Code center > Suggestions
Suggesting a cost for .fixpos
Testlund:
Maybe a value stored in the slime sysvar could determine the strength of it, something between 1-100 for instance? But that would probably mean the value has to reset to 0 if something dislodge it. I'm just brainstorming a little.
EricL:
--- Quote from: Testlund ---Maybe a value stored in the slime sysvar could determine the strength of it, something between 1-100 for instance?
--- End quote ---
At this stage, I think I'd rather keep slime out of the fixation picture. Down the road, sure, lets explore it but for now, I just want to address the issue people have with fixing and the physicis model in the simpliest way possible.
2.41.1m should be out in a day or two.
Nitus:
I hope that extreme gravity will affect your "suction cup" model. I guess if you're making it strictly fricton-based, it should address my concerns, but for it to be truly in line with the present model there should be at least an morphological cost, such as acceleration vs gravity. I simply can't accept a model that "fakes it" as saying anything worthwhile. You shouldn't need to make it happen to see it happen.
EricL:
--- Quote from: Nitus ---I simply can't accept a model that "fakes it" as saying anything worthwhile.
--- End quote ---
I could care less whether whether you accept it or not. Let me be very clear about something. The simulator is not intended to be a perfect (or semi-perfect) simualtion of real, macro world physics. There are hundreds of examples where it is not. The only reason it even attempts to simulate tangible phyisical world objects and interactions at all (as opposed to purely digital constructs) is to appeal to human intuition and aid humans in identifying interesting evolved or programmed behaviour. Evolution does not require the model conform to your notion of correctness. We could in fact do away with all simulated phyiscality and allow bots to reside, interact and evolve in a purely a naitve digital realm divorced from anything our own evolution has prepared us to recognize. There are good arguments to favor such a model as I have argued in the past. But even given the current physics model, that something violates your macro-world intuition or personal sense of worth is insufficient reason to change it. It cetainly is no reason for me to spend my valuable hours doing so.
If you have a well-reasoned, specific suggestion to make, let's hear it. But spare me your unreasoned value judgements.
Nitus:
--- Quote ---I could care less whether whether you accept it or not. Let me be very clear about something. The simulator is not intended to be a perfect (or semi-perfect) simualtion of real, macro world physics. There are hundreds of examples where it is not. The only reason it even attempts to simulate tangible phyisical world objects and interactions at all (as opposed to purely digital constructs) is to appeal to human intuition and aid humans in identifying interesting evolved or programmed behaviour. Evolution does not require the model conform to your notion of correctness. We could in fact do away with all simulated phyiscality and allow bots to reside, interact and evolve in a purely a naitve digital realm divorced from anything our own evolution has prepared us to recognize. There are good arguments to favor such a model as I have argued in the past. But even given the current physics model, that something violates your macro-world intuition or personal sense of worth is insufficient reason to change it. It cetainly is no reason for me to spend my valuable hours doing so.
If you have a well-reasoned, specific suggestion to make, let's hear it. But spare me your unreasoned value judgements.
--- End quote ---
There's no need to get hostile. I appreciate your efforts on this fine, free product, as I appreciate that you've taken steps to address concerns that I and others have with this issue.
This isn't about my "notion of correctness" or my "macro-world intuition", whatever that's supposed to mean. Are you suggesting that microorganisms are less beholden to physical laws, somehow? Certainly, you could design any kind of strange model you want to achieve whatever effects you want, though whether the results would say anything meaningful about evolution would be a matter of debate. That's irrelevant to the point: fact is, you chose to go with a model that reflects real world physics. In either case, internal consistency within your model is important - if you're going to have gravity, for example, then it should function properly.
I'm guessing [or hoping] that your friction-based fix will address most of my concerns, including RE gravity. I certainly didn't intend to draw ire with that comment. I'm grateful simply that you've chosen to fix it at all. I've enjoyed darwinbots for years now, and with every release you make it that much more enjoyable. This is work you do on your own time, for little kudos, and it makes my life just a little brighter. If I had the time and the inclination, I'd help out a little instead of just whining about my broken sims ;p.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version