unreality

there's no such thing as "damage" lol. A pointer dies (goes into stasis) when its energy drops to 0. An effective way of forcing this is to use COPY to drop a "JUMP 0,0" line, which will cause the pointer to jump on that line over and over again until it dies. However, there are other choices of bombs (such as "JUMP 0,100") which have other positives and negatives to them. For some basic bombs & more complex bombs and discussion of their positives and negatives, see the spoiler in the OP entitled Tips and Tricks and Bombs. For the emulator, if for some reason you can't download the raw html file, just open up the emulator spoiler and open up the secondary spoiler. That contains the html & javascript code you need. Just copy that whole code and paste it into a text file. Save the text file as "vna2.html" onto your desktop or wherever. Then drag it onto your browser (Firefox, Chrome, IE, Safari, Opera, Gecko, whatever you have) [edit - typo]

so are these (specifically the one in the spoiler) not correct somehow?

GC is trying to psyche you out Regardless of whether he actually dies or not, Priam's guess will still be correct, which is the point. It's more important to go for GC, even if GC is saved, and get BTSC, than to make wild guesses

So my work on hoppers was semi-conclusive I tried to make a more definite formula but this patterns the behavior: Anyway, that's just theoretical math about hoppers ~~ On to my newer programs ;D This one, called Caravanserai [the name may make sense after some inspection or after running it] is slow and not very polished, and probably not that good of a battler (at ALL lol), but it's more of an interesting thing than a battler. Its pointer #1 continually creates "hoops" spaced evenly about the VNA. Then it disperses pointers #3-#8 (#2 is a guzzler backup) to "jump the hoops" and just dance around the VNA. The hoops look like this: FOOD 0,0 JUMP 0,49 and are spaced 50 apart, so they're continually on a run around the VNA. Enemy pointers may be trapped too, that's actually the point. Meanwhile, pointer #9 bombs sporadically [why not] and keeps track of rounds basically. After 100 of its loops since its creation [this number should be tweaked; there are 3 or 4 rounds per loop so it amounts to a long time, should probably be shortened], pointer #9 flicks to a second mode, 'recalling' all of the pointers into pointer #2's guzzler... then it effectively replaces the hoops with bombs (it doesn't do it itself but delegates the task to #1 who was sitting there re-reinforcing the hoops the whole time - #9 just overwrites its base-hoop to a bomb) so that an enemy pointers trapped in the cycles will die. Then #9 goes back to its lame bombing attempts and 2-8 guzzle it up. If the enemy isn't dead after that, Caravanserai failed. ... failure is most likely, but it's just a prototype ;D now I have made a second program, called Scythe II, and this is the opposite of Caravanserai lol. Scythe II is fast, efficient and deadly. It improves on my original Scythe.... we'll see how Scythe II does in the ring I won't reveal it publicly but I'd like to challenge anyone to combat it. We'll make our programs separately so as to not craft them after the style of the other [though I've already made mine] and then we'll battle ;D

I have the answer!

Are you asking us to solve the Riemann Hypothesis, lol?

SET!, SET# and SET$ are used for setting variable values. They're in the spoilers of the OP

Good point - I stand corrected

don't get your discouraged, you're doing great I call the kind of program you made a "guzzler" COPY 2,4 FOOD 0,0 FOOD 0,0 JUMP 0,-2 a shorter example would be something like FOOD 0,0 JUMP 0,-1 which has less vulnerable spots. The sample bomber I gave: COPY 4,10 EDIT -1,2,b+: FOOD 0,0 JUMP 0,-3 JUMP 0,100 doesn't have a "defense clause" or "non-self-destruct clause" that prevents it from bombing itself. This means that it will rip itself apart if it hasn't already won/lost by a certain amount of time. When planning a bomber, it's always important to make sure it can't destroy itself (or other pointers the program is running). Anyway, you're doing really good for a first-time programmer, so don't get discouraged You should pick apart some of the programs me and DMS have made and see how they work - you'll get the hang of it in no time and you'll be kicking our @sses ;D

we need at least 3 more votes ;D

interesting... with an update for us: * Paris should save me * Helen should nullify me * Aeneas should kill Grey Cells (sorry GC ) * Priam should guess the above three actions * Ares should not act

haha, flashback Mafia V i think

bwahahahaha, die Brandonb ;D edit: action sent also rated this topic 5* aaand recopying this: ~~ ok, Trojans - let's go ahead with the plan * Paris should save me * Helen should nullify me * Aeneas should kill Brandonb * Priam should guess the above three actions * Ares should not act I'll probably die tonight, so I hope someone else is ready to step up - hopefully someone else that was semi-outed today

ok, Trojans - let's go ahead with the plan * Paris should save me * Helen should nullify me * Aeneas should kill Brandonb * Priam should guess the above three actions * Ares should not act I'll probably die tonight, so I hope someone else is ready to step up - hopefully someone else that was semi-outed today

Shadow Children is very good, although it's a 7-book series. Pendragon is longer (9 books so far, #10 will be the final one), which is why it might not be the best pick [although Pendragon are exceptional, the description doesn't do it justice] this Ender's Game looks interesting. Despite the book club pick, I'm reading that one as well, along with SH5 and GEB

yeah, this search failed too

some I've read already, some I don't want to read, but I'd be fine with all of these: * Gödel, Escher, Bach * Slaughterhouse Five [classic, LOST-related... what's not to like? ] * Pendragon [already read but I was planning on rereading a few of em soon] ~ can attest for their excellence * Ender's Game [heard good things about it] of those, I'd most go for the last three, and of those I voted for Slaughterhouse 5

adding SomeGuy's vote to PG's: Host: itachi 1) Limeliam 2) Prof. Templeton - voting for O'mally 3) Frost 4) dawh - voting for O'mally 5) Cherry Lane 6) Star Tiger - voting for Brandonb 7) LIS - DEAD 8) SomeGuy - voting for Prof Templeton 9) Joe's Student 10) GC - voting for Prof Templeton 11) PG - voting for Brandonb 12) reaymond - voting for PG 13) impervious - voting for Brandonb 14) O'mally - voting for O'mally 15) unreality voting for Brandonb 16) Brandonb - voting for Prof Templeton 17) Y-San - DEAD [Achaean]

important post Prof T: fishing expedition or not, or whether you're lying or not, that might not save you ;D Host: itachi 1) Limeliam 2) Prof. Templeton - voting for O'mally 3) Frost 4) dawh - voting for Prof Templeton 5) Cherry Lane 6) Star Tiger - voting for Brandonb 7) LIS - DEAD 8) SomeGuy 9) Joe's Student 10) GC - voting for Prof Templeton 11) PG 12) reaymond - voting for PG 13) impervious - voting for Brandonb 14) O'mally - voting for O'mally 15) unreality voting for Brandonb 16) Brandonb - voting for Prof Templeton 17) Y-San - DEAD [Achaean]

Is there a specification where we are unsure of the input. Can we specify a domain? For example, for input (x) larger than 1, f(x) = 2x will work. But if we can't specify input, then it might not work (if x happened to be 1), and thus isn't "secure" Likewise, do the numbers have to be integers? ie f(x) x + .01 will make a non-integer which by default cannot be a prime. But if x happened to be 4.99, then it would fail. So I'm saying, are we completely unsure of the input? In that case, I think this one works:

let's see... I was just listening to: Paralyzer - Finger Eleven Square One - Coldplay Satellite - Guster Lime Juice - Mutual Kumquat Whatever You Like - T.I. How Far We've Come - Matchbox Twenty

wow Four ten-letters ;D You just topped everything lol. Btw you could start the fourth one with 'i' not 'n' if you wanted it to be all words. Anyway - yeah, wow. 11 is probably impossible. If there are more ten-letters, then it might be possible, but I'm not sure. The only thing I can think of is adding onto yours like this: a an ane anes sanes stanes stances stanches staunches staunchest staunchiest but I don't know if that's a word - it sounds right but you never know

yeah post #10 was a typo - I meant 0 to 1, not 0 to pi Everywhere else I said 0 to 1

No offense, but I hate Michael Crichton books. They're incomprehensibly boring. I started both Jurassic Park and Prey. I dropped Prey after the first 5-10 chapters but drudged through Jurassic Park, slowly. They're just so boring