I can't take this seriously while watching starcraft guys walking around

he must have put a lot of work into this

but his method of explaining things can't possibly be understood by the people linking this around

I barely understand (I still don't think I do)

Fraction magic indeed.

I am trying to figure out how one could visualize this on a graph

not a starcraft graph

lol

wtf is this starcraft metaphor

imagine Powell summons this guy to court

and he whips out a starcraft game

and tries to explain this to a judge

HAHAHA

I used to spend a lot of time debunking PvsNP "proofs"

this is a hard problem in computer science (probably the most important problem in CS and all of math)

but it is very approachable to amateurs and it is surprising that it is difficult to solve

many people take a crack at it, and it is a trope in the CS community; people look down on those who attempt to solve this sort of problem, especially if they are amateurs (not professionals in CS)

@DrSammyD It just might be human error. When they manually enter values into the NEP system, they sometimes attribute them to the wrong precincts. In order to mask the errors, they use a debit/credit approach to move the values. Logically, you might think they would send a negative entry on one side and the positive on the other. In this case, they are doing a wholesale replacement of the values.

the reason being that it is very difficult to read through the proofs and disprove them (takes a lot of time) and they never end

sort of like Perpetual Motion machines for physicists

anyway, there is a page on the internet that collects such "proofs" for archival purposes

and in order to learn the underlying difficulty of the problem, I spent a lot of time humoring such proofs and taking the time to disprove them

fun days

That would make sense if it wasn't for like sets of 5 different precincts at a time, all with varying total values but not ratios.

anyway, I've never seen one that involves stacraft

he's laughing at his own simulation!

I still don't understand this scheme

OK so it knows how many votes it needs in the "virtual precincts"

and it hijacks some precincts during a period of time

ohh I get it now

those precincts converge to the virtual ratio

Yep

and hold there until it snaps to another precinct

OK, what was missing is the "converge" part

ok now I can think of how to visualize this

what if

we visualized a 2d chart showing the ratios of every precinct

over time

each precinct gets a curve

yea I think I can work with this

Yeah, I think that's a good visualization.