Manuj and Shruti Dhariwal wrote:

(…) we introduce Let’s Chance—a novel computational microworld that extends the widely popular Scratch Programming Language with new types of code blocks and representations that make it accessible for children to encounter and tinker with the rich ideas and sophisticated concepts of probabilistic modeling and learning. Using the tool, children can imagine and code their own expressive, playful, and personally meaningful probabilistic projects, such as—generative art, music, or text; chance-based games and stories; interactive visualizations; and even advanced projects for making a computer learn from input data using simple Markov models of probabilistic learning, among many other creative possibilities.

(pick random (1) to (10))

The_Game_ wrote:

Are they in any way different from

(pick random (1) to (10))

7salad3salad wrote:

That looks pretty cool. I think I'd like to see this implemented!

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])
switch costume to (pick random (1) to (# of costumes))
start sound (pick random (1) to (# of sounds)) :: sound

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])
switch costume to (pick random (1) to (# of costumes))
start sound (pick random (1) to (# of sounds)) :: sound

The most complex thing showcased was a Markov chain, and that can be done easily and more flexibly with a couple lists. I don't see any reason to add this to Scratch, except maybe as an extension.

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])
switch costume to (pick random (1) to (# of costumes))
start sound (pick random (1) to (# of sounds)) :: sound

The most complex thing showcased was a Markov chain, and that can be done easily and more flexibly with a couple lists. I don't see any reason to add this to Scratch, except maybe as an extension.

PPPDUD wrote:

Support, because it would be awesome and useful for AIs. However, you should be able to programmatically change the chances of each item and add/remove items programmatically.

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

no its not, it lets you set the odds of each thing getting picked, and lets you modularly set those odds using a seperate list
this is basically impossible inside scratch, watch the showcase video

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])
switch costume to (pick random (1) to (# of costumes))
start sound (pick random (1) to (# of sounds)) :: sound

The most complex thing showcased was a Markov chain, and that can be done easily and more flexibly with a couple lists. I don't see any reason to add this to Scratch, except maybe as an extension.

no its not, it lets you set the odds of each thing getting picked, and lets you modularly set those odds using a seperate list
this is basically impossible inside scratch, watch the showcase video

set [choice v] to [1]
set [remaining chance v] to [100]
repeat (length of [choices v])
if <not <(pick random (1) to (remaining chance)) > (item (choice) of [probabilities v])>> then
set [result v] to (item (choice) of [choices v])
stop [this script v]
end
change [choice v] by (1)
end

rdococ wrote:

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])
switch costume to (pick random (1) to (# of costumes))
start sound (pick random (1) to (# of sounds)) :: sound

The most complex thing showcased was a Markov chain, and that can be done easily and more flexibly with a couple lists. I don't see any reason to add this to Scratch, except maybe as an extension.

no its not, it lets you set the odds of each thing getting picked, and lets you modularly set those odds using a seperate list
this is basically impossible inside scratch, watch the showcase video

It's not that hard. You can duplicate items in the list, or make two lists and run through them like so:

set [choice v] to [1]
set [remaining chance v] to [100]
repeat (length of [choices v])
if <not <(pick random (1) to (remaining chance)) > (item (choice) of [probabilities v])>> then
set [result v] to (item (choice) of [choices v])
stop [this script v]
end
change [choice v] by (1)
end

This workaround is a nice kid-sized chunk of algorithm design that the “Let's Chance” extension would make pointless. I'd rather have custom reporters and first-class lists, so it's easier to make things like this yourself and reuse it for all sorts of use cases.

blablablahello wrote:

rdococ wrote:

-snip-

I would disagree with the “its not hard” part, as you should be considering that many users of scratch are completely new to programming and are like 7. On the other hand, I do agree that rather then adding an entire extension just to workaround this, it would be better to have them figure it out themselves, as this is way too complicated and specific to be summarized into a simple block. A better solution would be to add or feature tutorials on matters such as these.

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])

(item (random v) of [list v])

BobRocks20 wrote:

How is this “too complicated and specific?” I knew what they meant when people said there was a 1% chance of getting something when I was a kid.

set [outcome v] to (item (random v) of [outcomes v])
if <(outcome) = [outcome 1]> then
...
else
if <(outcome) = [outcome 2]> then
...
else
...
end
end

set [outcome v] to (pick random (1) to (x ::grey))
...

rdococ wrote:

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])
switch costume to (pick random (1) to (# of costumes))
start sound (pick random (1) to (# of sounds)) :: sound

The most complex thing showcased was a Markov chain, and that can be done easily and more flexibly with a couple lists. I don't see any reason to add this to Scratch, except maybe as an extension.

no its not, it lets you set the odds of each thing getting picked, and lets you modularly set those odds using a seperate list
this is basically impossible inside scratch, watch the showcase video

It's not that hard. You can duplicate items in the list, or make two lists and run through them like so:

set [choice v] to [1]
set [remaining chance v] to [100]
repeat (length of [choices v])
if <not <(pick random (1) to (remaining chance)) > (item (choice) of [probabilities v])>> then
set [result v] to (item (choice) of [choices v])
stop [this script v]
end
change [choice v] by (1)
end

This workaround is a nice kid-sized chunk of algorithm design that the “Let's Chance” extension would make pointless. I'd rather have custom reporters and first-class lists, so it's easier to make things like this yourself and reuse it for all sorts of use cases.

medians wrote:

rdococ wrote:

You're all massively overestimating the abilities of this. This is just a slightly souped up ‘pick random’ block with simple workarounds:

(item (pick random (1) to (length of [list v])) of [list v])

Or just this?

(item (random v) of [list v])