Insanity is dictated by an meter that is not directly shown to the player but its progress can be tracked by a blue hue on the border of the screen, and certain things will fill that meter, where at certain theresholds, will begin to debilitate the character.
Insanity can be resisted by leveling up the Willpower attribute, by taking talent cards from the Mental Fortress deck or talents that boost sanity, wearing a blindfold, certain equipment or with the Blindseer Oath. Those will increase a stat called Sanity.
A mysterious signal. A missing crew. And the one man trying to piece it all together. As Commander Abe Douglas, explore a giant, interconnected world filled with menacing sea life, monstrous bosses, and a mystery that threatens not only your crew, but your own sanity.
A mysterious signal. A missing crew. And the one man trying to piece it all together. As Abe Douglas, dive deep into a fully underwater metroidvania to explore massive oceanic biomes, battle monstrous bosses, and piece together a mystery that threatens not only your crew, but your own sanity.
Set in the aftermath of a real-life mysterious event called the \"Bloop\", a GOAA (Possibly standing in for the real-life NOAA) research vessel called the Baroness is sent into the depths of the Atlantic Ocean to investigate. When the vessel and its six-person crew encounters trouble and drops out of contact, experienced seaman Abe Douglas, the man who assembled that crew, which includes his own son Clay, sets out in a one-man submersible to find them. What he finds will threaten not only his life, but his state of mind.
FREE GOG PC GAMES PRESENTSDepths of Sanity (c) Bomb Shelter Games / Bomb Shelter GamesA mysterious signal. A missing crew. And the one man trying to piece it all together. As Abe Douglas, dive deep into a fully underwater metroidvania to explore massive oceanic biomes, battle monstrous bosses, and piece together a mystery that threatens not only your crew, but your own sanity.
50 SHOFAR Fall 1992 Vol. 11, No. 1 FROM MADNESS ON TO SANI1Y: A. B. YEHOSHUA'S SHIFTING PERSPECTIVE ON THE DIASPORA by Gilead Morahg Gilead Morahg is Professor of Hebrew at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he serves as Chairman of the Department of Hebrew and Semitic Studies and Director of the Center for Jewish Studies. A. B. Yehoshua is one of Israel's foremost literary artists. He is also a political activist and the author of many essays on social and ideological issues. In both his fiction and his essays Yehoshua has long been concerned with what he regards as the unhealthy and potentially destructive effect of the Jewish Diaspora on the emergent society and culture of the Jewish homeland. The conventions ofcontemporarycriticism have discouraged systematic examinations of the manner in which Yehoshua's social and political ideas are embedded and explored within the structures ofhis literary works. This is unfortunate, since for Yehoshua, as for many other writers, social perceptions and ideological convictions are integral components of the sensibility that generates his art. The intent of this essay is to determine how Yehoshua's stated ideological concern with the tensions between Zion and the Diaspora is transmuted into the narrative dynamics and signifying structures of two of his recent novels: A Late Divorce (1982) and Molkho (1987).1 Both of these books appeared in the aftermath of Between Right and Right (1980), Yehoshua's first collection of essays on Zionist questions. A brief summary of the views on the relationship between Israel and the Jewish Diaspora that are expressed in these essays 'An English translation of Molkho, titled Five Seasons (Doubleday), was published in 1989. The English translation of A Late Divorce (Doubleday) was published in 1984. Yehoshua's Shifting Perspective on the Diaspora 51 will provide a necessary context for the discussion of the novels that followed them. In Between Right and Right, Yehoshua writes that \"the Diaspora is at the very heart of the. practical problems that the State ofIsrael is struggling with today. Understanding the phenomenon of the Diaspora is the key to understanding the Jewish nation and it, more than anything else, can help provide us with a reliable diagnosis of the cruel conflicts that are still plaguing this nation. 2 Yehoshua believes that the Jewish people continue to maintain a love-hate relationship with the Diaspora. He recognizes that the Zionist convictions which sustain the State of Israel and attempt to fashion its culture are still tenuous and far less inherent in the Jewish psyche than the view that regards the Diaspora \"as a permanent, almost natural feature of the Jewish people. In this view \"theJews are a Diaspora people and that is their existential strength.... This view intuitively grasps the depths of the Jewish people's need for the Golah [Diaspora], how organically it is intertwined with the Jewish essence and Jewish spiritual creativity and therefore tries to regard the Golah as legitimate and normal. 3 Much ofYehoshua's publicistic effort is devoted to arguing that there is nothing legitimate or normal about the Jewish impulse towards Diaspora. He regards this impulse as a pathological manifestation of a deeply rooted Jewish fear ofreturning to the land ofIsrael and establishing an independent national commonwealth there. Because of this, he writes, a paradoxical, almost pathological, situation is created. The nation is drawn towards the Golab as a possibility inherent in its being, it abhors it, it does all it can to endure within in, but byits steadily improving ability to live in the Golab it constantly pushes the return to its land further into the future. Yehoshua regards Zionism as the primary means of self-liberation from the Jewish fear of independence. But, very much like Brenner, who is one of 2A. B. Yehoshua, Bizekhut harlOnnaliut [A Plea for Nonnaley] (Tel Aviv, 1980), pp. 27-28. All subsequent page references to this book will be followed by an italicized reference to its English translation: Betweerl Right arid Right (New York, 1981), pp. 22-24. Although this book is more successfully translated than all of Yehoshua's other works, I often found it necessary to provide my own translations in order to...
SanitariumA timeless point and click horror game. You play as an amnesiac pushed into a creepy and morbid universe. After a terrible accident, you are awakened and find yourself inside an old asylum. Who are you Why are you here These are all questions you will need to solve as you struggle to regain your sanity.
Strengths: 1. The logic flow of this paper is clear. The sanity check is very convincing.2. The finding that current pruning methods are not relying much on training data is surprising but reasonable. The proposed pruning method is much more efficient comparing to conventional pruning methods. 3. Emperical evaluation shows the proposed sanity check is crucial and necessary.4. The relevance to the NeurIPS community is high.
Summary and Contributions: This paper performs two sanity checks on unstructured pruning methods - does data or architecture matter for pruning - and expands on observations to create smart ratios and hybrid tickets. - The authors check the dependency on data by using random labels, random pixels, and less data. They find that good tickets can still be found on such corrupted data.- They also check the dependency on structure by rearranging masks or shuffling unmasked weights within each layer. They find that performance does not drop when the per-layer structure is disturbed.- Inspired by these observations, they propose smart-ratios, where random tickets with the given smart-ratios mostly match or outperform other existing pruning methods. - They combine smart-ratios with learning rate rewinding to form \"hybrid tickets\" to gain further performance improvements.
Weaknesses: Soundness/significance: My main concern is that this paper focuses on one shot pruning rather than iterative pruning. Iterative magnitude pruning (IMP) is the standard in lottery ticket training since it does better, especially at higher prune rates. Even \"Learning both Weights and Connections for Efficient Neural Networks\", referenced in this paper for one-shot pruning, said iterative pruning is better. Do the sanity checks hold up on IMP Do smart-ratios and hybrid tickets still perform better than IMP baselines If so, you could argue that your method saves even more compute; if not, then the scope of this paper is more limited.Other concerns about the soundness of claims:- Table 3: I don't see half dataset or shuffled weights doing worse than LT- Table 4: hybrid tickets don't seem much better besides at 98% sparsity when the baselines fail
Clarity: The writing is clear, however, I don't agree that \"data used in the pruning step and the structure of pruned network are essential\" are good \"sanity checks\": it is not bad for pruning methods to not rely on data/architecture. In fact, the ideal pruning method would be efficient and not need any additional information. I would instead frame those \"sanity checks\" simply as characteristics of pruning methods, which are used as inspiration for more efficient methods.
Additional Feedback: See comments under weaknesses, clarity, and prior work. I would like to see broader experiments that consider IMP, clarification of claims from seemingly insignificant results in the tables, and a reframing of the paper that does not make it sound like pruning methods need to \"pass\" the tests of depending on data/architecture.I would also like to see \"sanity checks\" performed on datasets besides cifar10.I am surprised that corrupted data (figure 3) does not hurt performance at all - does the model end up with the same keep-ratios with corrupted data Does the model need to train a lot longer for the corrupted data to have any effect (as per ) Might be interesting to see more here.Minor questions/suggestions:-