 | | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I've been sort of pondering this, and I've concluded that the researcher's conclusion makes more sense if we use as a sample 100 random elements chosen from the "classic" LEGO era vs 100 random elements from the newer Ninjago era. Whatever the (...) (13 years ago, 29-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I think it's the higher ratio of piece types to set size that leads him to conclude the sets are not as useful for free-form building as they once were. The argument he makes is that if you have a set of 100 unique pieces, it has less (...) (13 years ago, 1-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
--snip-- (...) no. Nowhere near 100%. There's a very high fraction of LEGO fans outside North America. (13 years ago, 12-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) A fair point, I suppose, though I maintain that since I was referring to "non AFOLs," I'm not sure that it's relevant. (13 years ago, 12-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) If the author is worried about maximum variation with minimal parts... go play with Silly-Putty. LEGO is not, at the heart, about combinatorics, it's about creations. Perhaps he should do more building and less math. Or, visit a convention (...) (13 years ago, 12-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) That * was actually an *ahem* but FTX ate the rest. Sounds harsher without it. Ignore the word 'fans'. Very few non-AFOLs here or in Europe would call them LEGOs. Ergo not even close to 100%. (13 years ago, 12-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) And here I was wondering how you did that nifty bullet point. How about this: Of the English-speaking population that might reasonably be anticipated to pluralize a word by adding an S on the end of it, nearly 100% of non-AFOLs use the term (...) (13 years ago, 12-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
--snip-- (...) Oh I'm not taking it seriously at all ;) But I will fight for the linguistic differences between us and them (defined as the situation calls for). I have never heard, outside of TV and my recent trip to the US, the bricks referred to (...) (13 years ago, 13-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
--snip-- (...) "Mum! They have LEGO!" "Don't you have enough LEGO already?" "All my LEGO is in the cupboard." Fixed! (13 years ago, 13-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) LOL. If that poor kid's collection can fit in the cupboard, then he obviously doesn't have enough. (13 years ago, 13-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I suppose that I can accept that as a fitting compromise. Wow. This might be the first time that we agreed on something. (13 years ago, 13-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I remember a time when my collection fit into a cardboard box k, i was still single digits at the time Dave (13 years ago, 13-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure we've agreed many times in the past where there was a common enemy. But it's much more fun arguing so those are what are remembered ;) (13 years ago, 13-Mar-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
