100x100x100 Rubik's Cube is here

To me, none of this (even the first video) is "suspicious". It's just Tony has put unnecessary pressure on himself to get his puzzle turning. (Giving yourself a 7 day deadline to do something that could take easily 3 times as long is an unfortunate situation to put yourself in!)

I don't think he would post even the first video about this, if he didn't absolutely believe that the mechanism worked (or should work, "in theory"), but he should have waited to do a checkerboard on it before posting this thread, IMO.

Maybe he posted too early ("prematurely"):
  • To get emotional support to push through the last step in the process (to remove all kinks and knots in the puzzle) before making a full checkerboard pattern. And if so, I understand that completely.
  • Because he was too excited not to share his current progress. (Again, I understand that completely.)
  • Because he wanted to see what people's reactions would be (if it will be "worth it" to make what he already knows to be a fully functional 100x100x100 "visually fully functional" for others to see/believe).
All I can personally say is, even if it were a 200 pound 1000x1000x1000, I would not be "excited" about it.
  • If it's literally infeasible to even turn it, what's the point? (Kind of reminds me of how the original computers were the size of a room and had less power than your smartphone!)
  • The 34x34x34 also gave me the same type of bitter-bitter-bitter-sweet feeling as this 100x100x100 (to be fair to Tony, that I'm not favoring anyone else's "100+pound brick of plastic over his").
    • Having said that, I do say that the 34x34x34 (both the video presentation itself, as well as the turning mechanism) was the best VERY BIG physical cube that I have seen made.
    • That for it to be pretty much forgotten in such a short period of time is a shame on several levels.
    • Kind of reminds me of how one WR solve may be very "elegant", but the next (which is 0.01 seconds faster . . . and of which may have been more to luck) is recognized over the elegant one.
TLDR, I have never doubted Tony (even with him not showing a slice in all 3 directions, even in this 2nd video) that he successfully came up with the mechanism (which I believe he stated he learned from other people's contributions), but clearly (especially after seeing people's reactions so far), he should have waited to first make a full checkerboard with his puzzle before saying that the 100x100x100 is here.

EDIT:
All I hope is that Tony doesn't hurt himself rushing to finish this project! (Take your time, Tony. You have nothing to prove to anyone!)
 
Last edited:
The saga ends here

Screenshot_20260223_205557_YouTube.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
100x100x100 Rubik's Cube Solve
Replies
4
Views
6,092
SimonWestlund
S
Michael Wimberly
Rubik’s Cube Guinness World Records Compilation
Replies
1
Views
116
Sub 20 Cuber
Sub 20 Cuber
nbwzx
Cubolt, a pure-C optimal Rubik's Cube solver
Replies
2
Views
291
nbwzx
nbwzx
abunickabhi
Rubik's X Tetris
Replies
2
Views
127
Sub 20 Cuber
Sub 20 Cuber
abunickabhi
[SAR] Dereck Samuel Marin Suarez 2.89s Rubik's Clock average
Replies
2
Views
150
Sub 20 Cuber
Sub 20 Cuber
Back
Top