[WCA Regulations 2014] Logos and Stickers

[TMOY]

I said that in my post, I even Bolded it to make it obvious, what I am saying is that it is possible but not without breaking some other existing regulation

OK, then you're simply off-topic. We're talking about whether that parity thing is a valid reason for banning logos on even-layered cubes or not. If cheating with these logos requires to also cheat in some other way, then simply dealing with that other way of cheating is enough.

 

[stoic]

this is starting to sound like the debate on whether or not stickerless puzzles are allowed.

1) 3l) should be fixed to not allow ANY stickers on corner pieces for obvious reasons. I don't know why this hasn't been addressed before actually...
2) On center pieces (like 4x4 or 6x6) I don't see much of a problem really.
3) No. Logos should be flat, that's it.
4) Customs logos should be allowed so people can identify their own cubes. Delegate discretion is enough to manage logos with severe profanity or other sensitive material.
5) Absolutely? Doesn't even have to be at a competition, even with friends that have the same brand cube.

I agree with all of the above.
Thanks for saving me some time typing!

 

[Stefan]

Because you know which kind of scramble you just applied.

No. Not scrambling. I was talking about the solve.

Granted, during the solve you will be able to figure out whether you've changed the parity or not

Ok... so we agree now?

it is also theoretically possible to trace this from the start of the solve to avoid parity altogether, provided that you know if the scramble had an odd or even number of slice moves but there is no way of knowing that without breaking some other rule

I'm not sure, but aronpm [post=742899]might have done it[/post] without breaking rules.

 

[Joël]

- A logo on a 4x4x4/6x6x6 could be theoretically be used to count the number of turns made on that face in order to count parity.

I don't really have a very strong opinion about any of this, but what annoys me about this thread is the issue about logo's on 4x4 and 6x6 and parities. I don't understand how a logo can be used to determine anything about parity. I just don't get it. Right now I think it's impossible to use this to your advantage in any way, but I'd love to be proven wrong. I have not seen anyone in this thread explaining it, so perhaps somebody who understands it should explain it properly, in detail.

 

[Sajwo]

I don't really have a very strong opinion about any of this, but what annoys me about this thread is the issue about logo's on 4x4 and 6x6 and parities. I don't understand how a logo can be used to determine anything about parity. I just don't get it. Right now I think it's impossible to use this to your advantage in any way, but I'd love to be proven wrong. I have not seen anyone in this thread explaining it, so perhaps somebody who understands it should explain it properly, in detail.

agree. This is just ridiculous

 

[cubeninjaIV]

OK, then you're simply off-topic. We're talking about whether that parity thing is a valid reason for banning logos on even-layered cubes or not. If cheating with these logos requires to also cheat in some other way, then simply dealing with that other way of cheating is enough.

Again, something that I said in my first post.

Some people who don't know the parity alg might solve parity using the method i described, but it doesnt depend on the presence of a logo. additionally, if trying to completely avoid parity (which also isnt dependent on the presence of a logo) the whole process is a waste of time if you don't know how many slice turns the scramble had which you cant know without seeing (1)the scramble prior to solving, which is against the rules or (2) having someone tell you this information, which is also against the rules.

In case were still not on the same page, I highly doubt that anyone will ever get a significant benefit from using a logo to help them solve parity, and I see no real reason why they should be banned.

 

[DrKorbin]

additionally, if trying to completely avoid parity (which also isnt dependent on the presence of a logo) the whole process is a waste of time if you don't know how many slice turns the scramble had which you cant know without seeing (1)the scramble prior to solving, which is against the rules or (2) having someone tell you this information, which is also against the rules.

Did you read the link Stefan'd given?

 

[cubeninjaIV]

Did you read the link Stefan'd given?

I was typing this when he posted it

I was unaware of this thread, but did know that the concept was possible, even if it is extremely difficult to determine during inspection. However, the process doesn't rely on the presence of a logo.

 

[cubizh]

Do you mean something like the Cubesmith/V-cube/Rubik's/Maru logos where there printed onto the sticker instead of a Transparent layer like what the Dayan cubes have?

Any logo that when you close your eyes you can identify it by the use of your fingers only should be disallowed because you can identify where it is without having to look at it which is advantageous specially on BLD events. (like the new YJ's for instance).

 

[TMOY]

No. Not scrambling. I was talking about the solve.

Then we were simply not talking about the same thing.

I'm not sure, but aronpm [post=742899]might have done it[/post] without breaking rules.

I don't know if Aron has actually done it, but I'm convinced it's possible with practice. But a logo on centers is of no help to achieve that.

 

[Joël]

I don't really have a very strong opinion about any of this, but what annoys me about this thread is the issue about logo's on 4x4 and 6x6 and parities. I don't understand how a logo can be used to determine anything about parity. I just don't get it. Right now I think it's impossible to use this to your advantage in any way, but I'd love to be proven wrong. I have not seen anyone in this thread explaining it, so perhaps somebody who understands it should explain it properly, in detail.

A bit weird to reply to myself, but I also want to explain my reasoning for thinking that this is impossible:

Suppose you put a logo on one of the white centers of a 4x4. In any cube state, I can cycle 3 white pieces, to make the logo end up in 4 places (where ever I want the logo to end up), and the rest of the cube state will be identical. This means I can also create 4 scrambles that have an identical cube state, except the logo can be in four different places. So what does the position of the logo tell me about parity during inspection, or during the rest of the solve? It seems like it doesn't tell me anything. Again, if I am wrong, I'd love it if somebody would explain it.

 

[Allu K5]

I find this all funny, because the logos were part of many original puzzles like the V-cube 6.

So yes, you can do some theoretical things, but practice is the one who judges here, in the real world.

 

[TMOY]

A bit weird to reply to myself, but I also want to explain my reasoning for thinking that this is impossible:

Suppose you put a logo on one of the white centers of a 4x4. In any cube state, I can cycle 3 white pieces, to make the logo end up in 4 places (where ever I want the logo to end up), and the rest of the cube state will be identical. This means I can also create 4 scrambles that have an identical cube state, except the logo can be in four different places. So what does the position of the logo tell me about parity during inspection, or during the rest of the solve? It seems like it doesn't tell me anything. Again, if I am wrong, I'd love it if somebody would explain it.

That's exactly what I was saying in my first post in this topic.

ISome peiople are speaking of determining edge parity beforehand and using the logo to keep track of it. But this is also irrelevant because edge parity and center parity are independent (at least on 4^3).

 

[Stefan]

I [...] did know that the concept was possible

Bit strange then that you said "there is no way".

However, the process doesn't rely on the presence of a logo.

Nobody said it did.

So what does the position of the logo tell me about parity during inspection, or during the rest of the solve? It seems like it doesn't tell me anything. Again, if I am wrong, I'd love it if somebody would explain it.

Likely nothing during inspection, but you can use it to track "parity stuff" during the solve:

If I let's say put the logo on Ufr and then do U turns, I can tell how many U turns I did modulo 4, just by looking at where the logo is.

 

[Stefan]

ISome peiople are speaking of determining edge parity beforehand and using the logo to keep track of it. But this is also irrelevant because edge parity and center parity are independent (at least on 4^3).

What do you mean with center parity?

Edge parity and "inner qtm" parity are not independent, and a logo can help tracking the latter and thus the former. For example if you solve the L and R centers, put the logo on Rfu, and then solve the remaining centers with <Rw,U>. Then looking at the logo, you can easily tell how many Rw turns (modulo 4) you've done while solving the remaining centers.

 

[cubeninjaIV]

Bit strange then that you said "there is no way".

Indeed, I left it out because I was unaware of anyone being able to do this during inspection and still plan normal center stuff.

Nobody said it did.

In fact, this is what the discussion is about. read the OP and you will see an argument for the ban of logos on 4x4 and 6x6 because they can be used to track parity.

Either way, it seems that most if not all of us agree that if someone were able to do this, they wouldn't rely on a logo.

I have nothing more to say

 

[Stefan]

In fact, this is what the discussion is about. read the OP and you will see an argument for the ban of logos on 4x4 and 6x6 because they can be used to track parity.

I don't think so. But feel free to point out where exactly the OP spoke about using it during inspection.

 

[DrKorbin]

What do you mean with center parity?

Center parity is PLL parity: you can swap 2 centers and 2 corners simultaneously.

 

[cubeninjaIV]

- A logo on a 4x4x4/6x6x6 could be theoretically be used to count the number of turns made on that face in order to count parity.

Nothing to do with inspection

 

[cubizh]

For the people not being able to visualize it, can someone do an example solve with a logo cube to show exactly how one can eventually take advantage of this?
Thanks in advance.