Show HN: Rubiks Cube Solver

23 points
1/21/1970
2 days ago
by wozzp

Comments


agar

Note to the site author: Using Chrome's translate tool seems to break your UI. Upon first visit, I was prompted to translate from Portuguese to English and accepted. Subsequent visits required I click the "Translate this page" button on the right side of the URL bar. (Edit: Chrome 1490.7827.201 on Windows 10).

When translated, clicking the Solver drop-down (default 3x3x3) displays:

Unexpected error

Something went wrong. The current screen broke unexpectedly. Please try again or switch routes to reload it.

2 days ago

wozzp

Interesting, but the site has support for 9 languages, what language were you using?

2 days ago

vivzkestrel

- instead of giving a solver, solve the harder problem

- make a tool that teaches me how to visualize a rubiks cube so that i can solve it myself

- make it something like this https://visualrambling.space/neural-network/

2 days ago

wozzp

I will add it to my backlog, thank you very much.

a day ago

alexkh

I think that "Randomise" button could be helpful. Or may be i haven't found it

2 days ago

wozzp

do you want a scrambler?

a day ago

alexkh

yep

12 hours ago

schoen

Does it effectively achieve God's Algorithm (minimum theoretically possible sequence of moves to solve each position)?

2 days ago

xmprt

God's algorithm is not computationally feasible on consumer hardware so I'd assume not although there are many algorithms that can get pretty close (either matching or 1-2 moves off the optimal solution) which are much faster to solve. If you're curious, look up Cube Explorer which is an app that's built for this.

2 days ago

dtjc

God's algorithm has worked fine on consumer hardware for decades. Look up Korf. Even Cube Explorer has an optimal solver.

2 days ago

wozzp

Not in practice. Computing the absolute minimum solution for every possible position is computationally infeasible for a web-based solver. This uses Kociemba’s two-phase algorithm instead, which produces very efficient solutions, usually close to optimal, without requiring enormous amounts of time and memory.

2 days ago

dtjc

Why infeasible? cube20.org says "a good desktop PC" can optimally solve 0.36 random positions per second. And that's from the year 2010. I don't see why a web-based solver 16 years later should be much slower.

And apparently vcube optimally solved six cubes per second eight years ago already: https://github.com/Voltara/vcube

2 days ago

logicalappeals

HN hitting new lows when slop like this makes it on my feed. This is neither original nor inspiring. Props on the umpteenth Rubik’s cube solver, I guess.

2 days ago

wozzp

Your -3 karma is pretty self-explanatory. Hope you have a better day tomorrow.

2 days ago