1. 9
  1.  

  2. 3

    I’m not sharing this because of the author’s conclusions, but because of how they approach analysis and presentation of datasets. They could have been more open-minded about it, but I think that they do a good job of motivating their suggestions by starting with questions about existing data and adjusting its presentation to look for hidden assumptions.

    1. 2

      Interesting look at a niche kind of competition I had never thought much about before. As a young teenager, I taught myself how to solve a rubik’s cube from a website using one not-particularly-efficient algorithm, and had some fun with that, but I never got into the world of competitive cubing.

      I agree with the video author’s conclusion that it makes sense to consider the most important rubik’s cube solving world record to be one based around total time to solve. I do wonder how it happened that the current system of a max-15s inspection time before the measured solve time arose - maybe there are good Chesterson’s fence reasons for why it works this way, that I wouldn’t know about from learning about this issue from one youtube video.

      And as in any competitive event, we should expect that everyone involved is optimizing for the rules as they currently exist. If the author’s rule change came into effect, it’s possible that we’d see a temporary re-shuffling of the rankings, before they re-shuffled back to something like their original pattern as everyone started practicing to optimize for total time rather than post-inspection time.

      1. 2

        I’m more apt to watch documentaries on cultures I don’t know than anything else. I ended up watching “The Speed Cubers” a year or two ago and was fascinated by it. If this video interests you, check out the longer documentary.