression at the end of it and came back with a still image that kinda worked. And then I learned that on epicmafia.com/forum, topic text in particular doesn't use bbcode.
