If you allow for multiple possible pairs of edge mappings the problem is not just not solvable in polynomial time, it is not solvable at all. because multiple arrangements can match, and despite not being described formally, the goal is pretty obviously to find "the" solution and not "a" solution.
It's not NP-complete. You can determine whether two pieces fit together in constant time so you can find a match for a given piece in O(n) time. The paper is planar, so the number of "matchings" is linear in n. Find a match in O(n) time O(n) times and you got yourself a quadratic problem.
Wouldn't be forced to testify, no. But evidence is still presented and used without the accused/defendant testifying on it. In any case, I didn't mean to make any claims regarding "should" just to comment that the asymmetry, justified or not, seems odd.
There's also the issue of cultural norms. What people in one country might consider to be corrupt, people in another might think is fine behavior or so commonplace that despite being bad it's expected and so doesn't count.
My first thought was that corruption is already illegal.
My second thought was that making something illegal doesn't stop it from being done.
Then I saw "Corporate donations, professional lobbyists, etc." Your examples of "corruption" aren't corruption at all. You just want to shut up people you don't like.
No, it's gone up greatly in the last few decades because it's becoming harder and harder to draw a living wage without a degree. Even jobs that don't require a degree are increasingly likely to have a degree listed as a requirement.
Chicken, meet egg. If two people are up for the job and they are otherwise equal, I may as well pick the guy with the degree since that proves at least a little bit about his intelligence and perseverance. That pushes down relative demand for the degreeless, and hence, wages. So now college degrees are of value even in fields where they have very little meaning. Well, since the degree has value more people will get them. If more people have degrees, then it will become more common for a person with a degree to be seeking a job that really doesn't require one. Repeat.
What makes this particularly troubling is that nobody in the cycle is really doing anything irrational or wrong. Placing less value on the degree in the case where it's irrelevant would help. Less willingness to seek an irrelevant degree would as well. If a degree cost more either monetarily or in terms of effort/difficulty that might actually make a big difference.
No. It's a real attempt to solve a genuine security issue dealing with threats like a boot sector virus. The only security implication is that in this one single way the other OS is less secure, and it will actually be true.
Ah, but now you're talking about the market in which people know exactly what they want and how to ask for it. If you're selling a board for the server market, then you're a fool to eliminate half your potential customers by supporting only Windows.
400+ years? When the hell are you counting from? Are you referring to pre-Columbian Amerindian civilizations? If so that's a lot more than 400 years of slavery.
The laws you mention sound an awful lot like they are respecting the fact that religions exist not respecting the establishment of one. The law is allowed to recognize that such a thing as religion exists; it's not allowed to establish, prefer, promote, or otherwise favor any of them over one another or over their absence. Really would you want to read that the way you suggest? A legal system that is required to stick its fingers in its ears and yell "la la la, I can't hear you" when dealing with facts on the ground is crippled.
That's a pretty accurate recount over the years by my memory as well. But I think you skipped the GTS 250 between the 8800 and the 6950. Alas, I'm still on that generation, and Battlefield 3 appears to demand a lot more.
Slashdot Mirror
For N items, there are N! ways to arrange them. That doesn't make sorting an N! problem.
If you allow for multiple possible pairs of edge mappings the problem is not just not solvable in polynomial time, it is not solvable at all. because multiple arrangements can match, and despite not being described formally, the goal is pretty obviously to find "the" solution and not "a" solution.
It's not NP-complete. You can determine whether two pieces fit together in constant time so you can find a match for a given piece in O(n) time. The paper is planar, so the number of "matchings" is linear in n. Find a match in O(n) time O(n) times and you got yourself a quadratic problem.
Well, did the first-responders fix the phone or not? TFA doesn't say.
Wouldn't be forced to testify, no. But evidence is still presented and used without the accused/defendant testifying on it. In any case, I didn't mean to make any claims regarding "should" just to comment that the asymmetry, justified or not, seems odd.
Not really, there's still discovery which is where all that stuff comes out anyway.
Right. No argument there. No argument at all really. I was just commenting that limiting the protection to criminal cases strikes me as an odd choice.
Does it seem strange to anyone else that while in a criminal trial you can't be compelled to testify against yourself, in a civil trial you can be?
I liked it the one time I tried back in '03. Can anyone with modern experience with both compare portage and apt?
So you want to eat children? Because that's exactly what you're proposing. Oh, hey there non sequiter.
You're being a bit uncharitable. He argued in the form "X does Y," not "X only does Y."
There's also the issue of cultural norms. What people in one country might consider to be corrupt, people in another might think is fine behavior or so commonplace that despite being bad it's expected and so doesn't count.
My second thought was that making something illegal doesn't stop it from being done.
Then I saw "Corporate donations, professional lobbyists, etc." Your examples of "corruption" aren't corruption at all. You just want to shut up people you don't like.
The average person does not participate in a given business or research program. The average voter does participate in a democracy.
No, it's gone up greatly in the last few decades because it's becoming harder and harder to draw a living wage without a degree. Even jobs that don't require a degree are increasingly likely to have a degree listed as a requirement.
Chicken, meet egg. If two people are up for the job and they are otherwise equal, I may as well pick the guy with the degree since that proves at least a little bit about his intelligence and perseverance. That pushes down relative demand for the degreeless, and hence, wages. So now college degrees are of value even in fields where they have very little meaning. Well, since the degree has value more people will get them. If more people have degrees, then it will become more common for a person with a degree to be seeking a job that really doesn't require one. Repeat. What makes this particularly troubling is that nobody in the cycle is really doing anything irrational or wrong. Placing less value on the degree in the case where it's irrelevant would help. Less willingness to seek an irrelevant degree would as well. If a degree cost more either monetarily or in terms of effort/difficulty that might actually make a big difference.
query: "jazzlad" first result: www.jazzlad.com/
No. It's a real attempt to solve a genuine security issue dealing with threats like a boot sector virus. The only security implication is that in this one single way the other OS is less secure, and it will actually be true.
Ah, but now you're talking about the market in which people know exactly what they want and how to ask for it. If you're selling a board for the server market, then you're a fool to eliminate half your potential customers by supporting only Windows.
My, what an eccentric asteroid.
Microsoft's Origami from way back in 2006 was an even better concept that failed to take off.
Don't forget Barringer Crater, which of course could happen anywhere.
400+ years? When the hell are you counting from? Are you referring to pre-Columbian Amerindian civilizations? If so that's a lot more than 400 years of slavery.
The laws you mention sound an awful lot like they are respecting the fact that religions exist not respecting the establishment of one. The law is allowed to recognize that such a thing as religion exists; it's not allowed to establish, prefer, promote, or otherwise favor any of them over one another or over their absence. Really would you want to read that the way you suggest? A legal system that is required to stick its fingers in its ears and yell "la la la, I can't hear you" when dealing with facts on the ground is crippled.
As to your power comment, the FAQs page on their website claims it runs on 4 AA batteries.
That's a pretty accurate recount over the years by my memory as well. But I think you skipped the GTS 250 between the 8800 and the 6950. Alas, I'm still on that generation, and Battlefield 3 appears to demand a lot more.