3-sat asks a pretty simple question. Are there boolean variables (X1, X2, X3....) that satisfy a sequence of logical operations that look like:
(x1 OR x2 OR x3) AND
(x2 OR NOT x3 OR x4) AND...
Basically always composed of 3 OR conditions (possibly including NOT operations), joined by AND conditions. The 3 ORs is what makes it '3SAT'. There is also 2SAT, etc.
What is particularly interesting about 3SAT is that the difficulty of discovering the answer has been proved to be in NP-COMPLETE. Meaning that any other NP-COMPLETE problem can be converted to a 3SAT problem. So if you can solve 3SAT, you can solve any NP-COMPLETE problem.
It's a really interesting question. $9B will almost certainly buy all the pigeons. But then, so would $1B. So then you have to ask, how much of a pigeon breeding industry can $9B create? What will happen to that infrastructure when the buying spree runs out? You have to feed your pigeons too, how much economy of scale can be achieved in pigeon food production? The pigeons have to keep going for ten years, what does the turnover rate look like, and is that sustainable when there's a risk of noncontinuation after the first decade?
Yeah, that's going to kill Hulu, I bet. The number of people who just aren't going to watch commercials with their content any more is going nowhere but up.
As a manager, I have never done that. Usually I make immediate decisions based on past experience. If neither data nor my experience is available, it's my responsibility to go find more experience.
Make tough decisions, and even recommend them.
Which requires taking responsibility (e.g. losing your extra pay) for the wrong ones. I see very few managers do this. (Same issue applies to the first item, and otherwise they definitely aren't earning their extra money, they're just getting it).
Protect those below from other departments.
This means you are an active participant in organizational dysfunction. Again, not earning your higher pay.
Condense and filter input from those below to be useful for those above.
A genuinely useful skill. Very rare.
Make "we're late and over budget" sound like "we make you rich".
Another "participant in organizational dysfunction" item.
Look interested and not bored for a second when an investor or customer babbles for six hours straight.
A genuinely useful skill. Very rare.
Some people can, some can't. And yes, many managers fail at this too.
I'd have to say most. Until the average comes up, I can't feel like managers 'earn' their pay.
You have people fresh out of the military running IT? Ouch... they're typically hardly qualified to be a low level employee. Military IT processes are just too different.
"In business he was a deceitful backstabbing manipulative bastard. "
Which I take to mean: Bill Gates is evil. (With which I agree). It does take a little bit of interpretation on those actions to conclude that he therefore stole most of his money. But it's not a far leap.
You then state: "And now his is spending billions on his philanthropy. I won't dismiss that Gates is/was an ass, but he does deserve some credit."
So he gets credit for giving away a portion of what he took from others through backstabbing and manipulation. Personally, I don't think so. He can get credit from me when he's given away ALL but the fairly earned portion. When he has under a billion left, let me know.
Because it's the right thing to do. The pope is infallible, so it must have been right. Since it was right, it must have been what God wanted. Apparently, God is pro-pedophile.
Guns are a little different from your other cases because having killed a person, you've only proved the guns fitness for purpose. You've made any liability suit for poor design harder, not easier, in that case.
Well, given the kids were said to have broken in, if the parents didn't volunteer to replace the dishes, and said dishes were sufficiently expensive to replace... I could well imagine using small claims court to repair that defect in the parents.
Some people like to eat using fancy dishes. Like $500+ per plate. Not me, but I'm just saying, this scenario could have been about a serious amount of money. Less so if you eat off of $0.25 IKEA plates.
Since Ford had the option to but in a breath-lock starter system, but instead chose a shitty non-breath-lock starter system to save costs, should they be held liable?
Slashdot Mirror
The clauses in 3sat are required to be disjunctions (OR).
3-sat asks a pretty simple question. Are there boolean variables (X1, X2, X3 ....) that satisfy a sequence of logical operations that look like:
(x1 OR x2 OR x3) AND ...
(x2 OR NOT x3 OR x4) AND
Basically always composed of 3 OR conditions (possibly including NOT operations), joined by AND conditions. The 3 ORs is what makes it '3SAT'. There is also 2SAT, etc.
What is particularly interesting about 3SAT is that the difficulty of discovering the answer has been proved to be in NP-COMPLETE. Meaning that any other NP-COMPLETE problem can be converted to a 3SAT problem. So if you can solve 3SAT, you can solve any NP-COMPLETE problem.
If you let that kind of post get to you, slashdot is of no use to you.
Integer factorization is not (yet) np-complete, so technically no one can do what you are asking, even if they have a legitimate proof of p=np.
Do you have evidence that RSA security rests on P != NP? Because I'm pretty sure none of R, S, nor A have figured that out.
It's a really interesting question. $9B will almost certainly buy all the pigeons. But then, so would $1B. So then you have to ask, how much of a pigeon breeding industry can $9B create? What will happen to that infrastructure when the buying spree runs out? You have to feed your pigeons too, how much economy of scale can be achieved in pigeon food production? The pigeons have to keep going for ten years, what does the turnover rate look like, and is that sustainable when there's a risk of noncontinuation after the first decade?
In addition to the reasons listed by others, self destruct mechanisms have mass. Mass is very expensive to lift into orbit.
Because it's hard to get licensed to put up a wire into the sky because of the risk of catching planes. Even in pretty remote areas.
In step 2, you start a repair service that corrects the problems caused by 1.
You should really invest the $0 an ad-blocker will cost you.
Yeah, that's going to kill Hulu, I bet. The number of people who just aren't going to watch commercials with their content any more is going nowhere but up.
Ability to:
Make immediate decisions with little data.
As a manager, I have never done that. Usually I make immediate decisions based on past experience. If neither data nor my experience is available, it's my responsibility to go find more experience.
Make tough decisions, and even recommend them.
Which requires taking responsibility (e.g. losing your extra pay) for the wrong ones. I see very few managers do this. (Same issue applies to the first item, and otherwise they definitely aren't earning their extra money, they're just getting it).
Protect those below from other departments.
This means you are an active participant in organizational dysfunction. Again, not earning your higher pay.
Condense and filter input from those below to be useful for those above.
A genuinely useful skill. Very rare.
Make "we're late and over budget" sound like "we make you rich".
Another "participant in organizational dysfunction" item.
Look interested and not bored for a second when an investor or customer babbles for six hours straight.
A genuinely useful skill. Very rare.
Some people can, some can't. And yes, many managers fail at this too.
I'd have to say most. Until the average comes up, I can't feel like managers 'earn' their pay.
You have people fresh out of the military running IT? Ouch ... they're typically hardly qualified to be a low level employee. Military IT processes are just too different.
So the goal of a non-profit business is to make a profit?
I interpreted you the same way. You said:
"In business he was a deceitful backstabbing manipulative bastard. "
Which I take to mean: Bill Gates is evil. (With which I agree). It does take a little bit of interpretation on those actions to conclude that he therefore stole most of his money. But it's not a far leap.
You then state:
"And now his is spending billions on his philanthropy. I won't dismiss that Gates is/was an ass, but he does deserve some credit."
So he gets credit for giving away a portion of what he took from others through backstabbing and manipulation. Personally, I don't think so. He can get credit from me when he's given away ALL but the fairly earned portion. When he has under a billion left, let me know.
Because it's the right thing to do. The pope is infallible, so it must have been right. Since it was right, it must have been what God wanted. Apparently, God is pro-pedophile.
I don't know, he might be responsible for more deaths by now.
Depends on if they advertise their lock as being immune to picking in order to increase sales.
Guns are a little different from your other cases because having killed a person, you've only proved the guns fitness for purpose. You've made any liability suit for poor design harder, not easier, in that case.
Precisely. Most of them didn't even move.
Well, given the kids were said to have broken in, if the parents didn't volunteer to replace the dishes, and said dishes were sufficiently expensive to replace ... I could well imagine using small claims court to repair that defect in the parents.
Some people like to eat using fancy dishes. Like $500+ per plate. Not me, but I'm just saying, this scenario could have been about a serious amount of money. Less so if you eat off of $0.25 IKEA plates.
Since Ford had the option to but in a breath-lock starter system, but instead chose a shitty non-breath-lock starter system to save costs, should they be held liable?
I only claimed the evidence was better than for Santa Clause.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1097-4679(197410)30:4%3C577::AID-JCLP2270300434%3E3.0.CO;2-8/abstract
The capricans were responsible for a massive genocide ... what did the sagitarons do to make it a 'demotion'?