Not Sanitized Yet
			-----------------

kar: those who're considering tesselations should read the paper steve posted.
kar: steve says the code they provide assumes that u cant do reflections

kar: lets play some games..  g1 with g7cookies

rooz: can we see the spiral .. i wanna see if they can interlock them together.

kar: nope.. is there any player who can do this..
kar: is there any group which claims they can do this by the end.

kar: lets see another game..
ma: what is the approach of this player.
han: we just find bounding rectangles, but no rotations.

eric: we're applying some physics !! if two cookies overlap, the idea
is to compute the torque betwwen them and then the torque would push them apart

kar: so u're just putting forces proportional to area.

vlad: u might be applying torque to rotate but them may keep rotating and
still overlapping no matter how much u rotate.

yaniv: I dont see any benefit, the initial orientation may mar the usefulness.

jason: u might have a problem if u have two overlapping shapes vertically and
u may not be able to push them around coz of the boundaries.

mb: random shapes may not have two angles they match.

kar: lets ask ppl who havent spoken yet

gp: we're specializing on convex cookies.
	we're matching corners. aggregation of cookies.

andy: we're thinking about tesselations.

yuan: bounding shapes.

lu: i dont think that will give good solutions. it would prevent cookies
	fit closely.

lyubov: i agree that rectangle bounding approach has certain disadvantages.
	but for convex shapes it'll work good.

ma: i think our approach is good but in large problems it may not do
to have an exhaustive placement, so the bounding rectangle approach maybe
a good approximation.

yaniv: i'm doing a bin packing kind of thing with group1's algorithm.

vlad: with bounding rectangles, tight fitting shapes may not fit anymore.

kar: but with yaniv's approach they may fit at any intermediate stage.

kar: hand made shapes VS random shapes..

alexis: I dont think it'll make much of a difference.

jw: I think there should be 3 tournaments
	1) Random
	2) Human-made
	3) Basic shapes

dv: I think random shapes wouldn't be that interesting.

lu: if some cookies are going to be puzzle shapes, we're better off
	preprocessing and seeing if its a puzzle shape.

kar: how do we deal with random shapes ??

kar: every group submits a final cookie.
	how do we prevent ppl specializing their code for their own cookies.

ak: we can perturb the cookie a bit, i.e. rotate or expand or contract a bit.

rooz: what if the shape doesnt fit in the boundaries ??

dv: if the shape has a boundning rectangle at some angle with smaller side
less than 1, it should fit.

jw: if its feasible, there should be a configutation where there is a vertex
on the top and the bottom.

kar: deliverable for tuesday.

rooz: a better player.

kar: a player thats not "naive" by next time

kar: what do ppl think about solving puzzle shapes ??

ma: there are some puzzle pieces which u cannot fit just by pushing them
together.

adam: u can solve them by starting them on top of each other and pushing apart.

jw: its possible to exhaustively match sides with other sides.