Slashdot Mirror
Toilet Paper Algorithms
ziani writes "Computer science professor and ex-Apple technologist Don Norman posits a new "forcing function" in toilet paper use algorithms." Browsing through his website is a good way to kill a couple of hours.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
These days, I can just use a couple of VA Software stock certificates and get the same effect. Plus, it is cheaper than toilet paper!
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
from the you-know-you're-taking-too-long-in-the-bathroom-wh en department.
slashdot!=valid HTML
I wonder if he was inspired by Snowcrash, and the long discussion of the issues related to toliet paper in the Fed Building in which yt's mom works? Sounds pretty similar, but less funny.
Academics, especially professors, spend a good deal of their time brown-nosing and kissing other people's asses in the hopes of securing yet another research grant. Hence, the seemingly odd fascination for toilet paper, the uses of.
"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
I would be interested to see statistics on toilet paper use vs. size of the roll. My bet would be that people will use more paper when the roll is full sized compared to when it is smaller due to the number of rotations and time involved to get the same amount of paper. This may be an argument to have a number of small rolls instead or one big one at commercial facilities where toilet paper use is a noticable cost.
Apple only hired guys who knew their crap.
Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
Toilet humour alert;
Using 'forced functions' and 'toilet' in the same paragraph is a bit 'I need to go RIGHT NOW' prompting I feel.
I put my books on Amazon, Smashwords, Demonoid, ISOHunt and Pirate Bay. Search for 'Michael Cargill'
This topic is full of shit!
Table-ized A.I.
...I knew that degree in CS would come in handy some day.
When you run out.. just used a printed out copy of a Microsoft EULA!
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Excellent! This will invalidate the first-grader's rant for a paperless crap session!:
:)
"Be a man, use your hand."
This is why I majored in Finance and minored in CS.
I used to think that I needed to get a life, but heck, this takes the cake.
What kind of anal person wastes time on scheduling/queuing algorithms for TP?!?!
Having said that - I have the chindogu book, and it looks like this guy is _not_ a minority of one. Worrying...
Havng said that the banner you hang from your forehead in order to cover your yawning maw and smultaniously indicate which stop you'd like to get off at when wanting to sleep on the subway train is darned useful.
THL.
Keeping
From the header, I believed this was a news about Lisp...
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
So you can't use the 3 shells?
*Moohahahahaa*
(Demolition Man)
But what about the over/under dichotomy? Most people put the toilet paper in the holder so it unrolls over the top, but a sizable minority (myself included) put it in there so unrolls from the bottom. Each group drives the other nuts.
This should be taken into account somehow when exploring any toilet paper algorithm.
Has anyone researched yet when a common-sense idea beomes an algorithm that computer scientist discuss?
I mean, ok, nice idea, but do we really need computer scientist for this (except for using buzzwords)?
Disclaimer: This post was written deliberately in the long-practiced computer science tradition of over-analyzing simple problems.
___
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
I need TP, TP for my bunghole. For there is only but on bunghole. The Almighty Bunghole. My people, we have only one bunghole. I wouldn't want my bungholio to get polio!
The Japaneze have built several toilets which, when you're done answering nature's call, you reach on one side of the bowl where controls are. There you can clean your butt by having warm watter sprayed around the exit area, maybe some soap, rinse, and then blow dry.
:D
Don't forget to flush!
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
I thought they always told you not to force it.
?-|||-----x<*))))><
The problem with this is the tp holder. It has a mechanism that you need to squeeze in and pull out. It's clumsy and inefficient. I built one that slides in from the front. When the roll is done, you pull it straight out and replace the roll.
He has some interesting common sense solutions to today's problems I wish companies thought like he did
***I GOT NUTHIN***
i was just thinking about this last week, and the fact is, that commercial roll holders blow chunks. in trying to enforce some failed engineers design for roll use, they actually prevent you from getting any toilet paper at all. well, without getting one shredded square at a time.
the basic home roll, at least dispenses the required amount of paper. while i totally agree with the essay, youd think in doing the second thing, theyd get the first thing right first.
commercial roll holders suck, thats why people pee on them.
Decided to take a look, see what kind of dual-roll dispensers are available, and voila... a sale!
Don't know if it was deliberate or not, but what a great way to utilitze the Slashdot Effect...
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
By using a smallest algorithm you get no benefit over random or largest, except for the option of negating the purpose of dual rolls. With smallest you can refill either after one roll is out or after both rolls are out. If you do it after one roll is done, you've lost all benefit of a dual roll setup: you still have to refill after each single roll and because there is no discernable difference between two fully (or nearly) stocked rolls the one you start using will be the one you keep using. The second roll doesn't even get a chance.
If you choose to refill after two rolls you end up with no gain over random or largest since you have to refill two at a time no matter what.
Conclusion: there is no best way to deal with a two roll setup. The advantage conferred is just that you don't have to refill for twice as long if you choose. If you want to refill at the same interval as a single, stick with a single.
The article does a good job of analyzing which roll to choose, but neglects the most important question of installing toilet paper rolls.
Should the paper come over the top of the roll, or out from under the bottom?
Clearly, over the top is better, because no matter how long or short the loose end is, it is always on the front so you can find it. With the under the bottom system, the loose end can be hanging behind the roll and you have to roll it until you can grab it.
Anyone who took more than five seconds to realize Algorithm Small was the solution should not be allowed to post on slashdot. OK, I'll allow 30 seconds, to accommodate diversity among the readership, but that's it.
"Get your hands out of that cereal box! How many times have I told you never to open a new box until you've finished the last box?"
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
Members of the world. Fear no longer. The toilet paper issue is solved, once and for all. No nitwick professor can now waste you're hard earned tax money on this essentially small problem. I am glad it was solved by man-in-the-street.
Look a monkey!
Believe it or not, Donald Knuth has a paper "The Toilet Paper Problem" in his book Selected Papers on Analysis of Algorithms (ISBN 1575862123).
At the beginning was at.
"Hi, my name is Don, and I have too much free time on my hands."
Never argue with a man carrying a water buffalo
this guy either has too much free time and/or is psycotic..
If you want to make a fast buck, go the the hardware store, buy a bunch of sand-paper, and resell it at a Trekkie convention as Official Klingon Toilet Paper. (You might need to print up some fancy-looking packaging.)
Sells like hot cakes.
I just don't like to be around when they test it on a dare.
Table-ized A.I.
The problem they're trying to solve is that of running out of paper before you're done wiping. Get it?
This is not an uncommon problem, and having two rolls solves this problem if you always use the smaller roll first, as the article describes. If it runs out before you're done, it's no problem because you've still got the other roll. Then you can replace the empty one at your convience.
The author discussed, in true binary fashion, "available" vs. "unavailable" for a second roll.
People have also discussed "over the top vs. under the bottom".
There is a middle ground: two rollers, one "over the top" and the other "under the bottom". This would also self-regulate the usage of the rolls, ensuring one ran out before the other.
Which one runs out first depends on the physical characteristics of the holder.
For a fixed holder, the answer is probably "over the top".
But for a hanging holder, where the weight of the paper itself levers the paper into the wall, increasing the overall friction, "under the bottom" allows you to mitigate friction effects, while "over the top" increases them.
Since a fixed holder results in the choice being user preference, that doesn't solve anything; clearly, the fix is in two parts: (1) use hanging holders, and (2) make the primary roll "under the bottom" and the secondary roll "over the top".
Another solution (which is only statistical) is to locate rolls on either side of the toilet. Left handed people are outnumbered by right handed people 20 to 1, on average. But this fix only works "on average", as a result.
All in all, a "P-P complete" problem.
-- Terry
This is one of the textbook examples of what people in several fields (such as economics evolutionary biology) have for some time referred to as "super-rational" behavior.
Th conventional definition of "super-rational" is taking into account the consequences of everyone (or at least the majority) following the strategy. It doesn't actually imply that the actors are rational (or even thinking). One of the topics where it has been used is the biological question of how altruism evolves. The best explanation so far is that a population that behaves altruistically among themselves has a survival advantage over purely individualistic populations.
The double toilet paper example is used as a clear way of illustrating this concept, in a way that doesn't impinge on people's social or religious ideologies. Very few people have any strong feelings about which roll you should use, so they are able to follow the argument without their beliefs causing distraction. And it's clear that a population could behave in a super-rational fashion in this case without being consciously aware that they were doing so. An irrational preference for the inner part of the roll would suffice.
If you ask google about "super-rational", you'll find a number of links to this concept buried among the silly and/or pretentious sites.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
we purchased holder of two rolls, side by side. We discovered that although we now had two rolls instead of one, the problem was not solved.
It's disturbing to see "The Guru of Workable Technology" was unable to identify a correct solution to the problem before he purchased and used the product...
Luckily the "guru" was eventually able to identify and correct the problem, then share the experience with us all! (Don't you think a "guru" would have better things to write about?)
It occurs to me that there *is* a paredo optimal solution.
There has to be.
The problem is "P-P complete".
-- Terry
Do you "double-dip"?
...Also, you can WinToiletPaper.Com
Are you a "perfectionist" or an "inspector"?
Take the Bathroom Habits Study here
(An error occured processing this directive.)
Cover your eyes and click this link!
At my home on campus, they are installing new showers. To do this, they needed to turn off the water. It's been off since Wednesday, and will likely be off until Monday or Tuesday. Talk about disgusting. We've been running out to Wal-Mart and buying gallons of water so we can flush the toilets. It wouldn't be that bad, but one of the guys in the house must have some major problems, because he has to go #2 a lot. And they smell real, real bad.
Toilet paper is the least of concerns.
At my work they have installed the commercial type where pushing down on the emtpy roll drops the next roll into place.
Alas, invariably the next roll gets dropped into place before the first roll is complete. You end up with two touching rolls, one on to of the other, both of which are hard to turn.
As for the "over or under" question that is not addressed in the article but many people seem to be discussing, most people with cats would prefer the under approach. The over approach is far too easy for my cats to unravel, leading to the bathroom being turned into a toilet paper playhouse while I am away. At least the under approach makes them think a little (something they prefer to avoid).
Life is like a web application. Sometime you need cookies just to get by.
One can catch the paper against the roller holder and get more friction making tearing easier when the roll is installed "backwords". If you try to do this with a forwards roll you'll have to loop what you've got up and around, which tends to get complicated when one is focussed on the latest issue of Popular Mechanics... or whatever else one might read on the toilet... one-handed.
At least it looks as if the toliet paper problem is defintely in P. Human beings could be doomed to a lifetime of misery should the problem had been intractable.
If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
By using a smallest algorithm you get no benefit over random or largest, except for the option of negating the purpose of dual rolls.
I normally don't get into the scatalogical stuff, but the above asumption is wrong for places where the people using the article are not the ones who replace the article.
I work in a place where the men's restroom in the software section (can't vouch for the women's restroom) has 3 stalls, two have the "forcing function" dispensers, and one has the dual roll dispenser.
The "forcing function" dispensers have long since been severely damaged as a result of (I'm assuming) lack of fulfillment during a moment of need.
The rolls in the recently installed "dual roll" stall were initially subject to the algorithm large. Once the sight of two nearly empty rolls greeted the visitors, the popular usage quickly became algorithm small.
I've not wasted a couple hours yet, but the Essays I have read are quite insightful... I'm especially fond of the one titled "in defense of cheating". My wife has her degree in education and is homeschooling my 5 year old son, I'm going to have her read them and give me an educator's perspective on them. I think that the concepts are more intended for a higher education but I'm curious if she will come up with methods for implimenting them into an early childhood classrom. His assertions of attractive things working better and his corresponding defenses are very interesting as well.
wordtrip.com
$a=$rolls[0]; $b=$rolls[1]; if ($a $a) { use Toilet::RollA; } elsif ($a = $b) { int(rand(2)); } if ($a eq 0 && $b eq 0 && $USER{'diarrhea'}) { die "Crap!"; }
Here's a good teamwork exercise/competition for management training classes: Given two adjacent porceline bowls in a restroom of a large building and two rolls of toilet paper, unroll the two rolls or toilet paper completely on parallel paths starting at each toilet, running out the door of the restroom and through the halls of the building. Each team of 5-10 people gets one strand of TP and the corresponding toilet. The team that can flush its roll entirely down its toilet first without severing it wins. This demonstrates that the role of management is (a) coordinating work, (b) moving paper, (c) making people rush, and (d) moving unpleasant pieces of paper rapidly to a place where no one can find them.
Why do they call it a crapper and not a crappee?
Alternatively, there is the squares of newspaper hanging off the nail. Cheaper and you can refill it when it is half used!
I dont care when the paper tube is full or empty,.. I just want to be able to spin it and get my paper.... but the age old conflict is really the hanging direction. I posted a poll about this back in 9/2000 Go Vote!
Oh, I'm sorry, that's for EE majors, not CS people.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
Assuming that the average time in the restroom is 1 minute for men and five minutes for women. Given that an airplane or restaurant has two toilets. If these are changed from accessible to either sex to sex-distinct, then the average wait for men is reduced about 80% but for women increased about 100%, so it is a net loss. However, if these are changed from sex-distinct to accessible to either sex, then the average wait for men is increased about 400% and for women it is decreased only 50%, so it is also a net loss. The net net result is that nothing can be changed, and the tyranny of the status quo prevails.
Soap. Rinse. Dry. The three seashells? Must be.
Perhaps the answer has something to do with whether the paper is dispensed over the top toward the front or over the top toward the back.
This puts in question the author's premise in the first place. He states there are three possible functions for the use of toilet paper.
Algorithm large
Algorithm small
Algorithm random
Perhaps, even before these algorithms are addressed, the directionality of the toilet paper is of ultimate concern.
This is to say that the author's algorithms might be correct if both rolls of toilet paper are equal, but the purpose of the forcing function is to make the rolls of toilet paper unequal.
So I ask: what would happen if, on a dual roll of toilet paper, the closer roll was over the top toward the user and the further roll was over the top and away. This would make the first roll more accessable and therefore might possibly resolve the whole issue.
And I'm not even a computer scientist!
Oh, man. When I read "forcing function," I was going to suggest more fiber, but this is a bit different...
My
Limekiller
With the button called "ATR" for (Automatic Tampon Removal) and a guy who accidentally takes care of business in the women's washroom...
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
There is more to computer science than mastering the latest buzz words.
All your favorite sites in one place!
If you have a cat, the roll needs to face towards the wall, or you'll find it unrolled and most of your home TPd. On the other hand, my can is now able to unroll it in either direction.
I think this is a pretty shitty topic. Killing time until 20 seconds elapses, yeah, what a stupid rule, 20 seconds, ok, come on.... there we go....
Engineers at Cisco Systems have known about this problem for a long time. Being in the field more often then at home, they came up with WRED, weighted random early drop. This method has enabled them to reduce buying toilet paper for their own home use to a very manageable small number of times a year. Clever.
Ex DEC Alpha people -> AMD Hammer engineers
:)
Ex Amiga people -> Newtek, scala, etc..
Ex SGI -> NVIDIA
etc etc..
Ex-Apple -> Toilet paper algo. research.
I rest my case
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
ok, so every non-cat-owner knows that "over the top" is easier to use. Simply make rotating roll holders. Have one roll "over the top" and one the opposite. Then, when the over the top roll runs out (which will almost certainly be sooner than the "under the bottom" roll), simply rotate the under the bottom roll so it's over the top. Then, when the person who used the last of the roll replaces it (and he had better), he must simply place the new roll in an under the bottom orientation.
One needn't force the correct usage. Often making the preferred choice more attractive will suffice.
This is the centre of the problem; all of the other BS (sorry, I just had to play that card; what I meant was overcomplicated speculation) veers off and becomes a bit irrelevant, as the only thing sought is a holder for the next roll of toilet paper. However, it is not to be used until the current roll is empty. What could be simpler than to create a cylindrical container in which to put the next roll? It would be inaccessible for use but ready to bring out and replace the old.
true && more || less
Why bother wearing a toilet roll on your head? Simply take it to it's natural conclusion - Nappies.
Sure, you could always carry a toilet around in your pants, but thats not really practical, is it?
But really, as children, (unless we go by Homer Simpsons method of letting them run around free in the garden and let nature take its course) we wear nappies, (Diapers, whatever)
As senior citizens, embarassing deterioration of our internal organs may drive us to take similar action.
So why in the middle must we train ourselves to go against what we learnt as babies, only to go back to it when elderly?
Add the fact that we sleep for roughly one third of our lives, and during the period of our lives when we aren't in nappies we can usually control our bodily functions to avoid accidents while asleep.
So, in effect, time on/at the toilet makes up a miniscule amount of our lives, yet it takes a lot of time in getting to and from the toilet, not to mention buying and using toilet paper, and washing hands.
Why go through all this bother? Save space in your house! Save time! Save water! Wear a nappy today!
A paid comment brought to you by the Nappy Makers association of Australia
c - a blessed +5 grain of salt
"Also, why are the flush mechanisms so fragile? It seems every house and appartment I have ever lived in had problems with the flushing and fill mechanisms."
When was the last time you remember seeing anyone do *preventive* maintenance on a toilet? It's not something people want to think about. So when things don't work quite right we just ignore it or jiggle the handle while it slowly gets worse and worse until it finally breaks.
BTW, I had to fix one a little while ago, and according to a do-it-yourself book, the most common point of failure is in rubber parts (especially the flapper valve) which degrade and must be periodically replaced. You can get more expensive synthetic ones that will last longer, but over time even those can suffer from deformation that will degrade the seal.
No offense to Don Norman, but come on, this is stretching it. When the goal is to ensure that one roll of toilet tissue is exhausted before the other, then it seems pretty obvious to me: finish one roll before starting the other. Duh. Anything that uses both is going to increase the likelihood that both run out at the same time.
You don't need to have a computer science degree to figure this out; you just need common sense.
In fact, thinking like a computer scientist might be what caused him incorrectly to consider a random algorithm in the first place.
Toilet paper? You guys actually wipe after pooping? I kinda enjoy the slippery, squishy feeling from leaving the klingons attached, especially when I've eaten a lot of greasy foods earlier, I'm wearing pants and it's a really hot day. And the aroma! Great googly-moogly!
Hmm. I find this analysis to be metaphorical of the
:-)
American two-party political process. Dispite
Kennedy's famous assertion, people join political
parties not for what they can give the party, but
what the party can give them. Like the toilet paper
dilema we subconsciously choose the "bigger roll",
as it were, because that party has "more" to offer.
We are oblivious to normative rate of decay in the
system because our initial strategy is a subconscious
one.
Write 3000 words on the subject.
Where have you been living? It's no longer called "toilet paper" -- it's now "toilet tissue!" My god, you people are so uncultured it's a wonder you don't spend all your time in front of a computer screen talking to people over some magical worldwide web.
[insert witty comment here]
not
An episode of the old Fox series 'Married with Children' had Al Bundy installing his own bathroon in the basement so he wouldn't have to share with the rest of the family. After going through a quest to find the right crapper, one with the most 'satisfying flush', he proudly mounted 4 TP dispensers on the wall so he would never be without.
I have to admit: I've come up with some pretty decent ideas in the bathroom and to have my thought process jarred by a missing roll of TP would be frustrating.
Furthermore, most homes have something nice and pretty called a "under-sink cabinet" in the bathroom, which is where you keep the extra toilet rolls when you have a one-roll holder. It solves the problem of which roll to take paper from (the one in the holder, not the one out of sight in the cabinet, in case you are part of the few percent of the population that doesn't get this). And that is why most homes don't bother with ugly, bulky, industrial-looking dual-roll toilet holders. People who have a separate room for their toilet and no under-sink cabinets usually install a little cabinet in that room, useful not only for holding toilet paper but also cleaning supplies.
Most normal people understand this. Most normal people know to look in the cabinet when they run out of toilet paper. (Most normal people also know not to keep any incriminating or unusual personal items there because they understand that other people will be looking there.)
I think the fact that one of the foremost HCI experts in the countries thinks it worthwhile to share his profound insights on this matter tells you a lot more about the state of HCI research than anything about toilet paper. Apparently, HCI researchers think that the rest of the country consists of idiots who don't even know what to do in the bathroom. In different words, I think a lot of HCI research is roughly at the same level of worrying about installing dual-roll toilet paper holders in the home.
Way back when I was a university student the department professor used to hold afternoon tea every Sunday and invite a handful of students. One day I received the invitation.
After a couple of cups of the stuff I had a set of floating teeth so asked where the toilet was (sorry, bathroom for our American readers). Whilst sitting on the throne I noticed that there were two rolls of toilet paper, one roll of the soft stuff and one roll of the hard stuff which for those of you who can't remember was like tracing paper.
After finishing up I went downstairs and carried on the art of polite conversation, but the two rolls of toilet paper were bugging me and so I had to ask. The lady of the house of course solved the mystery. The roll of soft paper was for normal use and the roll of hard paper was for use 'just in case Professor @~$)" had a sudden brilliant idea and needed to write it down before he forgot it.
Wonderful !!
Ed Almos
"When the roll empties, then what?"
Hire a certified consultant to wipe your butt.
One neglected aspect of this whole discussion is the all important physical placement of the roll holder.
One some toilets I've visited the arrangement fails to acknowledge that the distance to and / or placement of the roll holder relative to the actual toilet seat is an important design parameter.
On some of these poorly designed arrangements the roll is placed almost, but not entirely out of reach forcing one to leave the seat which we all know feels somewhat ackward. Others place the roll holder closely besides or even behind the actual toilet in such a way that you initially panic in search of it and - after discovering it - physically stress your body trying to find a way to get to the roll.
I think there's enough material in these observations for at least another paper on the subject.
naah sig schmig
I have what's called an "ostomy", in particular an ileostomy -- basically means that my large intestine has been cut off and the trailing end of the small intestine was put through the abdominal wall. Over this opening (called a "stoma") I have to wear a plastic bag, which hangs down my belly.
My butt, to continue the yucky details (what? you're still reading?), is now closed off. (Yes, I have a crack. Just no hole. Thankfully, I am not gay. Er.) The stool just goes into the bag. So no need to wash/wipe my tooshie anymore. But I *do* need to drain out the bag from time to time and clean it with -- you got it -- plain vanilla toilet paper. (Otherwise, brown stuff dribbles out the bottom of the bag...)
Anyway, I hope you weren't eating when I told you all this...
But such a toilet like you are describing would be a nightmare for me. I just hope people have good enough sense to just have plain old toilets without all the bells and whistles...then again, leave it to the Japanese to have a toilet like that.
for stupid people that store their toilet roll somewhere other than in the toilet.
I mean come on.
in my office building, one of the two rolls of paper is 'locked' by a little sticker which urges you to 'help save earth's resources by finishing the first roll first'- it also mentions that it is a patented device.
L
Dev elpizw tipota, dev phoboumai tipota eimai lephteros http://euclidian.org
Here's the best and simplest solution: Leave an extra roll or two on top of the water tank of the toilet.
It's simple and elagent.
Surely there can't be more than one or two "optimal" toilet-paper-dispensing solutions
Along those lines, I've wondered why urinal design hasn't converged on an optimal solution. It seems there's a new configuration every couple of years, yet the problems of back- and sidesplash have never been satisfactorily addressed.
Oh well, I guess that's what shoe polish is for.
Always take paper from the smallest roll.
Problem is: when the two rolls are about the same diameter, measurement error can make this degenerate to Algorithm Random, because it is hard to evaluate which roll is the largest. There is then a non-negligible chance that the user(s) never reach a state where one roll is unambiguously the smallest, and the two roll empty simultaneously. Actually, if users follow Algorithm Small and replenish empty rolls immediately (an admittedly theoretical assumption), it will always occur that the two rolls are the same size after less than two rolls worth of paper, so the above risk is very real.
We need a better algorithm. I've got one. I use the fact that paper rolls come with a glue seal on the first sheet, which helps us to formulate Algorithm Seal
Take paper from a nonempty unsealed roll.
On failure: unseal one roll an repeat the procedure.
On exit: please replace any empty roll with a new sealed roll.
First two steps are easy to memorize: just do the simplest possible thing to get paper.
I hereby place this work in the public domain.
-3Suns
~~~~
The Revolution will be Slashdotted
Duh.. its called rotating your stock.. This algorithm applies to pretty much any supply item which comes in seperately pacakged units.
For perishable items (prescriptions/food), it applies doubly so. Only have one package open, and use it up completely before opening the next. Always open the oldest package first (and if its too old for you to want to use it, dont open a newer one and save the older for later - it will just get older - if its too old to use now, throw it away)
Of course TP doesnt expire so it doesnt matter which one you open as long as its stored somewhere appropriate, but the 'only one open at a time' rule still applies..
TOILET PAPER METH? I have never understand that. Toilet paper is for wiping. Math is for comprehensive.
Bad Cops