## Skyrim Mods: Making sense of the REFR Change Form

I’m trying to parse a Skyrim SE save file, in order to determine where specific items, say Alchemy or Smithing ressources, are located in my containers in the world.

I have been able to parse REFR Changed Form most of the times:
ChangedForm.formId = 00002A68

ChangedForm.changeFlags = 134217760

ChangedForm.DataLengthSize = uint8

ChangedForm.TypeOfForm = REFR

ChangedForm.version = 78

ChangedForm.length1 = 85

ChangedForm.length2 = 0

ChangedForm.data = System.Byte[]

Inventory.Inventory Count = 5

InventoryItem.Inventory Item = 1 00006E1C

InventoryItem.Inventory Item = 1 00006E18

InventoryItem.Inventory Item = 4 00065C9F

InventoryItem.Inventory Item = 2 000EBA03

InventoryItem.Inventory Item = 3 00034CDF

What I don’t know is how to determine what container this inventory is for, and where it is.

Example:
Chest in Breezehome

Can someone help me find the correct path to the information I need?

Thanks

## algebra precalculus – Making sense of William Jones’s solution of quadratic equations and notation

In his History of Mathematical notation, Cajori (1993) writes about Jones’s approach to the solution of a quadratic equation as follows:

excerpt

Extract from Cajori (1993)

(a) What is meant with “the contrary” of “any sign”?

(b) Do I understand correctly that the “then” part supposed to be a solution to the preceding quadratic equation? If yes, how does this work exactly? How does it align with how we would symbolize the solution today?

## terminology – Does it make sense to consider an image to be a function?

I’m learning the Chapter 9.1 of the Deep Learning book.

Per post Does \$(x*w)\$ denote the resulting composite function, given \$*\$ denotes the convolution operation?, I guess I could consider $$I*K$$ a composite function, which means that $$I$$ is a function.

The book uses $$I$$ to denote a two-dimensional image, which leads to the image is being considered a function, does it make sense?

## Knowing somebody’s location does not mean you can see them

The rules on Unseen Attackers and Targets state (emphasis mine):

Combatants often try to escape their foes’ notice by hiding, casting the invisibility spell, or lurking in darkness.

When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see. (…)

When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden–both unseen and unheard–when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.

So even when a creature casts invisibility on themself you still know where they are because they are not hidden, but merely invisible. However, because they are invisible, you cannot see them (without a special sense like from see invisibility).

Creature Sense does not let a creature actually perceive invisible creatures, instead it tells them their location. Compare this with blindsight which does entail perceiving your surroundings:

A monster with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius. (…)

## An incredibly lengthy aside on senses and “seeing”

### Blindsight is seeing

The rules-text supports that Blindsight counts as seeing, but we also have some questions from the site to support this, in particular the one below and a certain part of the SAC:

Blindsight allows a creature to see the unseen, being invisible is bypassed by that sense and thus the mechanics that the Invisible condition provides are not activated.

An opportunity attack is triggered by “a hostile creature you can see”. If you can’t see an enemy, you can’t make an opportunity attack against it. Creatures with blindsight are an exception to this rule, because that ability lets those creatures “see” within a certain radius.

### Blindsense is not seeing

Meanwhile we can also look at the Rogue’s Blindsense:

If you are able to hear, you are aware of the location of any hidden or invisible creature within 10 feet of you.

Blindsense does not count as “seeing”. I will support this with links to two other questions on this site and then quotes from their answers:

Knowing a creature’s location means you don’t have to guess where it is, but if you can’t actually see it that still has consequences; you can’t target it with spells that specify a target you can see, you have disadvantage on attacks against it, that kind of thing.

Blindsense doesn’t mean you can see invisible opponents; it does mean that you don’t need to guess at their locations.

Blindsense is very similar to Creature Sense, so treating them similarly makes sense here.

### Tremorsense is probably not seeing

Unfortunately, there is also tremorsense:

A monster with tremorsense can detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the monster and the source of the vibrations are in contact with the same ground or substance.

So does this count as “seeing”? It is certainly similar to Creature Sense and the rogue’s blindsense, but the questions on this site seem to point a different way:

So my recommendation for a DM is this: make a ruling on how tremorsense works in your game. There are 2 logical rulings that I can see based on the description:

1. Tremorsense is effectively a substitute for vision for targets that it can detect.
2. Tremorsense allows the monster to know the precise location of a source of vibrations and little else.

Tremorsense and Blindsight are ‘seeing’ (…)

So while blindsight and tremorsense are not sight per se, within the realm of abilities that require sight, they can function as sight.

Tremorsense and Blindsight are not “seeing”

Tremorsense does not provide “sight” (…)

If tremorsense were intended to provide sight it would say so and would be more aptly names tremorsight, or tremorvision in line with blindsight, truesight, and darkvision.

So maybe the jury is out on Tremorsense, but it does seem like there is a consensus toward it not counting as sight as far as the votes and number of answers I’ve been able to find are concerned. It is also similar to Creature Sense (and Blindsense) so I would try to treat them all similarly, that is, that none of them actually count as seeing.

## dnd 5e – Do the creature sense ability of ulitharids grant them partial immunity to the invisibility spell and unseen attacker penalties?

The elder brain and ulitharid have the following ability, with the main difference between the two being the effective range (2 miles for the ulitharid, 5 for the elder brain):

Creature Sense. The ulitharid is aware of the presence of crea­tures within 2 miles of it that have an Intelligence score of 4 or higher. It knows the distance and direction to each creature, as well as each creature’s Intelligence score, but can’t sense anything else about it. A creature protected by a mind blank spell, a nondetection spell, or similar magic can’t be perceived in this manner.

However, if a ulitharid can know the exact distance and direction of an intelligent creature at all times, so long as they’re within range and not under the effects of mind blank or nondetection, does that mean they are partially immune to the invisibility spell and to penalties imposed when fighting unseen attackers? After all, unless the proper protective spells are cast, the ability description seems to indicate the ulitharid always knows exactly where the attacker is, whether they’re visible, invisible or hiding.

I don’t think they’d be immune to being surprised, should they be attacked while sleeping or if they simply didn’t expect the source of intelligence approaching to actually be the ranger instead of another ilithid, but I have my doubts regarding how the rules of hiding and invisibility should apply to such monsters.

## machine learning – Does it make sense to use Bayesian Network to understand feature correlation of clusters created with K-means?

My project idea is to create clusters of typical rooms for hotel customers, indicate which rooms are similar to the one they are looking for and let them understand why they are conceptually similar.

I engineered this solution:

First I create clusters using K-means algorithm.

Then I create a ‘cluster’ column inside the database. Now every row has a new information, which is hopefully going to help customers to choose which rooms are (in terms of facilities, amenities, and price) similar.

Then I pass this new database (of course discretized) with the new information to my Bayesian Network algorithm, and I set the ‘cluster’ attribute as class attribute for my Net.
Note that every information of the knowledge base is known a priori. I just need to check correlations between features when considering clusters part of them.

I’m choosing the cluster attribute to be the class because it is the only attribute describing (semantically speaking) every single room: other features can’t be univocally used to understand an hotel room.

Results are encouraging, because in an initial test I found a 90% TP-rate, but I’m fearing this is because there is some major correlation between the features influencing K-means and the Net.

Mind that, even though i’m an AI student, I’m not an expert and I’m asking this question to understand if my reasoning for tackling this problem is correct. Also this is not the full project idea, I’m just conceptually stuck up to this point.

Every idea, tip, guidance will be appreciated, but please don’t act like I did a crime if this is conceptually and theoretically wrong: I want to learn what to do.

Thanks!

## What is a `min_fee`?

Having a `min_fee` means changing the fee calculation to `max(min_fee, fee_rate * amt)`, potentially replacing the `base_fee`. My reasoning behind this is that it prevents 0-fee payments – fees below 1 msat are currently rounded down to 0 – without setting a `min_htlc_msat` or `base_fee`.

## How does it help?

Not setting a `min_htlc_msat` makes sure that micropayments can still be routed, while not setting a `base_fee` ensures a linear fee function for Pickhardt payments.
While my proposed fee function is generally not linear, it can be ensured that it always is linear in practice. I showed this in a reddit thread, responding to Rene Pickhardt. Here’s my response in full, if you don’t want to go to that reddit thread:

My idea behind `max(min_fee, fee_rate * amt)` was the fact that for reasonable `min_fee` and `fee_rate` settings, the function is linear even for relatively small payments.

More exactly, the function is linear for `fee_rate * amt >= min_fee` – or equivalently `amt >= min_fee / fee_rate` (let’s call this the `fee_ratio`).

A wallet/node that uses your flooding algorithm – with, say, a minimum split size of 10k sats – could then heuristically ignore channels that:

1. Have any base fee
2. Have a `fee_ratio` that is greater than 10k sats, which should be incredibly rare

Most channels would probably have their `min_fee` set to 1 msat, simply to prevent 0-fee htlcs. In my 200 ppm example, the `fee_ratio` would be 5 sats.

In fact, just 1k sats is a magic number here! When the `min_fee` is 1 msat, then any channel with a nonzero `fee_rate` has a maximum `fee_ratio` of 1k sats (`0.001 / 0.000001 = 1000`)!

So even all the way down to 1k sat payment splits, any channel with a 1 msat `min_fee` – and a nonzero `fee_rate` – has a linear fee function.

## Is it a good idea?

Now I would like to know if there are any fundamental issues here that I’m missing.
It seems to me that it could serve as a replacement for the (iirc arbitrary) `base_fee` setting, while still allowing Pickhardt payments.

## javascript – Does it make sense to use WebAssembly rather than JS as an engine for JS mobile app frameworks

If a mobile JS framework like NativeScript was using WebAssembly to native rather than running in a Javascript processor (so not using a JS to CLANG to JS pipeline).

Would it improve the performance to more or less the same level as Flutter or would Flutter still be noticeably faster because it compiles to C++.

Or expand it further to compile WebAssembly to the much lower level code.

## Sharpen your business sense with Report Generator For WHMCS 4.2.0! | Proxies-free

1. Report Generator For WHMCS 4.2.0

What is the point of storing data if you do not tap its full potential? Unleash the advanced powers of Report Generator For WHMCS now right inside your WHMCS 8.2, and enjoy an undisturbed insight into every single asset that your business relies on the most to thrive.

In a myriad of functionalities this modern tool brings to use with its brand-new 4.2.0 version you are sure to find:

• 6 totally new predefined reports into your clients, services, income and invoices.
• The mechanism to schedule reports for any preferred custom time period.
• Features to customize column presentation, including the addition of links via HTML code.
• Report generation now also in the XML file format.

2. GoGetSSL For WHMCS 2.5.12

GoGetSSL For WHMCS shows a whole new quality after stepping into the full compatibility with the latest WHMCS 8.2 version!

The module’s newly updated 2.5.12 version secures the most effortless provisioning of SSL certificates through your system, and now is waiting on our website to be downloaded and put to good use – free of absolutely any cost!

Stay on guard of your clients’ security with GoGetSSL For WHMCS!

3. If you wish to go through every other update we released lately, go right ahead:

Specially for you we will adapt an application and its design to your own needs, create a new module or even a completely new system built from scratch!

## real analysis – Is every analytic set the projection of a set with sections large in some sense?

Is every analytic set $$A$$ in, say, $$I=(0,1)$$, the projection of a Borel set $$B$$ in, say, $$(0,1) times (0,1)$$, $$A = pi_1(B)$$, with the following property: For every regular Borel probability measure $$mu$$ on $$(0,1)$$, there is $$y in (0,1)$$ s.t.

$$int 1_B(x,y) mu(dx) > 0$$

where $$1_B(cdot,cdot)$$ is the indicator function of $$B$$?

Any results that show that analytic sets are projections of sets with sections ‘large’ in some sense are appreciated as well. Answers that use axioms in addition to ZFC (in particular, $$V=L$$) are also useful.