I would recommend Vanishing Realms, specially when you already have a sword and a bow. It's so fun to fight with the skulls.
People seem to enjoy Tilt Brush, I find it nice but boring.
Brookhaven Experiment is a nice 1 time game to get people excited and scared.
Chair in the room is creepy, slow transitions but has a really well executed ambient.
People tend to like Job Simulator, it's lite and funny.
There are a couple of Vive demos that are also entertaining. In general people seem to like to grab things, throw, move around, feel large or small environments.
On the PSVR:
Battle Zone is my favorite at the moment
Drive Club is very good too but it makes me a little bit nauseous, and I'm not usually a person who gets nausea often.
I've been talking with people involved in elections in Honduras and they explained a technique that is normally used for paper ballots. It's called "La Cadena" (the chain) and it works like this.
A person goes to the voting center and gets a ballot
That person goes to the booth and marks the ballot
That person skips entering their ballot and goes out
Shows the ballot to the coercer, verifying the vote
The coercer gives the ballot to the next person
The next person gets another ballot and has the previous one hidden.
That person introduces the new ballot, hides the old one and goes out.
And the chain goes on.
Apparently it's a common way to coerce votes in low income urban areas and rural areas. You only need distraction or complicity from a person from the voting table and it's hard to detect.
Another common issue is vote stuffing.
On the philosophical part, it is in the end a human problem, but with technology at least you should reduce the possibility of cheating
An interesting tactic, but that kind of coercion would also work with online voting - standover men forcing you to vote on their computer, where they can see and track you. I imagine this would be particularly effective in poorer areas with less access to computers.
Complicity is always going to be hard to work around (it's the primary fault vector of electronic voting), but it seems 'the chain' wouldn't be too difficult to detect - the standover men would have to farm the ballots from the outgoing people and get them back into the line going in (but again, complicity to look the other way...)
Vote stuffing is easy to workaround - have the ballot papers custom-marked as they're handed out.
> technology at least you should reduce the possibility of cheating
Technology also opens up lots of new avenues for cheating. It also has the problem of not being understandable by the layperson if they have to manage it in any way at all.
It's also trivially easy to defeat this. Here in Canada, your ballot has a counterfoil with a number on it. That number is only removed immediately before you deposit your vote into the ballot box. This ensures that the ballot you deposit is the same one you were given by the polling clerk.
Using interactive proofs you can know that the machine won't modify your vote, and using zero-knowledge proofs plus a distributed key you can decrypt and randomize, being certain that votes haven't been lost and without revealing whom people voted for.
Additionally with a public ledger like the blockchain, you can be certain that your vote is there (checking your signature), and when votes were cast.
Using something like colored coins you can ensure that no additional votes are created.
The problem that I do see with remote voting is that I could be right next to you when you vote and coerce you to vote for the person that I want
Natanael_L I just skimmed through it but will read it later today. I worked on a prototype earlier this year implementing the blockchain part, not secure yet, specially it doesn't implement the end-to-end encryption. Anyhow you can read about it here and there is a link to the video of the prototype https://medium.com/@jagbolanos/votosocial-org-towards-an-e-v...
Well we already have mail-in voting and coercion could happen at some shadier physical locations.
Would it be possible to add another vote that invalidates the first, but preserves anonymity? Then there's no guarantee that someone doesn't just revote.
You make a good point and I think it's because sometimes the objective is not clear.
When you study sorting you really do it because:
1) It's a simple, frequent and clear problem that everybody understands
2) People just need to think about it for a while to figure out a correct algorithm normally O(n^2) and think about optimizations from there (that will probably still make it O(n^2)).
3) You can study different techniques to solve that problem: like divide-and-conquer (mergesort), using a data structure (heapsort), divide-and-conquer+randomization (quicksort), not going for comparisons but using the structure of the data (radixsort).
4) You can learn to apply big-O notation for efficiency and compare different algorithms
5) You can study the limits of a problem (not an algorithm) like the omega(n log(n)) limit of comparison sorts and the omega(n) limit of sorting in general).
This also happens with the less clear but also rich problem of the Minimum Spanning Tree that has 2 famous algorithm (Prim and Kruskal) that can be implemented with different data structures having a great impact in efficiency.
So the real problem is that sometimes teachers just focus on teaching sorting but don't explain (and sometimes they don't have it clear either) that it's not sorting but a framework of mind what you want to give them. Sorting is normally already implemented in the popular and not so popular programming languages libraries.
I agree with the reasons the parent provided, especially that teachers teach the content without providing a "why?"
What I suspect generally that I cannot prove (yet): When teachers teach things that are easy to teach but not directly important to learn, students are distracted by the surface irrelevance.
Of course the underlying concepts and designs of sorting are important to understand. But, that the GP asked, "Do professional programmers actually think about this? Is this relevant?" means the curriculum has a problem. The problem is: students are asking meta-questions that should've been answered by the "why?" mentioned above.
In sum, I agree with the parent, especially with:
> So the real problem is that sometimes teachers just focus on teaching sorting but don't explain (and sometimes they don't have it clear either) that it's not sorting but a framework of mind what you want to give them.
It's easy (possibly... lazy? Again, this is what I suspect that I cannot prove) for a CS department to declare "Students will learn [list of topics] by examining and implementing sorting algorithms."
By contrast, it's a hard to 1. interest students by presenting them with problems not fossilized exercises. 2. ensure to students' parents and taxpayers and employers that they know the "basics|fundamentals|theory"
Not sure if this happens to others but in my case some times I'm ENTP and others INTP. I guess I'm somehow in the middle and it might depend on the day.
There's also another difference in that adding a laptop for a kid that is already in school without doing anything to take advantage of the laptop in the teaching is very different from making tablet available for a kid that is not only without access to school, but in a village where everyone is illiterate.
We have a product that relies heavily on Parse. The model is a white labeled solution. We currently have a potential client that wants to host everything and we are kind of stuck with Parse. I could simply charge more if there was a customer hosted solution.
I would recommend Vanishing Realms, specially when you already have a sword and a bow. It's so fun to fight with the skulls.
People seem to enjoy Tilt Brush, I find it nice but boring.
Brookhaven Experiment is a nice 1 time game to get people excited and scared.
Chair in the room is creepy, slow transitions but has a really well executed ambient.
People tend to like Job Simulator, it's lite and funny.
There are a couple of Vive demos that are also entertaining. In general people seem to like to grab things, throw, move around, feel large or small environments.
On the PSVR:
Battle Zone is my favorite at the moment
Drive Club is very good too but it makes me a little bit nauseous, and I'm not usually a person who gets nausea often.