Odd parity Algorithms (specifically, single edge "flip")

[miniGOINGS]

Wow, just went to the wiki to find out more about K4 and realized the page is a DNF. http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/K4

Found the website though (http://snk.digibase.ca/k4/).

 

[Christopher Mowla]

The maximum (not average) number of algorithms should be three.

Well, the program does 3 cycles the entire time, and, if there is parity, it does the proper 2 cycle at the end.

I noticed on your guide that you also mention two-2 cylcle algs and 4 cycles...maybe if you consider those in the maximum algorithm count of 3. But, as I said, my program does 3 cycles for everything (except for a 2 cycle at the end, if there is parity). It doesn't count two 2 cycles as one alg, and it doesn't do 4 cycles.

Edit:

Maybe your wording is incorrect, but you don't pair edges on the K4 last layer.

Yeah, I think I did word it incorrectly, because it puts the winged edges into their correct positions directly (that's what I really meant).

 

[blade740]

For all who doubt me, don't worry because I will actually consider releasing these algs (my 24's, 23's, 22's, 20, and 19) to the public in the near future. I highly doubt it will be for a price. Instead it will just be a documentation of some kind where I give a plausible derivation (which will be pretty long, especially for the 19 and 20 BQTMs) for each (and where I can clearly get officially credited for these algs and the process to find them...anyone who uses my methods cannot get credit for any algs found from them without mentioning my name as well as theirs). In addition, I will be in favor of people displaying the algs I have found on Youtube, on their website(s), or anywhere as long as I am given credit (that includes not crediting computer solvers, which I did not use to find these algs).

Any suggestions on how I can do officially establish my credit is welcomed. But please, keep it to a minimum in this thread, for that is not puzzle theory (pm me if you can).

I'm sorry, but this is the biggest ego trip I've ever seen. You found a few algs that are a bit shorter than the commonly-known versions (and even then only in QTM, which nobody but you cares about). If anyone ever does talk about your alg (which is unlikely, since it's not useful for anything), you want them to put your name there to make sure you get credit for your alg? And make sure to note that you didn't use a computer?

This is NOT what cubing is about.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

This is NOT what cubing is about.

So what's your definition of cubing? Not all cubing is speedsolving. This is the theory section. And I think 6q is a significant amount less.

 

[PHPJaguar]

Not the part about the alg not being suitable for speedsolving, but the bit where you think/expect people are going to worship you for it. You've obviously not been very friendly to the people here, and I don't know why that makes you think you'll be a cubing celebrity.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

Not the part about the alg not being suitable for speedsolving, but the bit where you think/expect people are going to worship you for it. You've obviously not been very friendly to the people here, and I don't know why that makes you think you'll be a cubing celebrity.

What makes you say that? How have I been rude? All I have been doing is explaining that this is theory.

People constantly tell me how worthless everything I do is. I am not answering their negative comments back rudely.

Stop reading every word I write as hostility, because I am just talking calmly. And I don't understand how I have been mean to fanwuq, since I did send him the code.

What is it with you guys? People write very rude comments to me, and everyone supports it. I write regular statements and people call them rude? I don't get it.

In all honesty, the only time I got out of hand was when I went at Lucas Garron. But now, me and him are cool. So please reconsider your judgement of me.

 

[blade740]

This is NOT what cubing is about.

So what's your definition of cubing? Not all cubing is speedsolving. This is the theory section. And I think 6q is a significant amount less.

It's not a "definition of cubing" It's about how the cubing community works:
Cubing is, and has been for as long as I've been part of it, a collaboration. Information is freely shared. It's not about getting credit, or personal glory. Like someone already said, if you deserve respect, it will come. But demanding recognition is the WRONG way to get it.

I think of cubing culture as similar to hacker culture

Like most cultures without a money economy, hackerdom runs on reputation. You're trying to solve interesting problems, but how interesting they are, and whether your solutions are really good, is something that only your technical peers or superiors are normally equipped to judge.

Accordingly, when you play the hacker game, you learn to keep score primarily by what other hackers think of your skill (this is why you aren't really a hacker until other hackers consistently call you one). This fact is obscured by the image of hacking as solitary work; also by a hacker-cultural taboo (gradually decaying since the late 1990s but still potent) against admitting that ego or external validation are involved in one's motivation at all.

Specifically, hackerdom is what anthropologists call a gift culture. You gain status and reputation in it not by dominating other people, nor by being beautiful, nor by having things other people want, but rather by giving things away. Specifically, by giving away your time, your creativity, and the results of your skill.

 

[DavidWoner]

In all honesty, the only time I got out of hand was when I went at Lucas Garron. But now, me and him are cool. So please reconsider your judgement of me.

Do not think we have forgotten the very first thread you created here. First impressions are very hard to overcome. You have been told from the beginning that being secretive with your work is highly frowned upon. It seems that you have forgotten what was said there.

Perhaps you do not understand one of the underlying problems with hoarding your work, so I will do my best to explain. The cubing community is a collaborative one: someone shares their discovery, others give feedback, improvements are made, and everyone benefits. However, not sharing says two things.

1.) You do not deserve to see my work. It is above and beyond you.
2.) There is nothing I can gain from sharing with you. You are incapable of helping me in any way.

While these may not be your thoughts or motives, that is the impression that I (and likely others) get from your behavior. Please do not misconstrue this as a personal attack. You asked what our problem was, and I am attempting to explain.

 

[Henrik]

As far as I know and remember, no one has gotten credit by demand. When someone has gotten credit for single algorithms or sets of algs that has the same purpose, others has given them credit for the algs. An example is me, Jason Baum has given me credit for finding parity algs for his sq1 method. Even though only a few of the algs I found are online if any, Jason still credited me for helping him.

If others has their name on a method or gets credited with a name, it is for a method. MGLS is a new way of doing almost half the puzzle, ZZ is a whole new way of seeing how to solve 3x3x3. BH is a method and a collection of algs on how to solve the cube blindfolded.
Those has just put their name one the method so it can be recognized from others.

As far as I know no one had demanded credit for single algs, or methods, they have but their name on a method in the hopes of others to use it.

I think the quote Blade740 posted is very telling of how the cubing community works. Thanks

Now it is up to you to decide if you want to post the algs, and then you can hope for others to credit you.

 

[rachmaninovian]

i just found a dedge flip which is rather useful for me...

l r U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 r' U2 l U2 l2
which is 21qtm =P

and by doing l r U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 r' U2 l U2 l2 + l2 U2 l2 U2 l2
I get l r U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 r' U2 l' U2 l2, a double parity with 21qtm too.

however, these are NOT useful for reduction =p

 

[PatrickJameson]

For all who doubt me, don't worry because I will actually consider releasing these algs (my 24's, 23's, 22's, 20, and 19) to the public in the near future. I highly doubt it will be for a price. Instead it will just be a documentation of some kind where I give a plausible derivation (which will be pretty long, especially for the 19 and 20 BQTMs) for each (and where I can clearly get officially credited for these algs and the process to find them...anyone who uses my methods cannot get credit for any algs found from them without mentioning my name as well as theirs). In addition, I will be in favor of people displaying the algs I have found on Youtube, on their website(s), or anywhere as long as I am given credit (that includes not crediting computer solvers, which I did not use to find these algs).

Any suggestions on how I can do officially establish my credit is welcomed. But please, keep it to a minimum in this thread, for that is not puzzle theory (pm me if you can).

1/12/10 6:43pm central time USA

I lol'd. You do realize that because you are being like this, and the algs are basically useless to most people, you won't be remembered for the algorithms. Instead, at this point, you will be remembered usually with the prefix 'lol' added to your name.

If you had released these algs as you found them, without putting up such a fight, whenever this would come up in a conversation, people would think, 'oh, I should find that thread that cmowla made to find that alg'.

Lucas Garron released his version of the OLL parity on here, and it is very often referred to as 'lucas's parity' or something similar.

Not sure if there's much you can do at this point to bring your reputation back up, but as a start you should probably just release all of your work, as it would be much better for you than to just keep it a secret, or even possibly, like this post describes, have people pay to see it.

 

[Mr Cubism]

....."Pride before a fall".......

 

[Christopher Mowla]

....."Pride before a fall".......

I was never "up" in this community to fall. People hated me ever since I typed my first post about me finding brief algs by hand (a thread that no longer exists--my first thread ever--this was my second thread), instead of using computers. Ever since I began mentioning things like that, I have been holding firm against all who tried to criticize me into giving them my algs because I feared that I wouldn't get credited for my algs based on their behavior towards me.

Only individuals like Henrik showed that if he was to see my algs, he would give me credit (not necessarily respect...but he has shown that too) for them (even though he didn't have any use for them except curiousity of the possibility and theory).

I personally don't have enough energy to come up with these algs by hand and not get credit for them. It was not easy to find them, especially since it was against all "odds", considering I even believed that there could be no pure edge flip algs shorter than 25q.

The way my mind works, getting credit for my work and getting respect from this community are two different things. I never demanded respect, but I do believe that if I came up with these algs, that I should be given credit for finding them. I know that was too much to ask (from most of those who responded afterwards, at least). That's really all I was trying to say. Not to demand fame. Instead, to request credit (not respect) for where it is due, just as people must cite their papers if something is not their original work. With that example, the writer doesn't have to respect the author of the source he/she is quoting or paraphrasing, but must give credit to him/her regardless.

Despite all of what I just said, I know from experience with this community, that someone is going pervert what I just said (making it mean something that I didn't intend it to mean). All I can hope for is for everyone who took sides with those who believed I demanded respect (instead of credit) for my work would reconsider.

I have learned a lesson so far...I have given out other algorithms, and most of what I got in return was criticism, ridicule, and butchery. I have nothing further to say except this:
Notice that I said in the post that everyone was commenting on lately, for people to pm me. No one has done this...they all have instead written it on this thread...this thread was good before, but now has lost the cube theory entirely (by the community's choice...I guess they did it for entertainment).

There has been thousands of views on this thread, and I can only hope that a portion of those individuals can understand my reasoning more than those who have posted irrelevant and insulting comments to me.

If someone still wants to take something I said and put it out of my good intentional context, then, I really think this community is not even worth trying to be a part of or to waste my time writing posts and trying to contribute.

 

[DavidWoner]

I feared that I wouldn't get credited for my algs based on their behavior towards me.

At no point did I get this impression from anyone. How did you come to this conclusion? I cannot recall an instance where someone has not received due credit for their contributions. As you said, we do not have to respect you, but credit should (and will) always be given where it is due. If your only reason for not releasing your algs before now is that you fear your work will go uncredited, then I urge you to reconsider. Though we may seem cruel to you, we still follow a code.

There has been thousands of views on this thread, and I can only hope that a portion of those individuals can understand my reasoning more than those who have posted irrelevant and insulting comments to me.

Once again, you mistake constructive criticism for insults. Are you so thin-skinned that you cannot see past our words and know that we are trying to help you? I would like to see you succeed, and I take from your words that you only seek to be credited for your work, and recognized as the creator. However, you must bear in mind that you cannot be credited for unpublished work. Yes, there are rude, cruel, and insulting people who will scorn new ideas. That is how the world and, especially, the scientific community often works. Your victory will come from proving the naysayers wrong, not from retreating.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

I feared that I wouldn't get credited for my algs based on their behavior towards me.

At no point did I get this impression from anyone.

I lol'd. You do realize that because you are being like this, and the algs are basically useless to most people, you won't be remembered for the algorithms. Instead, at this point, you will be remembered usually with the prefix 'lol' added to your name.

Another thing I forgot to mention was that I was shocked everyone substituted "respect" in for "credit". The only person who commented who actually read what I wrote was miniGOINGS.

Looks like I'm not gonna read your stuff, as I want nothing to do with that kind of mentality...

What? All I am really trying to say is I want to be credited for my discoveries, just as others have been credited for their contributions.

If it's worth being credited, it will be.

 

[DavidWoner]

I feared that I wouldn't get credited for my algs based on their behavior towards me.

At no point did I get this impression from anyone.

I lol'd. You do realize that because you are being like this, and the algs are basically useless to most people, you won't be remembered for the algorithms. Instead, at this point, you will be remembered usually with the prefix 'lol' added to your name.

He is saying that you won't be remembered for your algs, that doesn't mean that we will forget that the algs were created by you. And I was hoping you could provide an older post, one that inspired your initial fears.


Another thing I forgot to mention was that I was shocked everyone substituted "respect" in for "credit". The only person who commented who actually read what I wrote was miniGOINGS.

Looks like I'm not gonna read your stuff, as I want nothing to do with that kind of mentality...

What? All I am really trying to say is I want to be credited for my discoveries, just as others have been credited for their contributions.

If it's worth being credited, it will be.

[/QUOTE]

Generally only respected work is worth mentioning/borrowing/using/etc, and therefore required credit. Going off what minigoings said, respected work is generally worth being credited. Even if people do not respect you as a person, your work can still speak for itself and earn respect on its own.

 

[fanwuq]

Cmowla,

The problem was the way you initially presented yourself. You were being a bit vain. Don't worry about whether or not others will credit you with your discoveries. People who find and share things are usually credited for their discoveries. Just enjoy finding your algs and don't bother seeking social approval. Look at blade740's quote.
Just share everything and everyone will be happy.
At first, I was pretty annoyed when you were making claims without any real evidence. Then, you provided some cool algs, and I and reThinker did recognize you for your work. MiniGoings is right, "If it's worth being credited, it will be."

You made some interesting algs that will be recognized in time. Right now people (you and your criticizers) are too concerned with petty matters.

I did not have the chance to find my calculator cable yet, but I'll download the program onto the calculator when I get the chance. Thanks for sending it!


Patrick,

Your comment was completely unnecessary and tasteless. You were not involved in this thread at all. All you did was come in for a lol and bang on this guy. That's not cool, man. Go back to #rubik. Cmowla will be remember for what he did and reveal, not for his imperfections. I can see that you are trying to offer cmowla some advice on how he should present himself, but I don't like your tone. Your advice will not accepted if you don't present yourself in an acceptable way. Therefore, the purpose of that post of yours was inherently mocking. If you have nothing positive or puzzle theory related to contribute, do not post anything.
Thanks.

Now can we go back to cube theory?

Edit:
Joey,

I will not make another post that is not cube theory related.

That's not cool, man. Go back to #rubik.

Can I ask what you mean by that?

You can ask, but doesn't mean that I will answer.
I dare you to post the address of this post on #rubik right now. But don't do it if you know what is good for the forums. There is no need for trolling in the puzzle theory section. Thanks.
You just need to know that I will be critical next time team # does another mass trolling. I'm cool with y'all as people, but some of the things you discuss on there are quite petty. If what I thought was wrong, prove me wrong through action (or rather inaction). If I was right, you can trashtalk about me all you like and I will still appreciate the cubing community as a whole.

Now can we go back to cube theory?

 

[joey]

That's not cool, man. Go back to #rubik.

Can I ask what you mean by that?

 

[miniGOINGS]

Wow, I didn't know that my sentance would be so appreciated (signature change maybe?).

But yea, credit is different than respect. If I found something that could potentially be important or effect future cubing, I would like credit where credit is due. I wouldn't demand respect, but I think that the OP does deserve a certain amount of credit if this truly is what he says it is.

 

[PatrickJameson]

Patrick,

Your comment was completely unnecessary and tasteless.

Tasteless, maybe, but unnecessary? I was simply attempting to put some sense into him, and since other methods that people have tried have failed, it was necessary to attempt a new approach.

You were not involved in this thread at all.

Doesn't mean I haven't been following it.

All you did was come in for a lol and bang on this guy. That's not cool, man.

I did not just 'come in for a lol and bang on this guy', I attempted to get him to realize how silly he has been.

Go back to #rubik.

What does #rubik have to do with this?

Cmowla will be remember for what he did and reveal, not for his imperfections.

Why? This entire thread is basically pointing out his 'imperfections', what would make him not be remembered for that?

Also, as you point out later in your post, I did make suggestions on how he could improve his reputation. I'm simply stating facts about how he will, if he doesn't change, mostly be remembered for.

Therefore, the purpose of that post of yours was inherently mocking.

Don't change/add any implied meaning to my post. This is not what I meant it to be and you know it.

If you have nothing positive or puzzle theory related to contribute, do not post anything.

Why are you not also pointing this toward cmowla as well? He has not provided very much actual cube theory, but rather most of his posts are him gloating about how awesome he is for finding something.

I dare you to post the address of this post on #rubik right now. But don't do it if you know what is good for the forums. There is no need for trolling in the puzzle theory section.

Huh? Firstly, many many posts on here have already been posted and discussed on #rubik. Secondly, what will posting this on #rubik do? Besides, it has already been posted once or twice. And thirdly, I'm not trolling. You implying/making up meanings of my actions are getting quite annoying. If you think this is a troll, it is not. It is merely defending your attack on me.