Meffert’s Challenge, Solved

By Shamus Posted Saturday Aug 26, 2006

Filed under: Nerd Culture 8 comments

Whew…

Meffert's Challenge, solved!

Solving these sorts of toy puzzles is a lot less like solving jigsaw puzzles or crosswords, and much more like cryptography. Beating the thing is not about searching for the solution, but more about building the tools that can take you from any arbitrary arrangement to the solved state.

I don’t know how other people go about it, but once I get serious about a puzzle, I sit down and start developing some tools. For example, I’ll come up with a series of moves that, if you hold the puzzle just so and perform these exact movements, it will (say) swap a couple of pieces without disturbing the rest. To record these moves (so I can look them up in five minutes, which is about how long it will take me to forget) I also need some system of notation. For me this is a series of symbols that will record each move. My system of notation for this thing consisted of four diagonal arrows, which was nice and simple.

This puzzle was a gift my wife picked up for me at a yard sale somewhere. I assumed the name was “Meffert’s Challenge”, since that’s what is written on the side. I looked it up, and it turns out that this puzzle is rightly called “3-D Creative Puzzle Ball“. Meh. Not very catchy.

The thing about this puzzle that I find curious is that two of the faces (the ones with the words) are not colored to match their neighbors in any way, which means that they could swap places and change orientation and the puzzle would still be “solved”. This is not true of other toy puzzles I’ve worked with. It certainly made this one easier, which is good. If I had needed to line up those two side pieces (which is how I think of them) then the thing might have been too hard for me. Having said that, I’m tempted to take some colored magic markers and put some dots on them just so I can observe how they shift around as I work with the thing.

This is the most fun I’ve had with a puzzle in a long time. The Rubik’s 4×4 is the absolute limit of my ability, and more recent puzzles have left that thing (and me) far behind, with puzzles of such astounding complexity that I never even know how to begin. A good example is this technicolor horror:

12 color Tiled Megaminx
Pure evil. Colorful, though.

This “3-D creative thingy puzzle” was within reach, and I was able to tackle it in a few days instead of ramming my head against it for weeks, which is how things went in high school with Rubik’s 4×4.

Anyway, that was fun.

 


 

Planet Nerf, Part 2

By Shamus Posted Friday Aug 25, 2006

Filed under: Rants 15 comments

From Fox News: Some Playground Equipment Targeted by Child Safety Groups. Wherein we read some tofu brain saying:

If children are the most precious commodity we have, then we don’t understand why people don’t make the play areas safe for children to grow up on. […] Getting hurt on a playground is not a rite of passage to be an adult.

Which makes it sound like our playgrounds are a crucible of rusty iron spikes, whirling blades, and Indiana Jones-style rolling boulder traps.

So playgrounds are now too dangerous. Riding bikes is too risky. TV rots their brain. Video games turn them into murderers. Sitting around all the time makes them obese. Clearly the only way to keep our kids safe is to place them into some sort of suspended animation until adulthood, when we can thaw them out and dress them in kevlar for a walk to the public library.

Just for the record: I saw this coming like Hally’s comet.

 


 

Meffert’s Challenge, Part 2

By Shamus Posted Friday Aug 25, 2006

Filed under: Nerd Culture 4 comments

I realize these puzzle posts are kind of odd: Not much to discuss here. However, there is a certain degree of satisfaction derived from conquering one of these things, and that sense of victory is heightened when I can share the moment with someone. People who know me have already learned to make excuses and leave the room quickly when they see me wandering around with a grin and one of these things in my hand, so I thought I’d just post my progress here. At least when you don’t read it I won’t know. See?

Right. Anyway: Victory!

Meffert's Challenge, unsolved

Ahem. Well. Almost…

Meffert's Challenge, unsolved

Most of my problem has been trying to unlearn what I’d learned about puzzles. I had to overcome my mental block that was forcing me to think of the ball as a globe with the words at the two poles. I had to stop trying to figure out which line was the “equator”. I kept trying to impose symetry that wasn’t there, and it was confusing me.

The puzzle is, as I suspected, quite a bit simpler than a Rubik’s Cube. At one point I completed a ring and found I’d completed a second one by accident. There are a lot less combinations, and it’s probably not that unlikely that someone would solve it by accident. (At the height of the Rubik’s craze there was a pyramid shaped puzzle like that: I never bothered to make a methodical solution because you could solve it easier with just luck. Just solve one side after another, ignoring the fact that you’re messing up what you’ve already done, and you’ll blunder into the solved state before too long. This puzzle is more complex and accidental solution isn’t that easy to come by, but I can see it happening.)

This is the most fun I’ve had with a puzzle in a long time, now that I’m making progress. The last couple I’ve tried were just beyond me, and those are never much fin. I think this one is within my reach if I just keep at it.

 


 

Pentax Optio E10 (Sucks)

By Shamus Posted Thursday Aug 24, 2006

Filed under: Rants 10 comments

I mentioned how my wife feels about gifts. For her birthday I got her a Pentax Optio E10. I saw that it was $100 cheaper than the one she wanted, and that it had another megapixel of resolution. The features it was missing were mostly advanced-user manual settings type stuff, which she didn’t really want or need. She was very grateful, but it turned out to be an unfortunate mistake.

  • By far the biggest flaw was the energy needs of the camera. We would slap in brand-new batteries and they would last ten minutes. That is, tens minutes not using the flash. One or two flash pictures would kill a set of batteries.
  • Not that these batteries were truly dead. They could power other devices – even other cameras – without trouble. If the camera would turn on, the battery power display would go from full to empty to halfway to depleated, seemingly at random. Then the camera would shut off and refuse to turn back on.
  • If it couldn’t turn on, it wouldn’t give an error message saying “not enough power captain”. It would turn on, beep mysteriously, then turn off again. Took us a while to figure out what the problem was.
  • The exposure times were ridiculous. It was like trying to take pictures with a tinted lens. Outside, in broad daylight, pictures were both too dark and blurry. It couldn’t get a picture fast enough or bright enough. Usually it’s a tradeoff between the two, but this was ridiculous. Note that I’m talking motion blur here, not incorrect focal settings. But while I’m on the subject…
  • I understand that auto-focus is a bit of guesswork on the part of the camera. It has to pick out an element somewhere to focus on, and sometimes the software will make the wrong guess. But this camera was hopeless at the job. Four-fifths of the time it would lock onto nothing and everything would be a total blur. Did I need to take my camera to an optometrist? Maybe get it a contact lens?

Happy birthday sweetheart! I hope you like crap!

I would think that I just got a defective unit, but our previous camera was also a (much older) Pentax Optio of some sort, and it eventually developed these problems. It started out fine, but after a couple of years it started eating batteries like popcorn, acquired myopia, and refused to turn on. In fact, we got the new camera because of these problems, only to find the new camera has all of these same problems right out of the box!

(I strongly suspect that all of the problems are power related. I’m guessing that if I were to get an adapter and plug the thing in, the pictures would be in-focus and adequately exposed.)

We finally gave up on the thing and she took it back. I hate taking gifts back. She exchanged it (and a bit more money) for the Canon Powershot A530, which is nicer in almost every way imaginable except that it costs quite a bit more. Not unreasonable, but after getting such a deal on the Pentax the price of the Canon kind of stung. The Canon may even be a bit too much camera for our needs. Still, my wife is now happy and taking beautiful pictures, which makes me happy.

Lesson learned. No more Pentax for us.

 


 

Meffert’s Challenge

By Shamus Posted Thursday Aug 24, 2006

Filed under: Nerd Culture 3 comments

This is what Meffert’s Challenge looks like solved:

Meffert's Challenge, Solved

And this is what mine looks like. All the time:

Meffert's Challenge, Hosed

Meffert’s Challenge should be a good deal easier than Rubik’s Cube. The number of permutations is clearly lower, since there are fewer “pieces” moving about. The problem is the thing changes shape as you work with it. In the first picture you see a face with lettering on it. There is an identical twin on the opposite side. My brain really wants to think of these as north / south poles on this globe, which is a mistake since they move around. You can get these two faces right next to each other. In fact, there is no move you can make that will not change the position of these two faces relative to one another. To put it another way: There is no equator division.

I had the same problem with Sqare-1. (which has an online version you can play here.) The lack of symetry just kills me. I can’t get me head around it.

Even allowing for my increasing senility as I ascend into my dotage, I can’t help thinking that the puzzle should not be as hard as it is. I can’t even make headway with it. I can’t even come up with any sort of process that will lead to a solution. I just spin the blasted thing until I go cross-eyed.

I usually have a puzzle in reach for when I need to do something like a large recompile, which will occupy my computer for a few minutes. These five-minute slices of time are annoying because they are too short to really make use of, but too long to spend idle. So, I keep a Rubik’s Cube or one of it’s decendants handy to keep my hands busy while I wait. But this one is really pissing me off. Arg.

 


 

I’m blushing

By Shamus Posted Thursday Aug 24, 2006

Filed under: Links 3 comments

Those who get queasy from saccharine, syrupy sweet things would do well to avoid this link, where my wife heaps praise on me in a way that I find both humiliating and gratifying.

That much praise will only build up expectations and lead to eventual disappointment for those who don’t know me yet. However, I can’t help but be grateful at having a wife this awesome. The fact that she has such an idealized view of me works in my favor, and I would be a fool to overlook such good fortune.

 


 

The Five Love Languages

By Shamus Posted Wednesday Aug 23, 2006

Filed under: Random 12 comments

Observing that men and women are different is so appalingly obvious that when someone puts out a book to document this point it sets my teeth on edge. Books like Men are from Mars, Women are from Vesus are so tiresome to me that I want to hunt down the author and punch him in his smug Martian face until my arms go numb. The fact that different human beings have different priorities and perceptions of the world is, in fact, a good thing and helps to made our lives more robust. The fact that these differences make for a vast, rich source of sitcom fodder is just a bonus. Unless you hate sitcoms. Which I do.

However, I did find a book along these lines that turned out to be useful. It had practical application. The book was The Five Love Languages, and it outlines a simple set of ideas that could probably be articulated on a single page, but which was stretched out into an entire book because nobody is going to pay $29.95 for a hardcover edition of a two-page document where page one is the table of contents. I didn’t read the book, but my wife did and gave me the basic premise. It sounded like another attempt to smooth things out between men and women (and to a lesser extent, people in general) by over-simplifying the problem. However, the thing stuck in my head and I’m often surprised at how useful the idea is. The stuff the book has to say has actual utility, and so I want to put these ideas up here and see what happens.

The thrust of it is this: There are a lot of ways of expressing love, affection, or appreciation. They can be roughly divided into five types:

  1. Gifts (giving someone a thing)
  2. Physical contact (This includes huggy-kissy-touchy-feely, but also lesser, non-romantic touching like a slap on the back, high-five, and other encraochments on personal space)
  3. Service (Doing a thing for someone. Pull some strings on their behalf. Mow their lawn. Fix their computer.)
  4. Words (Telling someone “I love you”, “You’re awesome”, or “nice job”)
  5. Spending Time (Spend some of your precious allotment of time with the person in question)

I had several nitpicks with this list, since I dislike any attempt to distill and catergorize human interactions into neat lists, but it works well enough and makes things easier to discuss.

The idea is that everyone has one or two ways in which they express and recieve love. These are very often asymetrical, so one guy might express love by buying stuff for people, but doesn’t feel particularly appreciated when others do the same for him. Instead, it is far more meaningful to him (makes him feel you really value him) if you (for example) spend time with him. While most of the things on the list are nice, there is at least one that each of us craves, and that makes us feel loved. Lots of friction in relationships between people rises from the fact that the people involved are expressing affection in a way the other person doesn’t find gratifying, and at the same time feeling neglected because they are not recognizing the other person’s attempt to do the same.

My first impulse when I heard this was to denounce it as horsehockey. But then I thought about it, and instead denounced it as interesting horsehockey. Then the thing grew on me as I started thinking about the many ways in which it applied to a lot of relationships – romantic and otherwise – that have been difficult for me over the years.

This setup leads to the classic situation where the husband can’t figure out what his wife’s problem is: He slaves away all day to put food on the table and that ungrateful woman can’t do anything but complain. And she’s stingy with sex. At the same time the wife is feeling unloved because he never says “I Love You”. And would it kill him to get her something nice once in a while, maybe some flowers? He’s doing #3 and craving #2, while she is craving #1 and probably giving #4. Each of them is expressing love (albeit in a way that is meaningless to the other person) while feeling frustrated that the other person never seems to reciprocate.

As cliché as this is, I think there is a reason it is a cliché. I think it is, for the most part, a pretty handy way of looking at various misunderstandings. When you boil things down, you realize this is not a problem between men and women per se, but a problem between any two people in a relationship. It’s just that romantic relationships between men and women are the kind most of us are familiar with.

Gifts don’t mean much to me. Sure, I am grateful when someone buys me something, but it doesn’t have any deep personal significance. I like to have things, but if I want something I usually just go out and get it. My wife, on the other hand, loves to get and give gifts. I remember once she mentioned she was really in the mood for pickles. I knew she was out. (This was before we were married. We lived about a half hour from each other.) So, I picked some up on the way the next time I visited her. She was ecstatic in a way that made no sense to me. I got the woman a jar of ordinary pickles and she acted like I’d bought her a new car. For her, it wasn’t about the expense of the gift, but the fact that I was thinking of her and got her something she really wanted. I’m still rubbish at this sort of thing, but I’m better now than I was ten years ago.

And now I’m finding all sorts of ways to apply this to my relationship with my kids and even coworkers. I’m so amazed by this discovery that I even considered reading the book once. Amazing.