The cyclic group generated by e.g. RU has order 105 (so 210 total turns or 105 of each side, alternated). If you have some math know-how, check out [1]. If you don't, take my word for it: when I was a teenager playing around with cubes, I once had a similar experience trying to do the same thing you did - when I went relatively quickly it never returned to the solved state, but when I was very deliberate about each turn, I got the 105 result (not by counting back then, but by rough time estimate given the figure I just looked up). Both you and I probably accidentally threw in one or more double-turns (like a U2) in there, or undercounted and gave up well before the cycle had completed (I, too, had thought I'd made "hundreds" of moves).
I think it's possible that that may be an additional benefit (for Google), but to me it seems overwhelmingly more likely that the main explanation here is Conway's Law.
You've identified a potential strategy by which a computer can play like a 1300-rated player, but not one where it will "play like a 1300-rated human". Patzers can still find and make moves in your set of N (if only by blind chance).
Yeah, you would have to weigh the moves based on how "obvious" it is, such as how active the piece has been, how many turns until it leads to winning material, or other such 'bad habits' humans fall for.
I want to note for the HN crowd that the book is in the "just technical enough to inform yet not scare off the layman, but not technical enough for the practitioner" nonfiction subgenre. Critically, there are a number of finer details that DFW gets wrong; if you're mathematically inclined and intend to read this, I suggest pairing it with a printed copy of Prabhakar Ragde's errata document hosted by the DFW fansite The Howling Fantods ([1]).
Genuinely asking: is that huge in terms of their install base or revenue, or is that huge in terms of PR ramifications (like, "vocal minority" type of deal)? In my younger days I'd've had a heavily skewed pro-gamer and pro-authority-of-the-gamer-rabble viewpoint, but now at this phase of my life I can't help but feel the majority of the places I see Windows are all in business and education contexts (so just business, heyo). I'd be curious to know if the gamer-rabble still holds the kind of weight in the social media aggregate that, say, got the Kinect-as-mandatory stuff walked back.
Steam has a daily peak userbase of around 33 million users[1]. I haven't been able to find a recent monthly user count, but it's certainly a lot of users. The Steam hardware survey reports over 96% of surveyed users use Windows[2].
Now, we can't say for sure how many of these users primarily use their PC for gaming. But it's probably a lot of them. PC gaming is huge, and it's one of the few areas where a general consumer actually needs a PC, and can't use a phone or tablet.
Perhaps not the hyphenated form, but I'd had a chat with a friend a couple days ago where we meandered around some surface level philosophy and I paraphrased a section or two from Thus Spoke Zarathustra about the rabble ([1]), so I'm sure that's why it was front of mind. I only used it twice just to be clear that it was referring to the same thing, I didn't intend for any semantic satiation or emphasis through repetition. My apologies!
I get what you're saying, but "rule 34 also applies to scientific research" is a bizarre way to word it; the way I'd interpret that phrase out of context is just that it logically follows because scientific research is a subset of "things that exist".
I don't claim to be in SBF's head, but the gist of the rationale for this type of thought is a hypercritical focus on effective usage of the limiting resource of time. Learning facts about reality is the only reason to consume text content; any purposeful reduction of signal-to-noise ratio is folly. Books should be blogposts. Blogposts should be bulleted digests. Maximize information density to minimize wasted time. Fiction is pure waste.
I feel like most people who have ever had that mental model of reading evolve past that type of thinking and settle into the "time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time" mode of thinking by the time they reach high school (yours truly included). Not to mention one often needs to take a moment for newly acquired information to "settle", and language that's (loosely) bridgework between facts is what grants that moment.
Worth noting for the interested reader that's disappointed upon reading your comment that there's also a Princeton Companion to Applied Mathematics (ISBN-13: 978-0691150390, ISBN-10: 0691150397).
As an aside, from time to time I try to cut the filename out of these kinds of urls and I'm delightedly nostalgic whenever I can browse the server, as it was so common some years ago; these were the kind of "secret powers" that attracted a lot of kids to learning about computers...
A math history book about one specific area of study written more in a popsci style that I liked: one of my favorite authors (David Foster Wallace) wrote "Everything & More: A Compact History of Infinity" which I'd call a 7/10 pop math experience and a 6/10 DFW experience, which is still a pretty good deal.
If you're no Math PhD but you are mathematically inclined (e.g. I studied plenty of math as an undergraduate but left to play the software industry game thereafter) you should have the errata document handy (I'll link the parent page that has other paratext [1]) - the author is a math enthusiast but not a mathematician and gets some of the finer details incorrect.
I also read Fermat's Last Theorem by Simon Singh and recall liking it, but I can't recall if it holds up under either mathematical scrutiny or the scrutiny of a more refined palate.
I was going to correct you by saying "if you didn't intend the pun, you should have used 'aether' (or 'æther' if you're cool)" but in going to the Wikipedia article to copypaste the "æ", I learned that "alternative spellings include æther, aither, and ether", which was enough news to me that I felt it worth commenting. Fair play!
[1] https://faculty.etsu.edu/gardnerr/4127/algebra-club/rubik-ta... - slide 41