• Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact

  • Nomic Report II

    January 18th, 2019
    nomic
    This second week has been a pretty slow one for the game. Pavel and I were both sick, some players have silently stopped participating, and the code is basically where it was a week ago. The biggest change is that we now have a dashboard:


    jefftk.com/nomic

    This shows what PRs need review by which people. Figuring this out efficiently from GitHub's interface was one of the biggest things slowing the game down. GitHub isn't designed around the idea that all repo collaborators are interested in reviewing every PR.

    (You can "view source" on that page to see how it's written, and what server-side support it requires. Even though it's built around a proxy to GitHub's rate-limited API I put caching on it, so it should be robust.)

    We did resolve one issue, which is that I had a bug in #37 which would have caused the game to break if we had reached three days without a commit. Todd fixed this in #58, which we got merged just in time. This also saw our first successful use of points, where in #59 I gave Todd one of my points to thank him for catching this.

    The other two substantive changes merged have been #48, which adds the ability for validate.py to inspect the PR diff in making merge decisions, and the long-outstanding #33 which gives a point for authoring a PR that gets merged.

    In the next week I'm hoping we can fully build out points functionality: merge #47 to switch to named bonuses and prevent merge conflicts, revive #49 to allow transferring points in a low-friction way, and maybe add something that rewards people for staying active in the game. Another option would be to change the current probabilistic win condition from a uniform sample to weighting by points.

    Comment via: facebook

    Recent posts on blogs I like:

    Interview with Kat Woods: decision-making about having kids

    Realizing what you don't want The post Interview with Kat Woods: decision-making about having kids appeared first on Otherwise.

    via Otherwise July 5, 2022

    Decision theory and dynamic inconsistency

    Here is my current take on decision theory: When making a decision after observing X, we should condition (or causally intervene) on statements like “My decision algorithm outputs Y after observing X.” Updating seems like a description of something you do…

    via The sideways view July 3, 2022

    10x (engineer, context) pairs

    Your actual output depends on a lot more than just how quickly you finish a given programming task. Everything besides the literal coding depends deeply on the way you interact with the organization around you.

    via benkuhn.net June 9, 2022

    more     (via openring)


  • Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact