As a 19-yr old male who has looked at plenty of porn, I'd just like to comment on how it, to the best of my knowledge, has not made my 20-yr-old girlfriend any less attractive/desirable to me. For the most part, we only have sex in the missionary position (not exactly taboo or anything) but that's plenty satisfying for me despite having seen pr0n featuring much crazier sex acts. The only dissapointment was the expected lack of pr0nstar-lasting ability.
As a student and amateur/hobbyist programmer, if a tool costs more than $0, I consider it expensive. I just don't pay for development tools, especially since there are plenty of free alternatives (eclipse *drool*). i'm just not at a point where i feel like spending money on developers tools when I can already develop for free and I have no intention of selling or even distributing for the most part any software I write. It's the same reason I use Octave instead of matlab despite the incomptibility hassles I've run into. I'm not paying $100 for software that I'm not going to make any money off of using. And that's one of the cheaper programs I''ve had to use at school. Microsoft is smart in realizing that many young hobbyist programmers arelimiting themselves to free/dirt-cheap tools. There's perceived benefit from using the expensive stuff doesn't justify the cost IMHO.
Not to sound all whiny, but I have VERY limited choice for who to vote for in the next election, not to mention, there's about 0% chance that Bush will win my state so my vote is most likely worthless (I'm still voting just in case those polls are wrong). Being able to vote for 1 of 2 candidates, when you like neither isn't that much influence especially when most states most likely wont even be close enough for your vote to relly mean anything (i.e., change the outcome of the election) in and of itself. The problem, IMHO, with the US gov't is that it's too democratic (and most people, IMHO, aren't educated/knowledgable enough to know which candidate is best for them) and I have very different values from most of the population which means I'm often overshadowed by the majority. Like the quote says, Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. not too fair for the sheep
My taskbar is that crowded even w/ tabbed IM windows I'm out of space.
Re:Someone please explain this to me.
on
Mozilla 1.7 Released
·
· Score: 1, Redundant
Firefox is a web browser, thunderbird = email client. mozilla is app suite w/ both browser & email & other stuff i believe. One feature to get rid of IE: tabbed browsing. If, like me, you frequently have lots of stuff open it's so much nicer than a crowded taskbar.
Yes and no. If that was the case why would measuring one particle cause the other to collapse into the same wave function? The first one only collapsed b/c it was measured and what it collapses into is random based on some probability distribution determined by the actual value of the quantum state.
No because measuring the second entangled prticle has the same affect on the first as directly measuring it. Otherwise one could get around Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which afaik appears to be a law of nature and not something that one can avoid.
Within special relativity, causality can be preserved by forbidding information from travelling faster than the speed of light this does not mean A cannot communicate w/ B FTL but that no useful information to an outside party can be passed (i.e., 1 cannot transmit a bit FTL but could transmit an unknown quantum state one has no control over)
Sorry to reply again but from wikipedia Like all quantum computer algorithms, Shor's algorithm is probabilistic: it gives the correct answer with high probability, and the probability of failure can be decreased by repeating the algorithm. And it runs in O((logN)^3) time. So not linear but sublinear unless my math is rustier than i thought.
It's my understanding that this is the hardest part of quantum algorithms. It's quite straightforward to just pick one answer and so with fixed probability (based on size of system) answer is right, otherwise it's wrong. IIRC, the beauty of shor's algorithm (factoring in polynomial - linear i think - time on a quantum computer) is that it always returns the correct answer. Unfortunately I don't know how it works so I can't answer that part. i hope someone else can explain that.
I think it's just a difference in perspective. To me, NOT consulting a lawyer is just stupid because I don't know anyone who honestly can't afford one and if you don't know enough to ascertain whether or not you've done anything wrong and/or could be liable for damages it's common sense to ask someone who does. To you, needing a lawyer is a sign of failure. I can't think of any POSSIBLE system that allows the average ignorant American fair protection from those who know the law. In this case it's not money that's doing the bullying it's ignorance (an understandable amount. I don't know tort law but if I'm sued I will be on the phone w/ a lawyer right away). IMHO, our political system is the best I've ever seen but the concept of using money to get elected almost sickens me but it doen't make me thinks the system doesn't work. I also hate our judicial system because 1) the jury of our peers concept which I find complete BS - see above post and 2) i have a much higher threshold of doubt than I see in general (my worries are much more about convicting the wrong person as opposed to letting criminal go) and dislike the nature of prosecutions (it's about finding SOMEONE to blame and prosecute not finding the truth, IMHO). But I also wouldn't scrap it or replace it until I see/hear of a better system
If I can buy a smart card programmer, I can fork over $150 for a legal opinion (basing that on a half hour of time) before settling. Yes it's true you can't represent yourself, but that doesn't make the system next to worthless, IMHO. It just means that corporations can bully people which is crap, yes, but it doesn't make the system worthless. I'd like to see a better one. IMHO, jury system sucks b/c no one who isn't salaried has any incentive within the system (i.e., beyond a sense of civic duty) to want to participate and plenty incentive to not participate $40 a day, or do work that bills out at $350/hr, not much of a choice. I also don't consider unemployed high school dropouts my peers (I, to be a bit pompous, wouldn't consider anyone w/out a bachelor's from an elite institution to be my peer) but they can still end up on a jury judging me I wouldn't scrap the system though.
ut if it doesn't hurt their bottom line in any way, and if you're not doing any harm to the company or any individual, more power to you.
Next question. What about downloading super pricey software that I would never pay for (since i'm a student)? it's not cutting into their profits, but I am freeloading. I think this is perfectly justified, especially when I have access to the software on a cluster I don't want to walk to/use b/c I have a laptop I want to do my work on.
What about when movie is in theaters and so company wont sell DVDs. Can one then download it b/c the only option is going to movie theater. Or before a movie is released (or in pre-release, so only NYC/LA have showings of it). Unfortunately, a lot of business models rely on delaying release of desired products. So should we just say fuck you, if you use that model or should our ethics/morals have to adjust for it?
Yes theft is theft, but copyright infringement is not theft. Theft = stealing = taking something unlawfully. If I copy something from you I have not deprived you of it, it would be illegal but not theft. Plagiarism is also not theft.
And I hate that there's no recognized difference between "commercial piracy" and other kinds of "piracy". IMHO, there's a huge difference between selling bootlet movies and downloading/ripping/watching movies that you cannot purchase a copy of.
While not applying to the music industry, IME, most non-music piracy is a result of industry not meeting the demands of consumers (business models relying on holding back product a to support product b - dvds not released until a movie is out of theaters for a certain amount of time, or no way to purchase said product in the form you want). and IMHO, that's perfectly morally justified (but i'm one of those devils who sees nothing wrong w/ janet jackson's tit being shown on national television, or the 7 dirty words being publically broadcast).
In my mind, there's no such thing as a "learning subject". Learning a subject (to me), is learning the methods to solve problems in that subject. History (in high school) which was pure memorization and rehashing of stuff, wasn't learning. Math was learning (inductive proofs, indirect proofs (proof by contradiction aka reductio ad absurdum), proof by infinite descent, etc.) b/c I learned techniques. To me, too much of school has become preparation for exams. I asked a question in an optimization course at Princeton and the response I got was (you don't have to know that for the final, so don't worry about it). REFORM SCHOOL TO ACTUALLY TEACH US WAYS TO THINK AND APPROACH PROBLEMS not to memorize facts/methods.
Both my parents' cell phones use bluetooth (somehow) to incorporate into their cars and work hands free & voice-activated. They have a reason to activate bluetooth, but don't read/. so would see no reason not to. Bluetooth has uses for mere mortals and such will be desired/sold/bought/activated by people who aren't tech-savvy/knowledgable of how it works.
Just b/c we might have the computing power to store the states of every particle in the human body, doesn't mean we know how to do it. There's also the whole how to rebuild us from that data thing b/c of laws of physics. It's also possible that superluminal teleportation (faster than light) is impossible. Been reading some interesting stuff by a prof of mine at Princeton about his theory that three information theory axioms imply quantum mechanics (and thus, that no useful info can be transferred faster than light would be a "law" of the universe). And good call on Timeline, one of my all-time favorite books (never seen the movie). Everyone should go read it.
It's your fault if you take the word of someone suing you. I'm sorry, I don't think what DirectTV is doing is right (should be illegal, IMHO, to bring about lawsuits if you have no evidence supporting your claims), but the first thing you should do if sued is contact a lawyer. You can countersue for legal fees if their case is weak enough (IANAL, i don't know the specific requirements). Settling w/out first talking to a lawyer is a recipe for letting yourself be fucked, so don't do it. I can't imagine people who are spending disposable income on these devices don't have the cash to get a tiny bit of legal advice before signing a settlement agreement, and I have very little sympathy for people who let themselves get bullied around b/c they didn't know or even try and find out if they weren't breaking the law.
I tend to have// and I LIKE IT that way, it's intuitive for me. I don't want to have everything in shallow structures. Same with my music music directory/artist/album/songs.mp3. Especially since i have lots of live music, it's then grouped by concert and in order (i preface files w/ two digit track number). order matters for live music. I don't want everything in my music. if you can explain why shallow structur is better for me i'll switch and use your spatial crap, o/w i want everything in one window.
also web browing (i tend to use webpages as info i need to recall and i like it tabbed - i hate new windows, i can't find stuff b/c i have too much open). tab 1 - lecture notes, tab 2 - assignment statement, tab 3 - checklist (when applicable), tab 4 - slashdot, tab 5 - other random crap i'm doing. i like to multitask, i don't like reloading web pages every time i need to check something
I was bored for most of high school (and below) because the teacher taught too slowly, I understood the first time a concept was explained and didn't need any hand-holding. Consequently I was a jackass and would do whaztever I could to make the teacher move faster usually by answering every question and making it harder for others to learn. In high school, I was part of a math research program, and that challenged me. If you like math, there's plenty of challenges there (try and prove on your own that there's an infinite number of primes, for example). In college, my solution is to take hard problem solving courses. While it lowers my gpa (I lost my 4.0 as a result of the 300-level math courses I've taken here at Princeton) I consider it worth it. My favorite class so far without a doubt has been an Abstract Algebra course which I unfortunately was not able to get an A in.
As far as the real world goes, allow me to relate something from a recently graduated math major at Princeton. He has since decided to go back to academia b/c he can't stand not being challenged and he loves Math. Find a subject you love and explore it deeply. Realize you probably wont be rich and decide do you want to enjoy your work, or make a lot of money. You probably can't have both.
As for your comment about bright being bullshit. I'd consider myself uniquely bright and have since elementary school. I happen to know my IQ as a result of testing for an enrichment program and where that places me in terms of the rest of the population. I know IQ isn't a perfect measure of intelligence but there's no reason to assume someone isn't bright/brilliant/whatever because they haven't done something ground breaking. I've never been published but I have done some rather difficult Math that has been recognized and awarded at science competitions.
I'm not talking about the professorial level, but i've encountered many teachers who were downright incompetant (such as a 6th grade teacher who didn't know 8th grade math well enough to teach it to me, so i taught myself that year in math). We're not talking calculus or even high school level math. Teaching is admirable but many of my public school teachers were fairly useless (economics professor who taught so slowly i could read the book and teach myself in class faster than he taught. i've also had a small handful of GREAT teachers (almost exclusively in enrichment classes). Sadly these did not outnumber the bad ones. I would not generalize and say all teachers can't do but I also wouldn't say that all teachers are competant and admirable (my mom taught for a little bit. Most of the faculty where she taught - in a very good area, taught b/c of the "perks" of the job (light hours, esp after first year when you have lesson plans, good vacation time, total job security as long as you don't break the law). So forgive me for not revering teachers in general.
Nitpicking. In small datasets, O(n) might be faster than O(logn). For instance, insertion sorting 5 elements is often faster than shell sorting them. But w/ such small datasets the speed difference is still probably negligible. As someone who's dealt w/ a lot of other people's code. I hate optimized code in unneccessary spots. It makes it harder to understand, when char s[16] is used in 8 spots to avoid allocating extra space by having multiple variables or when weird shortcuts are taken that might save 4 instructions @ the computer level but make it take an extra few minutes to understand the algorithm.
Biggest difference I've seen. Wrote a circuit simulator in C and then wrote it in assembly (in an array in C that was then executed as if it was a function - gotta love casting and pointers (*(void(*)(int*, int*, int*)) piCodeArray)(piInput, piCurrent, piNext); - that executed piCodeArray as a function w/ 3 int array params representing the input values for some constants, the current values for flip-flops, and the array to store subsequent ff values). Results: Using the Turing machine to emulate, the compiled version required.06 seconds to emulate 10,000 clock cycles while the interpretive version used 2.12 seconds (over 35 times as long to emulate that).
Point: assembly can be advantageous but I wouldn't advise it in normal circumstances. I can write the unix wc command in C real quickly, to do it in assembly is a waste of my time b/c the C version is fast enough (i've done both for assignments, as well as echo and sort). It's important to know WHEN to optimize. 99.99% of stuff you write doesn't need it, so don't waste your time. Make the code clear and correct, better than unreadable and efficient and definitely better than efficient but wrong.
Both first-order propositional calculus & predicate calculus are complete (two logic systems). The formal system must be powerful enough to express the natural numbers in order to not possible complete.
Slashdot Mirror
As a 19-yr old male who has looked at plenty of porn, I'd just like to comment on how it, to the best of my knowledge, has not made my 20-yr-old girlfriend any less attractive/desirable to me. For the most part, we only have sex in the missionary position (not exactly taboo or anything) but that's plenty satisfying for me despite having seen pr0n featuring much crazier sex acts. The only dissapointment was the expected lack of pr0nstar-lasting ability.
As a student and amateur/hobbyist programmer, if a tool costs more than $0, I consider it expensive. I just don't pay for development tools, especially since there are plenty of free alternatives (eclipse *drool*). i'm just not at a point where i feel like spending money on developers tools when I can already develop for free and I have no intention of selling or even distributing for the most part any software I write. It's the same reason I use Octave instead of matlab despite the incomptibility hassles I've run into. I'm not paying $100 for software that I'm not going to make any money off of using. And that's one of the cheaper programs I''ve had to use at school. Microsoft is smart in realizing that many young hobbyist programmers arelimiting themselves to free/dirt-cheap tools. There's perceived benefit from using the expensive stuff doesn't justify the cost IMHO.
Not to sound all whiny, but I have VERY limited choice for who to vote for in the next election, not to mention, there's about 0% chance that Bush will win my state so my vote is most likely worthless (I'm still voting just in case those polls are wrong). Being able to vote for 1 of 2 candidates, when you like neither isn't that much influence especially when most states most likely wont even be close enough for your vote to relly mean anything (i.e., change the outcome of the election) in and of itself. The problem, IMHO, with the US gov't is that it's too democratic (and most people, IMHO, aren't educated/knowledgable enough to know which candidate is best for them) and I have very different values from most of the population which means I'm often overshadowed by the majority. Like the quote says, Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. not too fair for the sheep
My taskbar is that crowded even w/ tabbed IM windows I'm out of space.
Firefox is a web browser, thunderbird = email client. mozilla is app suite w/ both browser & email & other stuff i believe. One feature to get rid of IE: tabbed browsing. If, like me, you frequently have lots of stuff open it's so much nicer than a crowded taskbar.
Yes and no. If that was the case why would measuring one particle cause the other to collapse into the same wave function? The first one only collapsed b/c it was measured and what it collapses into is random based on some probability distribution determined by the actual value of the quantum state.
No because measuring the second entangled prticle has the same affect on the first as directly measuring it. Otherwise one could get around Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which afaik appears to be a law of nature and not something that one can avoid.
Within special relativity, causality can be preserved by forbidding information from travelling faster than the speed of light this does not mean A cannot communicate w/ B FTL but that no useful information to an outside party can be passed (i.e., 1 cannot transmit a bit FTL but could transmit an unknown quantum state one has no control over)
Sorry to reply again but from wikipedia
Like all quantum computer algorithms, Shor's algorithm is probabilistic: it gives the correct answer with high probability, and the probability of failure can be decreased by repeating the algorithm.
And it runs in O((logN)^3) time. So not linear but sublinear unless my math is rustier than i thought.
It's my understanding that this is the hardest part of quantum algorithms. It's quite straightforward to just pick one answer and so with fixed probability (based on size of system) answer is right, otherwise it's wrong. IIRC, the beauty of shor's algorithm (factoring in polynomial - linear i think - time on a quantum computer) is that it always returns the correct answer. Unfortunately I don't know how it works so I can't answer that part. i hope someone else can explain that.
I think it's just a difference in perspective. To me, NOT consulting a lawyer is just stupid because I don't know anyone who honestly can't afford one and if you don't know enough to ascertain whether or not you've done anything wrong and/or could be liable for damages it's common sense to ask someone who does. To you, needing a lawyer is a sign of failure. I can't think of any POSSIBLE system that allows the average ignorant American fair protection from those who know the law. In this case it's not money that's doing the bullying it's ignorance (an understandable amount. I don't know tort law but if I'm sued I will be on the phone w/ a lawyer right away). IMHO, our political system is the best I've ever seen but the concept of using money to get elected almost sickens me but it doen't make me thinks the system doesn't work. I also hate our judicial system because 1) the jury of our peers concept which I find complete BS - see above post and 2) i have a much higher threshold of doubt than I see in general (my worries are much more about convicting the wrong person as opposed to letting criminal go) and dislike the nature of prosecutions (it's about finding SOMEONE to blame and prosecute not finding the truth, IMHO). But I also wouldn't scrap it or replace it until I see/hear of a better system
If I can buy a smart card programmer, I can fork over $150 for a legal opinion (basing that on a half hour of time) before settling. Yes it's true you can't represent yourself, but that doesn't make the system next to worthless, IMHO. It just means that corporations can bully people which is crap, yes, but it doesn't make the system worthless. I'd like to see a better one. IMHO, jury system sucks b/c no one who isn't salaried has any incentive within the system (i.e., beyond a sense of civic duty) to want to participate and plenty incentive to not participate $40 a day, or do work that bills out at $350/hr, not much of a choice. I also don't consider unemployed high school dropouts my peers (I, to be a bit pompous, wouldn't consider anyone w/out a bachelor's from an elite institution to be my peer) but they can still end up on a jury judging me I wouldn't scrap the system though.
ut if it doesn't hurt their bottom line in any way, and if you're not doing any harm to the company or any individual, more power to you.
Next question. What about downloading super pricey software that I would never pay for (since i'm a student)? it's not cutting into their profits, but I am freeloading. I think this is perfectly justified, especially when I have access to the software on a cluster I don't want to walk to/use b/c I have a laptop I want to do my work on.
What about when movie is in theaters and so company wont sell DVDs. Can one then download it b/c the only option is going to movie theater. Or before a movie is released (or in pre-release, so only NYC/LA have showings of it). Unfortunately, a lot of business models rely on delaying release of desired products. So should we just say fuck you, if you use that model or should our ethics/morals have to adjust for it?
Yes theft is theft, but copyright infringement is not theft. Theft = stealing = taking something unlawfully. If I copy something from you I have not deprived you of it, it would be illegal but not theft. Plagiarism is also not theft.
And I hate that there's no recognized difference between "commercial piracy" and other kinds of "piracy". IMHO, there's a huge difference between selling bootlet movies and downloading/ripping/watching movies that you cannot purchase a copy of.
While not applying to the music industry, IME, most non-music piracy is a result of industry not meeting the demands of consumers (business models relying on holding back product a to support product b - dvds not released until a movie is out of theaters for a certain amount of time, or no way to purchase said product in the form you want). and IMHO, that's perfectly morally justified (but i'm one of those devils who sees nothing wrong w/ janet jackson's tit being shown on national television, or the 7 dirty words being publically broadcast).
In my mind, there's no such thing as a "learning subject". Learning a subject (to me), is learning the methods to solve problems in that subject. History (in high school) which was pure memorization and rehashing of stuff, wasn't learning. Math was learning (inductive proofs, indirect proofs (proof by contradiction aka reductio ad absurdum), proof by infinite descent, etc.) b/c I learned techniques. To me, too much of school has become preparation for exams. I asked a question in an optimization course at Princeton and the response I got was (you don't have to know that for the final, so don't worry about it). REFORM SCHOOL TO ACTUALLY TEACH US WAYS TO THINK AND APPROACH PROBLEMS not to memorize facts/methods.
Both my parents' cell phones use bluetooth (somehow) to incorporate into their cars and work hands free & voice-activated. They have a reason to activate bluetooth, but don't read /. so would see no reason not to. Bluetooth has uses for mere mortals and such will be desired/sold/bought/activated by people who aren't tech-savvy/knowledgable of how it works.
Just b/c we might have the computing power to store the states of every particle in the human body, doesn't mean we know how to do it. There's also the whole how to rebuild us from that data thing b/c of laws of physics. It's also possible that superluminal teleportation (faster than light) is impossible. Been reading some interesting stuff by a prof of mine at Princeton about his theory that three information theory axioms imply quantum mechanics (and thus, that no useful info can be transferred faster than light would be a "law" of the universe). And good call on Timeline, one of my all-time favorite books (never seen the movie). Everyone should go read it.
It's your fault if you take the word of someone suing you. I'm sorry, I don't think what DirectTV is doing is right (should be illegal, IMHO, to bring about lawsuits if you have no evidence supporting your claims), but the first thing you should do if sued is contact a lawyer. You can countersue for legal fees if their case is weak enough (IANAL, i don't know the specific requirements). Settling w/out first talking to a lawyer is a recipe for letting yourself be fucked, so don't do it. I can't imagine people who are spending disposable income on these devices don't have the cash to get a tiny bit of legal advice before signing a settlement agreement, and I have very little sympathy for people who let themselves get bullied around b/c they didn't know or even try and find out if they weren't breaking the law.
I tend to have // and I LIKE IT that way, it's intuitive for me. I don't want to have everything in shallow structures. Same with my music music directory/artist/album/songs.mp3. Especially since i have lots of live music, it's then grouped by concert and in order (i preface files w/ two digit track number). order matters for live music. I don't want everything in my music.
if you can explain why shallow structur is better for me i'll switch and use your spatial crap, o/w i want everything in one window.
also web browing (i tend to use webpages as info i need to recall and i like it tabbed - i hate new windows, i can't find stuff b/c i have too much open). tab 1 - lecture notes, tab 2 - assignment statement, tab 3 - checklist (when applicable), tab 4 - slashdot, tab 5 - other random crap i'm doing. i like to multitask, i don't like reloading web pages every time i need to check something
I was bored for most of high school (and below) because the teacher taught too slowly, I understood the first time a concept was explained and didn't need any hand-holding. Consequently I was a jackass and would do whaztever I could to make the teacher move faster usually by answering every question and making it harder for others to learn. In high school, I was part of a math research program, and that challenged me. If you like math, there's plenty of challenges there (try and prove on your own that there's an infinite number of primes, for example). In college, my solution is to take hard problem solving courses. While it lowers my gpa (I lost my 4.0 as a result of the 300-level math courses I've taken here at Princeton) I consider it worth it. My favorite class so far without a doubt has been an Abstract Algebra course which I unfortunately was not able to get an A in.
As far as the real world goes, allow me to relate something from a recently graduated math major at Princeton. He has since decided to go back to academia b/c he can't stand not being challenged and he loves Math. Find a subject you love and explore it deeply. Realize you probably wont be rich and decide do you want to enjoy your work, or make a lot of money. You probably can't have both.
As for your comment about bright being bullshit. I'd consider myself uniquely bright and have since elementary school. I happen to know my IQ as a result of testing for an enrichment program and where that places me in terms of the rest of the population. I know IQ isn't a perfect measure of intelligence but there's no reason to assume someone isn't bright/brilliant/whatever because they haven't done something ground breaking. I've never been published but I have done some rather difficult Math that has been recognized and awarded at science competitions.
I'm not talking about the professorial level, but i've encountered many teachers who were downright incompetant (such as a 6th grade teacher who didn't know 8th grade math well enough to teach it to me, so i taught myself that year in math). We're not talking calculus or even high school level math. Teaching is admirable but many of my public school teachers were fairly useless (economics professor who taught so slowly i could read the book and teach myself in class faster than he taught. i've also had a small handful of GREAT teachers (almost exclusively in enrichment classes). Sadly these did not outnumber the bad ones. I would not generalize and say all teachers can't do but I also wouldn't say that all teachers are competant and admirable (my mom taught for a little bit. Most of the faculty where she taught - in a very good area, taught b/c of the "perks" of the job (light hours, esp after first year when you have lesson plans, good vacation time, total job security as long as you don't break the law). So forgive me for not revering teachers in general.
Yes it is. CS 217 (Introduction to Programming Systems) at Princeton. Took it last fall.
Nitpicking. In small datasets, O(n) might be faster than O(logn). For instance, insertion sorting 5 elements is often faster than shell sorting them. But w/ such small datasets the speed difference is still probably negligible. As someone who's dealt w/ a lot of other people's code. I hate optimized code in unneccessary spots. It makes it harder to understand, when char s[16] is used in 8 spots to avoid allocating extra space by having multiple variables or when weird shortcuts are taken that might save 4 instructions @ the computer level but make it take an extra few minutes to understand the algorithm.
Biggest difference I've seen. Wrote a circuit simulator in C and then wrote it in assembly (in an array in C that was then executed as if it was a function - gotta love casting and pointers (*(void(*)(int*, int*, int*)) piCodeArray)(piInput, piCurrent, piNext); - that executed piCodeArray as a function w/ 3 int array params representing the input values for some constants, the current values for flip-flops, and the array to store subsequent ff values). Results: Using the Turing machine to emulate, the compiled version required .06
seconds to emulate 10,000 clock cycles while the interpretive version used
2.12 seconds (over 35 times as long to emulate that).
Point: assembly can be advantageous but I wouldn't advise it in normal circumstances. I can write the unix wc command in C real quickly, to do it in assembly is a waste of my time b/c the C version is fast enough (i've done both for assignments, as well as echo and sort). It's important to know WHEN to optimize. 99.99% of stuff you write doesn't need it, so don't waste your time. Make the code clear and correct, better than unreadable and efficient and definitely better than efficient but wrong.
Both first-order propositional calculus & predicate calculus are complete (two logic systems). The formal system must be powerful enough to express the natural numbers in order to not possible complete.