Personally, I think there are two directions you can go. First, you use a pre-CS syllabus where you teach programming basics like bits and bytes. Second way is that you can use a syllabus where you stress computers for non-CS people which might include the Internet, file systems, etc.
We are aiming for a mix of both.
By the way, are bits and bytes "programming basics" or "implementation detail"?
This is, as i mentioned in the post, a first generation of teachers and students in this subject. A main goal of this exercise is to come up with a curriculum that does not scare people away.
In the next iteration of this exercise (which will happen perhaps five years from now) we get to deal with a set of students and (more importantly) teachers who have "seen" these things for a few years and so are comfortable with the next level.
Thank you, but I'm afraid most of your suggestions would be useful only a few iterations down the line.
Thanks for that link; we should be able to adapt it.
The teaching plan consists of 1.5 hours of classes and 1.5 hours of practicals, and if at all we decide to teach more Python, the stress would be on doing a lot of hands-on stuff.
Couple of things:
Irrespective of whether P = NP or not, there exists polynomial-time reductions from any problem in P to any NP-complete problem. I guess you meant it the other way round.
I am not sure in what sense you use the term "undecidable", but if (as it seems likely) you used it to mean independent , then your argument fails at steps 2 and 3.
A proof that P =? NP is undecidable has to only show that one can neither prove nor disprove this statement: it need not show that no polynomial-time reduction exists from from any NP-complete problem to any problem in P.
Slashdot needs a "sticky" so that we don't have to rehash this symantic issue every time it comes up. Zero day doesn't mean what most people claim it means.
Online at the above address -- works with any browser that supports JavaScript.
As a plugin for FireFox (and beta plugins for other browsers): Press F2 or type @@ at the beginning of a text field for the plugin to kick in.
As a webpage (the one at https://www.pwdhash.com/ )with JavaScript code that you can store on disk and open in any browser.
Constructs a one-way hash of
the password entered in a password (or other text) field, and
the domain name of the site where the password is used (both these can be entered manually in methods 1 and 3)
to get a domain-specific password.
Memorize one strong password and use this utility to get distinct passwords for each domain. The generated passwords are (usually) complicated enough to pass any conceivable non-triviality test.
Is anyone else dissapointed we don't already have this capability? I can stream Top Gear in HD from youtube in faster than real time but we lag this far behind in (optical? thermal?) imaging?
And what prevents you from inventing this capability for all of us, so that we are no longer disappointed? Just like the way you solved the streaming problem in the first place? Oh wait...
http://www.getdropbox.com/
Works perfectly for me. I use the free option, which has a 2 GB limit, which is more than enough for me to keep all my important stuff in sync. It has a client that integrates nicely with the Nautilus file browser on Ubuntu, which is what I use at home and office.
Whatever you put (or symlink) into a designated folder (which you can choose) gets mirrored to their server, from where it gets synced to every other system where you have installed the client, the next time you connect that system to the internet. They also give web-based access to the stored files.
There is the issue of privacy for the really paranoid, but I am not very concerned about that with the files I currently choose to mirror. I am more worried about the chance that their client develops a bug that wipes out my files, but I guess I'll take that risk.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I think there are two directions you can go. First, you use a pre-CS syllabus where you teach programming basics like bits and bytes. Second way is that you can use a syllabus where you stress computers for non-CS people which might include the Internet, file systems, etc.
We are aiming for a mix of both.
By the way, are bits and bytes "programming basics" or "implementation detail"?
I would think that such details as words, longwords, binary/octal/hex, OS, IO etc. more properly belong to a more advanced course in computing.
These are good candidates for inclusion. Thanks once again.
This is, as i mentioned in the post, a first generation of teachers and students in this subject. A main goal of this exercise is to come up with a curriculum that does not scare people away.
In the next iteration of this exercise (which will happen perhaps five years from now) we get to deal with a set of students and (more importantly) teachers who have "seen" these things for a few years and so are comfortable with the next level.
Thank you, but I'm afraid most of your suggestions would be useful only a few iterations down the line.
Thanks for that link; we should be able to adapt it.
The teaching plan consists of 1.5 hours of classes and 1.5 hours of practicals, and if at all we decide to teach more Python, the stress would be on doing a lot of hands-on stuff.
Couple of things: Irrespective of whether P = NP or not, there exists polynomial-time reductions from any problem in P to any NP-complete problem. I guess you meant it the other way round.
I am not sure in what sense you use the term "undecidable", but if (as it seems likely) you used it to mean independent , then your argument fails at steps 2 and 3.
A proof that P =? NP is undecidable has to only show that one can neither prove nor disprove this statement: it need not show that no polynomial-time reduction exists from from any NP-complete problem to any problem in P.
In other words, undecidable != false.
Slashdot needs a "sticky" so that we don't have to rehash this symantic issue every time it comes up. Zero day doesn't mean what most people claim it means.
"symantic" doesn't mean what you think it means.
Available in three ways:
Constructs a one-way hash of
to get a domain-specific password. Memorize one strong password and use this utility to get distinct passwords for each domain. The generated passwords are (usually) complicated enough to pass any conceivable non-triviality test.
Is anyone else dissapointed we don't already have this capability? I can stream Top Gear in HD from youtube in faster than real time but we lag this far behind in (optical? thermal?) imaging?
And what prevents you from inventing this capability for all of us, so that we are no longer disappointed? Just like the way you solved the streaming problem in the first place? Oh wait...
(If both steps are sufficiently efficient and the host platform is also x86, the compiled code may even be very similar to the original code.)
Why don't they just do away with the inefficient step of compiling it twice?
http://www.getdropbox.com/ Works perfectly for me. I use the free option, which has a 2 GB limit, which is more than enough for me to keep all my important stuff in sync. It has a client that integrates nicely with the Nautilus file browser on Ubuntu, which is what I use at home and office. Whatever you put (or symlink) into a designated folder (which you can choose) gets mirrored to their server, from where it gets synced to every other system where you have installed the client, the next time you connect that system to the internet. They also give web-based access to the stored files. There is the issue of privacy for the really paranoid, but I am not very concerned about that with the files I currently choose to mirror. I am more worried about the chance that their client develops a bug that wipes out my files, but I guess I'll take that risk.
188,000 results
How much do people in the US earn? This amount of money per month, is what is almost the total monthly salary in Europe is for many people!
This amount of money would be more than the yearly income of 99% of the people in India!
Would these people be the source of the reference to giants in Genesis?
Genesis 6:4 "There were giants in the earth in those days..."