Gas (fuel) is methane (usually), natural gas when there is a need to be explicit. Otherwise it's propane, butane, occasionally ethane. (gas stove)
Gas never means petroleum. I cannot think of a case where gas would refer to a solid or liquid. The nearest I can think of is LNG. Even in the case of petroleum fumes we'd use petroleum vapour and not petroleum gas.
A gas pedal would control the flow of a gas.
Where Americans would say "stepped on the gas", in the UK we would say "floored the throttle"
Commonly, our town centre pavements are paved using paving slabs. Out of the town centre, tarmac or concrete is also common.
Our roads are usually tarmacked using tarmac.
Other than some private estates and some roads where there's no clear distinction between the pedestrian and car part of the road, I cannot think of anywhere where there are paved roads. Roads are tarmac or concrete or, less commonly, cobbled. I would guess that paved roads don't stand up to HGVs (now LGVs) particularly well.
That doesn't explain why many companies tried telecommuting, found the results disappointing, and went back to requiring everyone to come to the office.
One word: Windows.
In my last job I had a linux desktop and when I worked from home it was almost like being at my desk. I only tended to do occasional days from home, if it had been for weeks or months at a time I'd have got a better graphics card and more screens at home but a dual screen setup was almost as good as a four screen setup that I had at work.
In this job I still do ALL my work on a unix server. But my desktop is a company mandated windows installation - which I then run an X server on and do almost everything in that window.
When I work from home I have to use Citrix Receiver to login to my desktop. Citrix receiver won't (at least for me) work across multiple screens, so I'm tied to one screen which hurts productivity.
Then, the next day I get into work and windows has changed my keyboard mapping to a US mapping (keyboard at home and work are the same). My X server windows have been resized and cannot be restored without logging out of all the xterms I have running. In fact, the simplest thing to do is to reboot when I get back into the office
And windows takes 15+ minutes to login. The context switch from one day to the next is bad enough, especially if you've got incomplete work that needs continuing rather than a new subtask to start but I'm usually thinking about that on my way in so I can start immediately, but one work from home day and the next day that commute that I was using to benefit work is wasted because windows causes so many frustrations to sort it out again.
I like going into the office. I don't want to work from home more than just occasionally. But that occasionally is important to me and I wouldn't work for a company that didn't allow it.
One or two developers still have a linux desktop at work - but TPTB hate them, it's only because they're "legacy" that they've got them and there is absolutely no chance of me getting one (plus I suspect even the ones with a linux desktop have to Cygwin to a windows machine and then ssh to their linux machine although they at least won't be bothered by windows getting confused about what keyboad map to use)
To be fair, it might actually be citrix that is the problem rather than windows but I see them as all part of the same problem.
Can you prove primes can't be factored in polynomial time?
PRIMES is in P. The question is N prime can be decided in polynomial time. If the answer is yes (N prime) then it's prime factorization is trivially N.
but proving a specific problem is a so-called NP-intermediate does not seem to be the same as proving P!=NP
Huh? Of course it is!
The question "Does P = NP?" says "Are all problems in NP also in P?" or, conversely, "Is there any problem in NP that is not in P?"
Finding even one problem that is in NP but not in P is sufficient to decide P != NP.
Because there are countless known NP-complete problems, if any problem (whether or not it was NP complete) was shown to be in NP but not in P then it would automatically follow that all NP-complete problems are also not in P.
I think where you're getting confused is that showing a given NP problem (that is not NP complete) is actually in P doesn't tell you anything about P=NP. As one fairly recent example (15 years ago now I google it) - PRIMES was shown to be in P https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
I think it's careless wording - people using NP to mean the subset of NP that is not in P.
Using this casual wording the question " Does P=NP?" becomes "Is NP empty?"
Of course, NP (and P) are sets of decision problems so factoring itself isn't in either of them - although there are decision problems in NP that can be used to factor.
OK, I got a bit careless there. You really need to talk about decision problems. But the decision problem does N have a factor = k can trivially be converted to an algorithm to factor using a binary search.
Either a given NP problem is in P - in which case it's also a P problem, or it's not in P, in which case P!=NP.
The two (obvious) routes to deciding P=NP is either to find an NP-complete problem that is also in P (proving P=NP) or finding an NP problem (doesn't need to be NP-complete in this case) that is not in P (proving that P!=NP)
Factoring is in NP but not known whether it's in NP-complete - it would be very surprising if it were but it could be (last I knew) - but it's also not known to be in P - and that would raise some eyebrows too were it to be proved. But factoring could be proved to be in P without affecting the P=NP question.
They can still prove that P = NP for specific cases
This makes no sense at all. Everything in P is also in NP. Therefore every P problem is also an NP problem that can be solved in polynomial time - but that's nothing to do with proving "P=NP for specific cases"
The expected answer means we will have cryptographic security available indefinitely.
I assume you're talking about asymmetric encryption. (Correctly used) OTP already gives perfect security symmetric encryption.
We may have to keep switching algorithms, but in principle there will always be an algorithm out there that can't be quickly bypassed.
Does this follow? AFAIAA all public key encryption requires a "trapdoor function" and I'm not aware of any that are NP Complete. Unless something has changed in the many years since I last looked at this that means that it's perfectly possible for P!=NP but there is no safe public key encryption method.
Evidence that P = NP (or one is a subset of the other) means all cryptography is doomed to fail.
I'm not sure even this is true for public key cryptography - what if factoring was found to be in P but with a polynomial of order 10^300. Then the RSA algorithm could be safe for sufficiently large primes even if P==NP
Huh? That double negatives means you wrote "he's one of the minority that is lactose tolerant", and there are too many cats who love (cow's) milk for that to make sense.
I have no idea about cats but it's perfectly possible for them to be lactose intolerant and also to like milk.
You will have no trouble getting a dog to eat normal chocolate - but it will kill the dog.
At the very least you should ensure that your cat's diet is fortified with Taurine. Much like humans need to eat fruit and veg in order to avoid scurvy, cats need meat and fish in order to get Taurine. (Cats produce their own vitamin C so do not need it in their diet. Ditto for humans and Taurine)
I'm surprised that your cat "loves fruit and vegetables." That might indicate that it's a very successful hunter and is getting plenty of fresh meat from birds and small mammals. Whether that is a bad thing probably depends on the environment that you live in.
At 100% relative humidity, even 36-37C is in fact deadly
A wet bulb temperature of 36-37C isn't just deadly, it's rapidly deadly. Your core body temperature will be at least 2C above your skin temperature which cannot be below the wet bulb temperature.
Loading, unloading is still a problem. What about when everybody wants to leave at the end of the day? They'll all be stuck in cars waiting for the ground floor unload position to become free.
And what's the advantage of having two shafts and a parking space over having three shafts? Uses the same floor space.
I could imagine that the sideways thing could be the main benefit.
Imagine a ten story building with two lift shafts and 10 cars. In a quiescent state there's one car parked on each floor.
During light times, someone gets into a lift, the cars above or below move out of the way and then it travels to the required floor. The cars it has passed simultaneously shuffle up or down one floor and you're back to the quiescent state. In busy times there can be one up and one down shaft - but there doesn't need to be the same wait time, indeed the lifts could be positioned every other floor.
Biggest issue with this I can see is the loading/unloading time. Ideally you'd want to do something similar to the way some London underground stations work where people leaving the lift go out through a different door to those entering the lift. Which may defeat any space savings from having fewer lift shafts.
What I'm not sure about is whether the lift can safely move sideways while people are in it. Feels to me as though trying to stand in such a lift would be like trying to stand on a train or boat where the sideways forces require significant strength and coordination to remain standing unsupported.
If the cars have multiple doors then you could have four lift shafts in a square array and every car would have four available directions to move.
Of course, what you could do is open the doors and then rapidly move the lift sideways, ejecting the people out of the door (a-la pulling the table cloth off the table without disturbing what is on the table) and readying the lift for the next load;-)
Now, why do companies use spaces over tabs? I'm not sure about that.
Because it's almost impossible to enforce consistent tab indenting. Apart from anything else you'll get passive-aggressive coders who will have a single tab at the start of every line and then use spaces.
So even if space's weren't the right choice, it wins politically as you can enforce a "no tabs" policy. (Makefiles excepted)
Indenting only works when you have a fixed space (5 in this case) tab width.
Even if you decide to deny the ability to line up comments across different indent levels, I've not come across an editor that can correctly insert tabs and spaces into the blank line you add to get across to the RH side to continue your comment.
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) The DUP is in favour of Northern Ireland leaving the EU but says that Brexit does not mean "leaving Europe". It adds that it will prioritise maintaining the CTA between the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Aims: frictionless border with the Irish Republic; assisting those working or travelling in the other jurisdiction Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from the Irish Republic into the broader UK market comprehensive free trade and customs agreement with the EU arrangements to facilitate ease of movement of people, goods and services
Comprehensive free trade and customs agreement, ease of movement of people, goods and services doesn't sound hard brexit to me.
TM doesn't need the DUP support to form a minority government.
What she does need is enough MPs who won't cause her to lose a no confidence vote (or something like failing to get the budget through parliament which would probably trigger another general election)
Indeed. But the LibDems also had the option to walk away and let the Tories form a minority government. The LibDems could have continued to support the Tories on an adhoc basis without agreeing to support them on tuition fees. The LibDems chose to sacrifice their headline policy to get a few cabinet ministers (and a PR referendum that the Tories were free to campaign against)
Let's face it - so do the Tories [want soft brexit]
No! That's the entire source of the utter mess we find ourselves in from DC agreeing to a referendum if he was elected PM right through to TM calling this general election.
The Tory party is split through the middle with hard brexiteers and remainers. All of this kerfuffle is down to the PM of the day trying to get some authority over one side or another.
If TM agrees to a "Norwegian" brexit for the DUP then she will be overthrown by the hard brexit corner of her party.
I really cannot see how we can get anything other than "no deal, WTO rules" or "please sir, can we stay in the game" come May 2019 - possibly we'll get to choose via a second referendum - because I don't see how any Tory PM can get any deal agreed with the EU accepted by the parliamentary Tory party.
Slashdot Mirror
Gas (fuel) is methane (usually), natural gas when there is a need to be explicit. Otherwise it's propane, butane, occasionally ethane. (gas stove)
Gas never means petroleum. I cannot think of a case where gas would refer to a solid or liquid. The nearest I can think of is LNG. Even in the case of petroleum fumes we'd use petroleum vapour and not petroleum gas.
A gas pedal would control the flow of a gas.
Where Americans would say "stepped on the gas", in the UK we would say "floored the throttle"
Commonly, our town centre pavements are paved using paving slabs. Out of the town centre, tarmac or concrete is also common.
Our roads are usually tarmacked using tarmac.
Other than some private estates and some roads where there's no clear distinction between the pedestrian and car part of the road, I cannot think of anywhere where there are paved roads. Roads are tarmac or concrete or, less commonly, cobbled. I would guess that paved roads don't stand up to HGVs (now LGVs) particularly well.
"Cygwin to a windows machine" should, of course, be "citrix to a windows machine"
Needless to say, cygwin is a lifesaver.
One word: Windows.
In my last job I had a linux desktop and when I worked from home it was almost like being at my desk. I only tended to do occasional days from home, if it had been for weeks or months at a time I'd have got a better graphics card and more screens at home but a dual screen setup was almost as good as a four screen setup that I had at work.
In this job I still do ALL my work on a unix server. But my desktop is a company mandated windows installation - which I then run an X server on and do almost everything in that window.
When I work from home I have to use Citrix Receiver to login to my desktop. Citrix receiver won't (at least for me) work across multiple screens, so I'm tied to one screen which hurts productivity.
Then, the next day I get into work and windows has changed my keyboard mapping to a US mapping (keyboard at home and work are the same). My X server windows have been resized and cannot be restored without logging out of all the xterms I have running. In fact, the simplest thing to do is to reboot when I get back into the office
And windows takes 15+ minutes to login. The context switch from one day to the next is bad enough, especially if you've got incomplete work that needs continuing rather than a new subtask to start but I'm usually thinking about that on my way in so I can start immediately, but one work from home day and the next day that commute that I was using to benefit work is wasted because windows causes so many frustrations to sort it out again.
I like going into the office. I don't want to work from home more than just occasionally. But that occasionally is important to me and I wouldn't work for a company that didn't allow it.
One or two developers still have a linux desktop at work - but TPTB hate them, it's only because they're "legacy" that they've got them and there is absolutely no chance of me getting one (plus I suspect even the ones with a linux desktop have to Cygwin to a windows machine and then ssh to their linux machine although they at least won't be bothered by windows getting confused about what keyboad map to use)
To be fair, it might actually be citrix that is the problem rather than windows but I see them as all part of the same problem.
Wikipedia tells me that extreme energy cosmic rays (>5x10e19 eV) are limited to about 160 million light years.
Trouble with astronomy is that this can be close or far depending on how you squint when you look at it :-)
Also google the oh-my-god particle which was estimated at 3x10e20 eV.
PRIMES is in P. The question is N prime can be decided in polynomial time. If the answer is yes (N prime) then it's prime factorization is trivially N.
Huh? Of course it is!
The question "Does P = NP?" says "Are all problems in NP also in P?" or, conversely, "Is there any problem in NP that is not in P?"
Finding even one problem that is in NP but not in P is sufficient to decide P != NP.
Because there are countless known NP-complete problems, if any problem (whether or not it was NP complete) was shown to be in NP but not in P then it would automatically follow that all NP-complete problems are also not in P.
I think where you're getting confused is that showing a given NP problem (that is not NP complete) is actually in P doesn't tell you anything about P=NP. As one fairly recent example (15 years ago now I google it) - PRIMES was shown to be in P https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
I think it's careless wording - people using NP to mean the subset of NP that is not in P.
Using this casual wording the question " Does P=NP?" becomes "Is NP empty?"
Of course, NP (and P) are sets of decision problems so factoring itself isn't in either of them - although there are decision problems in NP that can be used to factor.
Grrr
Does N have a factor <= k
OK, I got a bit careless there. You really need to talk about decision problems. But the decision problem does N have a factor = k can trivially be converted to an algorithm to factor using a binary search.
Huh?
Either a given NP problem is in P - in which case it's also a P problem, or it's not in P, in which case P!=NP.
The two (obvious) routes to deciding P=NP is either to find an NP-complete problem that is also in P (proving P=NP) or finding an NP problem (doesn't need to be NP-complete in this case) that is not in P (proving that P!=NP)
Factoring is in NP but not known whether it's in NP-complete - it would be very surprising if it were but it could be (last I knew) - but it's also not known to be in P - and that would raise some eyebrows too were it to be proved. But factoring could be proved to be in P without affecting the P=NP question.
This makes no sense at all. Everything in P is also in NP. Therefore every P problem is also an NP problem that can be solved in polynomial time - but that's nothing to do with proving "P=NP for specific cases"
I assume you're talking about asymmetric encryption. (Correctly used) OTP already gives perfect security symmetric encryption.
Does this follow? AFAIAA all public key encryption requires a "trapdoor function" and I'm not aware of any that are NP Complete. Unless something has changed in the many years since I last looked at this that means that it's perfectly possible for P!=NP but there is no safe public key encryption method.
I'm not sure even this is true for public key cryptography - what if factoring was found to be in P but with a polynomial of order 10^300. Then the RSA algorithm could be safe for sufficiently large primes even if P==NP
Huh? That double negatives means you wrote "he's one of the minority that is lactose tolerant", and there are too many cats who love (cow's) milk for that to make sense.
I have no idea about cats but it's perfectly possible for them to be lactose intolerant and also to like milk.
You will have no trouble getting a dog to eat normal chocolate - but it will kill the dog.
And my cat loves fruit and vegetables.
At the very least you should ensure that your cat's diet is fortified with Taurine. Much like humans need to eat fruit and veg in order to avoid scurvy, cats need meat and fish in order to get Taurine. (Cats produce their own vitamin C so do not need it in their diet. Ditto for humans and Taurine)
I'm surprised that your cat "loves fruit and vegetables." That might indicate that it's a very successful hunter and is getting plenty of fresh meat from birds and small mammals. Whether that is a bad thing probably depends on the environment that you live in.
A wet bulb temperature of 36-37C isn't just deadly, it's rapidly deadly. Your core body temperature will be at least 2C above your skin temperature which cannot be below the wet bulb temperature.
Loading, unloading is still a problem. What about when everybody wants to leave at the end of the day? They'll all be stuck in cars waiting for the ground floor unload position to become free.
And what's the advantage of having two shafts and a parking space over having three shafts? Uses the same floor space.
I could imagine that the sideways thing could be the main benefit.
Imagine a ten story building with two lift shafts and 10 cars. In a quiescent state there's one car parked on each floor.
During light times, someone gets into a lift, the cars above or below move out of the way and then it travels to the required floor. The cars it has passed simultaneously shuffle up or down one floor and you're back to the quiescent state. In busy times there can be one up and one down shaft - but there doesn't need to be the same wait time, indeed the lifts could be positioned every other floor.
Biggest issue with this I can see is the loading/unloading time. Ideally you'd want to do something similar to the way some London underground stations work where people leaving the lift go out through a different door to those entering the lift. Which may defeat any space savings from having fewer lift shafts.
What I'm not sure about is whether the lift can safely move sideways while people are in it. Feels to me as though trying to stand in such a lift would be like trying to stand on a train or boat where the sideways forces require significant strength and coordination to remain standing unsupported.
If the cars have multiple doors then you could have four lift shafts in a square array and every car would have four available directions to move.
Of course, what you could do is open the doors and then rapidly move the lift sideways, ejecting the people out of the door (a-la pulling the table cloth off the table without disturbing what is on the table) and readying the lift for the next load ;-)
Eighty? Eight!
Because it's almost impossible to enforce consistent tab indenting. Apart from anything else you'll get passive-aggressive coders who will have a single tab at the start of every line and then use spaces.
So even if space's weren't the right choice, it wins politically as you can enforce a "no tabs" policy. (Makefiles excepted)
<tab>this line...........//1 tab, 9 characters, 11 spaces to comment
<tab><tab>new level......//2 tabs, 9 characters, 6 spaces
Indenting only works when you have a fixed space (5 in this case) tab width.
Even if you decide to deny the ability to line up comments across different indent levels, I've not come across an editor that can correctly insert tabs and spaces into the blank line you add to get across to the RH side to continue your comment.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/elec...
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)
The DUP is in favour of Northern Ireland leaving the EU but says that Brexit does not mean "leaving Europe".
It adds that it will prioritise maintaining the CTA between the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
Aims:
frictionless border with the Irish Republic; assisting those working or travelling in the other jurisdiction
Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from the Irish Republic into the broader UK market
comprehensive free trade and customs agreement with the EU
arrangements to facilitate ease of movement of people, goods and services
Comprehensive free trade and customs agreement, ease of movement of people, goods and services doesn't sound hard brexit to me.
TM doesn't need the DUP support to form a minority government.
What she does need is enough MPs who won't cause her to lose a no confidence vote (or something like failing to get the budget through parliament which would probably trigger another general election)
Indeed. But the LibDems also had the option to walk away and let the Tories form a minority government. The LibDems could have continued to support the Tories on an adhoc basis without agreeing to support them on tuition fees. The LibDems chose to sacrifice their headline policy to get a few cabinet ministers (and a PR referendum that the Tories were free to campaign against)
No! That's the entire source of the utter mess we find ourselves in from DC agreeing to a referendum if he was elected PM right through to TM calling this general election.
The Tory party is split through the middle with hard brexiteers and remainers. All of this kerfuffle is down to the PM of the day trying to get some authority over one side or another.
If TM agrees to a "Norwegian" brexit for the DUP then she will be overthrown by the hard brexit corner of her party.
I really cannot see how we can get anything other than "no deal, WTO rules" or "please sir, can we stay in the game" come May 2019 - possibly we'll get to choose via a second referendum - because I don't see how any Tory PM can get any deal agreed with the EU accepted by the parliamentary Tory party.