Given dwarf fortress has an ASCII interface it may actually be a lot easier to set up claude to work with it. Also, a lot of the challenges of dwarf fortress is just knowing all the different mechanics and how they work which is something claude should be good at.
And it’s (Claude) almost certainly accumulated a fair amount of knowledge about the game itself, given the number of tutorials, guides, and other resources that have been written about DF over the last two decades.
Pasting a comment here I made on the previous article:
To me the most important fact to keep in mind about geothermal is that the energy flow across the crust is ~0.1W/m^2. Compare that to the sun which has >100W/m^2 even at high latitudes. Of course this does not mean geothermal is useless (in particular heat pumps, if you count those, are great), but it goes a long way to explaining why geothermal isn't seeing the same explosion as solar.
It's a misleading comparison. This is only the average amount of heat that diffuses through an ordinary patch of surface, and has more or less nothing to do with how a geothermal plant works, since they don't harvest heat by covering a large area of surface with conducting material.
The surface heat flow is low because rock acts as an insulator. If you drill down to where it's hot and draw the heat up you obviously get orders of magnitude larger flows of energy to the surface.
Are you suggesting to basically harvest the thermal energy in the rock in a non-renewable fashion? I don't think that is very promising, the heat capacity of rock is not that huge.
Back of the envelope calculation is drawing 1 GW from a cubic Kilometer of rock would lower the temperature by 1 degree C every 25 days. So I think you'd deplete a typical borehole quite quickly?
> Are you suggesting to basically harvest the thermal energy in the rock in a non-renewable fashion?
As I understand it, that's how many geothermal plants work, effectively mining the heat underneath them, but at a rate of extraction that means they would become uneconomical over a span of decades rather than months.
Exactly. The only exception to this are very rare sites like the one in Iceland where you can get close to a magma cell which has a much higher thermal gradient and possibly magma convection replenishing it.
> Compare that to the sun which has >100W/m^2 even at high latitudes.
Some places are covered with snow and get under 8 hours of sun a day, but your point still stands.
You know it's pretty compelling when there are several concurrent multi-billion dollar projects to transmit solar power from Africa, by undersea cable, to mainland Europe.
Should the technologies mentioned in the article can be perfected for large scale use, we would see a boom in geothermal, even larger than that of solar, as intermittency is automatically resolved.
Iceland and Australia would become new powers imho.
To me the most important fact to keep in mind about geothermal is that the energy flow across the crust is ~0.1W/m^2. Compare that to the sun which has >100W/m^2 even at high latitudes. Of course this does not mean geothermal is useless (in particular heat pumps, if you count those, are great), but it goes a long way to explaining why geothermal isn't seeing the same explosion as solar.
I think perhaps what is going on here is that the most commonly exported variety of cheese exported from Switzerland is Emmentaler, which matches the US taste profile (and has holes), but in Switzerland is considered a rather bland variety compared to e.g. Gruyere or Appenzeller. Maybe that got a bit exaggerated and it was labeled as "junk" cheese somewhere along the chain of communication.
I don't think so. For n=3 you can have 000, 001, 010, 100. All 4 (n+1) are pairwise orthogonal. However, I don't think js8 is correct as it looks like in 2^n you can't have more than n+1 mutually orthogonal vectors, as if any vector has 1 in some place, no other vector can have 1 in the same place.
It's not correct to call them orthogonal because I don't think the definition is a dot product. But that aside, yes, orthogonal basis can only have as much elements as dimensions. The article also mentions that, and then introduces "quasi-orthogonality", which means dot product is not zero but very small. On bitstrings, it would correspond to overlap on only small number of bits. I should have been clearer in my offhand remark. :-)
Your initial statement is still wrong, that you can include a lot of information in a small number of bits. If you have a small number of bits, the overlap will be staggering. Now, that may be ok, but not ok, if you want to present orthogonal concepts (or even quasi-orthogonal).
Also, why do you believe dot product cannot be trusted?
What I meant was similar to the article. If I have bit vectors of length 1000 bits (that will be the embedding). Let's say that every concept I want to model corresponds to a set choice of 10 bits being all set to 1, and the remaining bits 0. (These vectors are quasiorthogonal.) Then I can easily store a sentence (bitvector) about 50 concepts, while there is relatively small chance of overlap, i.e. all of the concepts are decodable from that bitstring.
But it's quite similar to what the top comment is saying about spherical codes. I think my comment is also about using coding theory to represent concepts.
Other than that, I don't have any issue with dot product over bitvectors - it's just not very useful for the above.
Hmm, I think one correction: is (0,0,0) actually a vector? I think that, by definition, an n-dimentional space can have at most n vectors which are all orthogonal to one another.
By the original definition, they can share bits that are set to zero and still be orthogonal. Think of the bits as basis vectors – if they have none in common, they are orthogonal.
reply