In the US, I would say roughly everyone uses Zoom outside of companies using Teams or Meet, generally because they're bundled with the office suites they use.
The early version of Google Play Music asked for your MP3s, so you could have them in the cloud for streaming. I guess they did this for a baseline of data and music and now I wonder if this was an elaborate hack to circumvent legal implications. Should have read the terms back then.
Uh, no, uploaded MP3s couldn't even be deduplicated across different users, because of lawyers. I know because I was there. The team had to ensure having maaaany petabytes of storage on launch day. Maybe the label or whoever owns the rights to the track today uploaded whatever they could find online? One way to verify that is checking if the same issue occurs on Spotify or Apple Music.
Do you have insight into what may have allowed some of the anecdotes others are describing, of bootleg versions being the versions used by Google Music/Youtube Music?
I'd also be interested to know if a Google Camera app installed post-facto to LineageOS is compatible with the remote control & viewfinder of the Pixel Watch.
Well, they are good enough for me, but to be honest, I'm not particularly picky... As said in a parallel post, you can get GCam in APK form (I run LineageOS without GApps) but I hear it's a bit trial&error to find one that works and I haven't bothered.
Most sports would profit from a deeper understanding and application of statistical inference. Or even of descriptive statistics. The fun lays in the operationalization, a step most applications of AI will likely omit, since AI will work out the dimensions of the data by itself.
Boxing for example could calculate the amount of kinetic energy brought to the table and how much of it landed or was sidestepped. How much was absorbed? Not easy to do, but also not impossible.
>Boxing for example could calculate the amount of kinetic energy brought to the table and how much of it landed or was sidestepped. How much was absorbed? Not easy to do, but also not impossible
It would be pretty difficult to do in a combat sport without sensors. As I understand it fencing has participants' blades wired up for this exact reason. How would you measure how hard a punch landed from a distance? You could put sensors in the gloves, but some of the time the punches bounce off the opponent's forearms, so you could get a false 'powerful' rating from a blocked punch.
Worse, some of the best punches aren't the most powerful in a kinetic sense, but just happen to very accurately land in the right spot on an opponent's chin. Or they're well timed and the opponent doesn't see it coming, so their surprise makes the strike more damaging. Even if you could precisely measure punch impact to the head from a distance, you'd be missing out on some excellent punches that are less powerful but set up by accuracy & timing. So yes it's basically impossible to measure in any way but subjectively
You mentioned fencing: the electronic scoring system in fencing is pretty primitive, and has not at all replaced the need for a referee. It determines whether a hit has landed, and that’s about it. Unfortunately the sport still has a big problem with how subjective the refereeing is (particularly in sabre, which is my weapon), and that’s driving corruption at the highest levels [1].
Modern fencing is also just about the worst case scenario for a martial art being watered down in the name of sports. At this point it's basically glorified tag.
I strongly prefer watching kendo over fencing because of that; the human element in fencing is essentially a technicality as far as I'm concerned as just a guy watching.
You might enjoy this video! The actual topic is the history of Aikido, but it shows some neat historical footage of, for lack of a better term, pre-Kendo Kendo. That is to say, Kenjutsu/Iaijutsu schools sparring using Kendo gear.
Accurately assessing the quantity and quality of punches landed is entirely tractable. If you can accurately track the movement of each fighter's joints (plausible with camera-based CV, almost trivial with LIDAR) then you're just solving a fairly straightforward dynamics problem. A well-timed hook or uppercut to the chin is more damaging for predictable biomechanical reasons - rotational trauma causes more damage than translational trauma because it results in greater shear forces within the brain, particularly the brain stem. It isn't a massively more difficult problem than the doppler radar systems used to track ball movement in sports like golf and baseball.
I think the harder problem is assessing the subjective factors mentioned by shadowerm, but that's also a hard problem for human judges.
F=MA Several very high speed and high resolution video cameras could collect all this information based on how glove, forearm, head, etc accelerate/rotate in real time.
You don’t need to process it all in real time. A blow by blow after round highlights real based on the most damaging blows could grow the sport by making it more interesting to watch lesser matches.
You could probably do it acoustically to some degree. A punch is going to violently displace some air proportionately to its impact.
Also, It might be undetectably negligible, but it would be an interesting experiment to see if a sufficiently sensitive thermal camera would be able to gather information on how much the air is getting compressed in advance of a punch.
You bring up a good point, it definitely a difficult environment. However there’s a lot of techniques for isolating sounds in a noisy environment.
Getting clean audio from performers at concerts is only moderately challenging these days, with plenty of great examples to point to. So I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss the idea.
It's not only about power but about unbalancing the opponent in order to obtain a knock-down. A weak hit making him fall is better than a massive blow (especially on hitting a strong body area).
The discussion was about scoring. In order to score the fight, you do need to process it in somewhat real time. I don't think waiting a few days to find out who won is going to be acceptable to fans
There's a lot more to it than just measuring force. For an extreme example, imagine delivering the same punch (force, target, etc.) to Mike Tyson in his prime versus a 90 year old lady.
People who know how to absorbed and redirect a blow minimize how much their brain gets tossed about, but measuring peak acceleration of the skill is going to show how much someone’s brain got rattled. It’s a solid structure and your brain is inside
Also a you don’t see 90 year old grandmother’s in the ring. So it’s true someone with a larger head has an advantage here, but mechanical properties of tissues should be fairly similar between fighters and acceleration accounts for the mass of the head.
Baseball already does this for things like sprint speed, bat speed, contact point, attack angle, exit velocity, and launch angle with Weather Applied Metrics added to show how the wind robbed your team of a home run. For pitches there is trajectory, release point, spin axis, seam orientation. Then on defense, a players starting location and their path distance speed to the ball, catch probability and arm strength. That's not even all of it. MLB parks have many multiple high frame rate cameras installed along with their own datacenters. They are also working on replacing the umpire & strike zone with an Automated Ball/Strike System (ABS); which I am personally not to happy about--that would be like taking those awkward fist-fights out of hockey.
All that, while very cool technology, is going to be much simpler than judging how hard a punch hit. You could gauge how fast a punch was with the same sort of tech as that, but how well it connected, and how much force was applied, are much more difficult.
Analytics has arguably made basketball worse, where everyone stands around the 3 point line, and the offense is mostly trying to shoot a 3 or go to the rim. Game used to be more diverse.
Analytics changed a lot of things in baseball too.
For example, analytics showed that stealing bases was a waste, and we saw a 6+ year window where hardly anybody tried to steal bases. But then, in 2023 steals were back in fashion. Why was that? More advanced analytics showing that the original analysis was wrong? Teams realizing that after years of not being forced to defend against the steal makes them more likely to be successful?
Basketball will adjust. If nobody has to defend against a midrange jumper then eventually nobody will be in the position to defend against a midrange jumper and it becomes an easier shot to take.
I’ve seen the complaints: the Bulls and Celtics are ruining basketball by shooting 50+ 3’s a game. But if that ruins basketball then basketball was weak to begin with. I mean seriously, neither the Bulls nor Celtics are getting anywhere close to the championship. Let them shoot 100 3’s a game if they want. Who cares?
I don't entirely disagree, but your point is undermined somewhat by the fact that the Celtics won the championship literally last year, and are currently favorites to win again this year.
Some sports ready have - baseball and golf famously record effectively every action any player does. American Football makes a lot of claims/hype but we don’t get access to data like in baseball/golf.
I'm not sure that's realistically possible. The effect of a punch is going to depend on where exactly it landed, the angle of the punch, whether it landed solidly or glanced off, whether the person receiving the punch rolled with it, the physiology of the person receiving the punch, what punches the person has already received, how the person receiving the punch breaths, etc.
Debatably there's other factors that should also factor into a judge's decision such as how aggressive a fighter is.
Geopolitics and many other extremely important domains would too.
I think it is going to become increasingly difficult to keep the various manufactured illusions our culture is composed of together. Hopefully the transition isn't too tumultuous.
No, this is a stupid idea for people who don't know anything about boxing.
Effective aggression and ring generalship are subjective human judgements. Boxing results are varied because in a championship fight, many times rounds will be completely subjective.
If you made boxing judged by AI, the rules would quickly be gamed. I suspect it would turn into a contest of jab/output and completely ruin boxing.
What ultimately makes boxing great is a fight today doesn't look that much different than a fight 100 years ago. That is the whole fun of it.
It is a really a symptom of a culture obsessed with scientism. As if adding a bullshit layer of scientism makes things somehow better and "smarter".
> If you made boxing judged by AI, the rules would quickly be gamed.
I though boxers were already gaming rules and this is effectively what gave rise to stuff like MMA.
Fans got tired of seeing a victor based upon technicality and skill and rules. Fans wanted a victor based upon being beaten down.
It's kind of interesting in that I'm not that interested in this for boxing but would rather see these kinds of systems in stuff like gymnastics or ice skating. Gymnastics and ice skating get absolutely skewered for the fact that you have to be "politically connected" in order to score well over time. I suspect that having an AI scoring system that winds up scoring performances correctly regardless of political connection would be godsend to those kinds of sports.
I count myself as a pretty decent fan of boxing. To argue that the rules are not already being gamed is pretty shallow. Winning by points is pretty much standard. Providing one additional judge that auto-tallies wouldn't kill the sport.
And I do believe the sport would benefit from, say, 3d reprojection to see a different view, or a heat map of hit vs throw locations, or a reproduction of movement throughout the ring.
Other sports have had these deep stats for a long time, and boxing has what, jab counts, points, and knockdowns? Come on. I love the sport and I love data.
That may be. But all the gamblers demand objectivity. Whether or not this technology provides objectivity is not knowable now, but it has the empathetic storytelling that it does, which is all that matters for the marginal gambler.
Yep. The in-a-nutshell argument for AI is that there's an unusual amount of bias and corruption in boxing judges, who usually determine the victor. The in-a-nutshell argument against is that less subjective scoring systems like punch counting have already been tried as an alternative in Olympic boxing, but fans didn't like the adaptations in style that resulted.
(Of course, dropping the punch counting for the 2016 Olympics immediately resulted in subjective judgements that were interesting at best...)
A computer can only judge based on things that can be measured. Martial arts (and really sports in general) rely heavily on things that can't be measured such as aggression, spirit, toughness, etc.
I believe the argument would be that humans are inconsistent, fallible, and gameable in idiosyncratic and individual ways not that they are less susceptible than AI.
A toubling aspect of the "bullshit scientism" is that
confidence/belief in "AI" seems proportional to human mistrust of
other humans. Therefore it's success rests on fomenting division and
mistrust amongst people and iconoclasm of traditional
skills/knowledge. Artificial ("intelligence") is, in it's very
definition, deceptive.
Great work, it really captures the feeling of Marble Madness. Its maybe to deep of a thought, but I really fancy the spin of the marble, something that the original was not conveying as fancy as your version does.
Thank you. The physics engine we're using (Rapier) really does most of the work to make the spin of the marble look realistic. But we spent quite some time tweaking the controls to make them as enjoyable as we could.
As a MM fan, I wanted to second this. Great work, engaging enough to make me finish it and wish there were more mechanics like the catapults and enemies.
I lived in an apartment in Frankfurt that still had this. The bathtub/shower was in the kitchen with just a curtain separating it (toilet with sink was in a separate room). With two roommates in the apartment, it made for some awkward moments, but you get used to it.
Now in my mind I started debating merits of wetroom kitchens... The remembered that you have lot of cabinets and dry goods inside... So benefits of being able to hose it down might be questionable.
My first job was to write news to teletext for German public broadcast. It required the author to compact even complex news into essentially two old tweets (I think around 300 characters) and deliver some context. Very good training!
There are many concepts called stepwise regression, its so weird that statistics, as a field, are so bad in delineating concepts.
I teach my students what you see in most social science papers, and in the light of the article at hand, I would call it "stepwise presentation of multivariate regression".
When it comes to the task of explaning, I think presenting different models, with a discussion what your pick is, provides good value to readers.
That said, I agree to the sentiment of the article but not the wording. "Blind" or manipulative stepwise deletion will decrease falsifiability of your work. That should be more provocative to scientists than evil.
