At a conference I'm just about to fly back from, one of the talks detailed how one metabolic mutation was carried by 10% of Caucasians, this fell to 4% in Chinese populations, and only 1% in Japanese.
Plenty of those genes. Just look at lactose intolerance. Those of western Eurasian descent can generally drink milk after weaning. The rest generally cannot. *wry grin* Unofrtunately, I'm one of the few of Eurasian descent who can't, although it's something that's developed as I get older and I produce enough lactase for about half a glass a milk at a meal, enough that I don't have to worry about checking for the presence of lactose in the ingredients of a meal.
The trouble here is that Google is reproducing the entire article if you think about it. Imagine if you go to the library every day, and copy a single phrase in a book. If you do this a few thousand times, you've reproduced the whole book, and it's definitely no longer fair use. That's what Google is doing. They have internal copies of everything, and they serve small (but different) pieces to people.
If I'm publishing a paper, I have the right to quote small portions of text under fair use. I'f I'm just publishing one paper, that's maybe 20-30 lines total. If, on the other hand, I'm an extremely prolific author, I might be publishing a hundred papers a year and now that's 200-300 lines. Google is like an extremely prolific authour, publishing hundreds of papers a day. Just like the case of citation in papers, they're never serving up a large chunk of text, but theoretically, by gathering together all of the citations, you could build a whole book out of it. *shrug* And honestly, what are the odds of having a whole book in the end? Few people are likely to cite the dedication page of a book, for instance. Similarly, there's a good chance that Google never fully replicates any given work. Now one might argue that they just get all the good stuff, but isn't what what citation is about, getting sections of the book that compose the meat of it? (Well, unless you're a news source, in which case it's good business to get as many out-of-context quotes as you can so as to misrepresent a source as you wish, but that's another matter entirely.)
No, it's that human (artificial) selection is breeding, and different from natural selection. I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or you really don't know the difference.
It was partly a joke (particularly the latter line about man descending from apes) and part a bit of annoyance in that humanity seems to be considered the only species who can't engage in an action without it being considered "unnatural." I guess it's a consequence of forming sentience. One of the examples I like to use (as contrived as it is) is the Blondie strip where her catering business was nearly forced to close because a rare and nearly extinct species of mice was sighted nearby. Cue in very satisfied looking cat walking out of the alleyway, licking its chops...
Humans are part of the evolutionary process, albeit a group with a fairly disproportionate impact due to the combination of our intelligence in figuring out exactly how to meddle, and our ego that leads us to meddle for the sake of meddling.
A blanket ban on ditigal transmitters. This was issued to ban cellphones/blackberries/etc. But reading into the rules, they tried to make it broad to cover anything. Well, that "anything" also included: car alarm remote fobs, and immobilizer car keys. It also covered items like Speedpass, and the very badges we wear.
How odd... usually they make the distinction between active digital transmitters (which admittedly do include things like the keyfobs) and passive digital transmitters like the RFID tags in Speedpass and the badges.
Thing is, where they actually have a need for security, the "secret squirrel rooms" are generally very well built. There are no ports, the rooms are soundproof, and the room's built so that transmissions can't get in or out. You will be frisked if there's any suspicion that you could have a recording device and they do scanning to check for things like cell phones and pagers that people have forgotten are on their persons. The rest of the security measures are, as a prior poster stated, a form of pork.
Once every city has wireless, people will "broadcast" their own stations to the entire city. A better music selection and no commercials will fuel this revolution. Large companies will hop onboard and compete aswell. Eventually auto manufacturers will offer Wi-Fi players in cars and the rest is history.
Great... now instead of searching a band of a few hundred possibilities, of which only a dozen are actually viable, for content I want to listen to, I'll be sorting through millions of podcasts to try to find one that's not about the podcaster's cat and how it vomitted on the sofa today...
The existance of one or two government funded stations *forces* the commercial competition to keep their standards up to remain competative. Without that, there is no hope of a good service.
Actually, the US government is pretty much mandated not to compete with private industry. I only found this out recently when a piece of software I wrote for the Air Force looked like it could be useful enough to be used outside of the Air Force itself. I was told that if that were the case, it couldn't be released for free, because by doing so, we could be competing against people in the industry.
Satellite raido is going to go the same way as satellite TV - in a few years time you will have exactly the same crap there when the execs realise that terrestrial raido is dead and they can squeeze out a few more pennies by running adverts.
Huh... I was actually under the impression that they were already doing this. There's a commercial that frequently runs on an FM station I listen to in town, sponsered by ClearChannel, I think, which details the history of radio, leading up to satellite radio where they end with a line somewhere along the lines of "satellite radio where you pay for installation, pay for subscriptions and now? *dramatic sound effect* There's commercials." I guess that was just FUD?
Myself, I still enjoy broadcast radio. I think they key is that I listen to classic rock and classic country. The Classical X stations usually employ about three decades of material to work with and they've weeded out a lot of the crap. (Was it Stranger in a Strange Land where one of the characters claims he likes classical music because they've had 300 years to weed out the crap?) Because they're both local stations, you feel somewhat connected to the personalities because you'll see them at the local mall or at city events. Too, you get breaking local news including which roads have been closed down by accidents. I actually don't like the "50 minutes without commercials" stations because they then have a big clog of commercials later on. I can deal with a commercial every few songs. Again, local talent is often being utilized for the commercials, so you have less of the feeling of being spoonfed generic copy.
Not to mention that the idea of having songs go down in price as demand goes up will appeal well to peoples' egos. There will be people who will buy the early copies of a song for $2.50 each (I'm considering that an upper limit because I saw it as a proposed upper price somewhere) and consider themselves to be the "trendsetting elite." There will be those who will buy obscure songs that don't sell well for $2.50 each and feel it inflates their indy cred. People like me will hang around and see what seems good, then buy it for $0.99 or whatever the lower price is, and feel good about being thrifty in our patience. The music industry gets its extra money and most of the smart people will still be paying the low prices for their music.
Your argument is nullified by the fact that humans plan and execute the reproduction of these chickens, thus any selection that is going on is artificial, not natural.
Since when were humans not considered natural? Are you going to start trying to argue that man did not descend from apes as well?
I work in a building with defense contractors. Cameras are banned, even non-digital ones, for fear that someone might take a picture, but they have no problems with USB sticks and digital music players. I once had a guard ask after the headphones I was wearing. When I explained they were to my digital music player, he waved me on, saying that he just wanted to be sure they weren't plugged into a cell phone. (Cell phones are required to be turned off while in the building ostensibly because the signals can disrupt some of the RF experiments. Camera cell phones are, of course, banned.)
Oh, and when the news reports came out, they did also briefly ban Furbies (remember when they were marketed as being able to mimic language? Security feared they'd be used as recording devices) and Coke cans (Coke was running that contest where prize cans had a GPS transmitter in them to lead in the prize team. This is more of the signal interference than a security thing, but people weren't hot on a GPS transmitter inside secured locations either).
The corporate support is passing by transmission or succession? Falling or being passed on traditionally as a responsibility or obligation?
The corporate support is coming by or as if by flowing down?
The corporate support is degenerating through a gradual change or evolution?
Devolve does not mean the opposite of "evolve."
Yes, I know it's pedantic, but it's one of those things that bugs me like when documents at work come out saying that a product covers "the whole gambit" of possibilities.
It just a good start to be able to just participate, without having do go through the "complicated" process to create an account. Its just to move one barrier away, to become a wikipedian. Once you feel more comfortable you will create an account nevertheless.
Wikipedia has one of the easier registration systems, but it's still yet another password to remember. With so many services, so many passwords, you pretty much have to either use insecure passwords and in multiple accounts, or you have to use some security-breaking measure to remember them all like Gator or the Google Toolbar. At one point, I thought one would be safe using an common password on all of the sites, but with all this talk of libel and the current political atmosphere in the US, how much damage could someone do by posting something via your webmail account? Your online journal site? Or, for that matter, Wikipedia? Theoretically, you can prove you weren't around to write whatever it was, but how much damage would be caused by people who don't see or don't believe the retraction? Worse, there's no guarantee that a site will maintain your information in their database. Years ago, I signed up for a dating service which went under. Several months later, another company contacted me, saying that they had my profile all set up with all the information from my old profile including my password. Shortly thereafter, all of my email passwords changed...
I would actually disagree with you on the ease of use for VB6 rather than VB.net, particularly in the area of GUI design. VB.Net has all of the controls exposed as classes, which makes it child's play to modify or even write from scratch the GUI in code. VB6, you used the wizards and heaven help you if you had to modify too much afterwards because doing so meant diving into API calls and the MFC. Also, there's the matter of references and code. VB6 tended to lose track of DLLs, leading to broken references all over the place. It was a toss-up as to whether any piece of code on the internet would work because the odds were they referenced some obscure DLL that wasn't in the default installation of Windows. VB.Net, on the other hand, has code which works almost every time and the manipulation of references is in the Solution Explorer itself rather than buried in a seperate dialog filled with hundreds of entries.
*shrug* Maybe it's a matter of me having spent more time developing in.Net, but I find VB.Net much easier to use than VB6. *wry grin* It could also be due to me having grounding in OOP before learning to develop in either of the VBs...
Thing is, the people most likely not to keep up on payments are often the fairly well off. I don't know how many times I saw autos being repoed from the employee parking lot at Intel during my co-op... *shrug* My father's a lawyer for a bank, specializing in bankruptcy and he sees the same thing day after day. The biggest offenders are the upper class, people who can afford to make their payments, but don't. Go figure.
Interesting commentary, although I disagree with you on several points. You seem to be creditting these people with a malicious agenda, an attitude which is sadly common during VfDs on Wikipedia. Typically someone puts the article up for deletion and then accuses everyone of being "noted sockpuppets" no matter how many edits or useful contributions they've had. *shrug* I think a lot of this comes down to what's notable. Is the Zillions of Games entry notable? It's got a strong community (or, as people during the VfD process would say, "a rabid community") and fairly substantial presence on the web. And then, there's the issue of notability in webcomics which is currently based on number of strips and Alexa rating. *shrug* Personally, I feel that there are a lot of esoteric articles in Wikipedia which only relate to a niche group. However, I would submit that such is the way of any decent encyclopedia. Most people will never think to look up Interstate 475 or Constantin Stamati-Ciurea (result of me running two random article requests), but to someone who's interested in the subject, those entries are vital. (Well, given they're both stubs, that too is debatable... darn actual random entries...) Yes, there are definite junk entries out there, but I think that niche articles are too quickly dismissed.
What I fear more for Wikipedia is the group-mind it creates. It's been said that the IQ of a mob is equivalent to the IQ of its smartest member divided by the number of people in the mob. Similarly, I fear the veracity of entries will be based on things which "everyone knows" even when they're not true, particularly if they disagree with what people feel is the truth. Good citation of sources helps, but cited sources can be wrong too.
In the end, I see Wikipedia not as a primary source, but a good springboard. You can use it to get a general idea on the subject, then branch out to better and more accurate research methods. And, if you find information not in the article, or which the article incorrectly answers, you go back and fix the entry, neh?
Add to the problem that on most college campuses, 911 directs you to Campus Security rather than emergency services... One of my friends had a fire start in the office next to them. They tried to call 911, got campus security, and got put on hold. Thank goodness for cell phones... 10 minutes after the fire was put out, the campus security got back on the line and asked the state of the emergency.
I'm highly amused in that your review of the review was utterly lacking in content other than the two links, yet you're running at +5 Informative. Somehow, I think your satire was missed. Maybe the people who write these reviews modded you up due to professional courtesy?
honestly unless you are open minded most Cd collections are very closed spoon fed collections from the RIAA members. When was the last time you found someone with bands like feeder, Impossible shapes, and other lower tier bands that you do not find in the top 10 CD and music stores?
And if you really want to encourage innovation and sock it to the RIAA, start listening to the local bands. In a decent-sized city, it's not hard to find some group performing in local venues who fits your musical preferences. Most sell their own CDs too. I've found some really gems in these bands and I know that my money is going towards someone local.
Another place to look for CDs of local bands are in your music shops. Not the places that sell CDs, but the ones that sell the instruments. Frequently, the counter will have CDs from several local bands available for purchase.
For some reason, this comment and its moderation brought a chuckle over the self-referentiality of the statement.
And, in a vague attempt to be on-topic, the idea is interesting, but I'll be more impressed once they can get it to work without the gloves. If nothing else, couldn't you see as a nice input method for translating ASL to glossed English? Sure, it will take a lot more work to get any kind of grammar working, but just being able to translate individual signs to the English equivalents would be of great value in emergency situations and hospitals.
*rolls eyes* "People aren't actually hypnotized; they just think they are. It's really all in their minds."
I never really understood that comment. It's kind of like saying, "That thinking thing? You're not really thinking... you just believe you are. It's all in your mind."
My last research into the matter was about 5 years ago and the materials may have been old then, but as I understand it, hypnosis doesn't remove the pain, but allows you to ignore it. This is an important distinction, as some of the physical reactions of the body occur in reaction to the pain. Also, there are some drugs which destroy the human body's ability to ignore pain. (They think... it works on people who claim to "be able to ignore pain.") They did a test (which sounded incredibly funny and sadistic) where they asked a well known hypnosis anesthesia guy and asked him to do tests. They had him induce trance, applied pain, nothing, applied more pain, nothing. Injected the drug and the guy started screaming his head off as all of the pain rushed in.
I do, however, have a problem with not being able to give 1 cent to the artist, without HAVING to give $1 to the record company.
Sure and you can. Many of these bands have an address for fan mail. Send them a few bucks. What are they going to do, send it back?
I had a professor assign this essay as required reading for our Computer Science class. While none of us (hopefully) are deliberately employing the tricks and techniques in there, I'll bet every one of us can look through there and find one thing that we've been guilty of doing whether it was inane variable names, inaccurate comments, or bizarre variable scope issues. By reading through, it forces you to confront your laundry list of faults and decide which ones need to be fixed.
And as for the maintainer interpretting it, you're absolutely right that most people just throw up their hands. It's hard to interpret someone else's code for anything past the trivial. Doable, but hard enough that rewriting it often is a good way. Heh, besides which, it's amazing how many times I've thrown up my hands, rewritten the code, and by the experience found that I understood the original code.
Slashdot Mirror
At a conference I'm just about to fly back from, one of the talks detailed how one metabolic mutation was carried by 10% of Caucasians, this fell to 4% in Chinese populations, and only 1% in Japanese.
Plenty of those genes. Just look at lactose intolerance. Those of western Eurasian descent can generally drink milk after weaning. The rest generally cannot. *wry grin* Unofrtunately, I'm one of the few of Eurasian descent who can't, although it's something that's developed as I get older and I produce enough lactase for about half a glass a milk at a meal, enough that I don't have to worry about checking for the presence of lactose in the ingredients of a meal.
The trouble here is that Google is reproducing the entire article if you think about it. Imagine if you go to the library every day, and copy a single phrase in a book. If you do this a few thousand times, you've reproduced the whole book, and it's definitely no longer fair use. That's what Google is doing. They have internal copies of everything, and they serve small (but different) pieces to people.
If I'm publishing a paper, I have the right to quote small portions of text under fair use. I'f I'm just publishing one paper, that's maybe 20-30 lines total. If, on the other hand, I'm an extremely prolific author, I might be publishing a hundred papers a year and now that's 200-300 lines. Google is like an extremely prolific authour, publishing hundreds of papers a day. Just like the case of citation in papers, they're never serving up a large chunk of text, but theoretically, by gathering together all of the citations, you could build a whole book out of it. *shrug* And honestly, what are the odds of having a whole book in the end? Few people are likely to cite the dedication page of a book, for instance. Similarly, there's a good chance that Google never fully replicates any given work. Now one might argue that they just get all the good stuff, but isn't what what citation is about, getting sections of the book that compose the meat of it? (Well, unless you're a news source, in which case it's good business to get as many out-of-context quotes as you can so as to misrepresent a source as you wish, but that's another matter entirely.)
It was partly a joke (particularly the latter line about man descending from apes) and part a bit of annoyance in that humanity seems to be considered the only species who can't engage in an action without it being considered "unnatural." I guess it's a consequence of forming sentience. One of the examples I like to use (as contrived as it is) is the Blondie strip where her catering business was nearly forced to close because a rare and nearly extinct species of mice was sighted nearby. Cue in very satisfied looking cat walking out of the alleyway, licking its chops...
Humans are part of the evolutionary process, albeit a group with a fairly disproportionate impact due to the combination of our intelligence in figuring out exactly how to meddle, and our ego that leads us to meddle for the sake of meddling.
How odd... usually they make the distinction between active digital transmitters (which admittedly do include things like the keyfobs) and passive digital transmitters like the RFID tags in Speedpass and the badges.
Thing is, where they actually have a need for security, the "secret squirrel rooms" are generally very well built. There are no ports, the rooms are soundproof, and the room's built so that transmissions can't get in or out. You will be frisked if there's any suspicion that you could have a recording device and they do scanning to check for things like cell phones and pagers that people have forgotten are on their persons. The rest of the security measures are, as a prior poster stated, a form of pork.
Once every city has wireless, people will "broadcast" their own stations to the entire city. A better music selection and no commercials will fuel this revolution. Large companies will hop onboard and compete aswell. Eventually auto manufacturers will offer Wi-Fi players in cars and the rest is history.
Great... now instead of searching a band of a few hundred possibilities, of which only a dozen are actually viable, for content I want to listen to, I'll be sorting through millions of podcasts to try to find one that's not about the podcaster's cat and how it vomitted on the sofa today...
Digital music? Real elitists know that the only true sound involves a needle and vinyl.
Actually, the US government is pretty much mandated not to compete with private industry. I only found this out recently when a piece of software I wrote for the Air Force looked like it could be useful enough to be used outside of the Air Force itself. I was told that if that were the case, it couldn't be released for free, because by doing so, we could be competing against people in the industry.
Satellite raido is going to go the same way as satellite TV - in a few years time you will have exactly the same crap there when the execs realise that terrestrial raido is dead and they can squeeze out a few more pennies by running adverts.
Huh... I was actually under the impression that they were already doing this. There's a commercial that frequently runs on an FM station I listen to in town, sponsered by ClearChannel, I think, which details the history of radio, leading up to satellite radio where they end with a line somewhere along the lines of "satellite radio where you pay for installation, pay for subscriptions and now? *dramatic sound effect* There's commercials." I guess that was just FUD?
Myself, I still enjoy broadcast radio. I think they key is that I listen to classic rock and classic country. The Classical X stations usually employ about three decades of material to work with and they've weeded out a lot of the crap. (Was it Stranger in a Strange Land where one of the characters claims he likes classical music because they've had 300 years to weed out the crap?) Because they're both local stations, you feel somewhat connected to the personalities because you'll see them at the local mall or at city events. Too, you get breaking local news including which roads have been closed down by accidents. I actually don't like the "50 minutes without commercials" stations because they then have a big clog of commercials later on. I can deal with a commercial every few songs. Again, local talent is often being utilized for the commercials, so you have less of the feeling of being spoonfed generic copy.
Not to mention that the idea of having songs go down in price as demand goes up will appeal well to peoples' egos. There will be people who will buy the early copies of a song for $2.50 each (I'm considering that an upper limit because I saw it as a proposed upper price somewhere) and consider themselves to be the "trendsetting elite." There will be those who will buy obscure songs that don't sell well for $2.50 each and feel it inflates their indy cred. People like me will hang around and see what seems good, then buy it for $0.99 or whatever the lower price is, and feel good about being thrifty in our patience. The music industry gets its extra money and most of the smart people will still be paying the low prices for their music.
Your argument is nullified by the fact that humans plan and execute the reproduction of these chickens, thus any selection that is going on is artificial, not natural.
Since when were humans not considered natural? Are you going to start trying to argue that man did not descend from apes as well?
Oh, and when the news reports came out, they did also briefly ban Furbies (remember when they were marketed as being able to mimic language? Security feared they'd be used as recording devices) and Coke cans (Coke was running that contest where prize cans had a GPS transmitter in them to lead in the prize team. This is more of the signal interference than a security thing, but people weren't hot on a GPS transmitter inside secured locations either).
Are you trying to imply that
Devolve does not mean the opposite of "evolve."
Yes, I know it's pedantic, but it's one of those things that bugs me like when documents at work come out saying that a product covers "the whole gambit" of possibilities.
It just a good start to be able to just participate, without having do go through the "complicated" process to create an account. Its just to move one barrier away, to become a wikipedian. Once you feel more comfortable you will create an account nevertheless.
Wikipedia has one of the easier registration systems, but it's still yet another password to remember. With so many services, so many passwords, you pretty much have to either use insecure passwords and in multiple accounts, or you have to use some security-breaking measure to remember them all like Gator or the Google Toolbar. At one point, I thought one would be safe using an common password on all of the sites, but with all this talk of libel and the current political atmosphere in the US, how much damage could someone do by posting something via your webmail account? Your online journal site? Or, for that matter, Wikipedia? Theoretically, you can prove you weren't around to write whatever it was, but how much damage would be caused by people who don't see or don't believe the retraction? Worse, there's no guarantee that a site will maintain your information in their database. Years ago, I signed up for a dating service which went under. Several months later, another company contacted me, saying that they had my profile all set up with all the information from my old profile including my password. Shortly thereafter, all of my email passwords changed...
*shrug* Maybe it's a matter of me having spent more time developing in .Net, but I find VB.Net much easier to use than VB6. *wry grin* It could also be due to me having grounding in OOP before learning to develop in either of the VBs...
The allure of decadent capitalism.
More accurately, we broke up a semi-empire into constituent countries. Russia still exists. The CCCP doesn't.
Thing is, the people most likely not to keep up on payments are often the fairly well off. I don't know how many times I saw autos being repoed from the employee parking lot at Intel during my co-op... *shrug* My father's a lawyer for a bank, specializing in bankruptcy and he sees the same thing day after day. The biggest offenders are the upper class, people who can afford to make their payments, but don't. Go figure.
What I fear more for Wikipedia is the group-mind it creates. It's been said that the IQ of a mob is equivalent to the IQ of its smartest member divided by the number of people in the mob. Similarly, I fear the veracity of entries will be based on things which "everyone knows" even when they're not true, particularly if they disagree with what people feel is the truth. Good citation of sources helps, but cited sources can be wrong too.
In the end, I see Wikipedia not as a primary source, but a good springboard. You can use it to get a general idea on the subject, then branch out to better and more accurate research methods. And, if you find information not in the article, or which the article incorrectly answers, you go back and fix the entry, neh?
Add to the problem that on most college campuses, 911 directs you to Campus Security rather than emergency services... One of my friends had a fire start in the office next to them. They tried to call 911, got campus security, and got put on hold. Thank goodness for cell phones... 10 minutes after the fire was put out, the campus security got back on the line and asked the state of the emergency.
I'm highly amused in that your review of the review was utterly lacking in content other than the two links, yet you're running at +5 Informative. Somehow, I think your satire was missed. Maybe the people who write these reviews modded you up due to professional courtesy?
And if you really want to encourage innovation and sock it to the RIAA, start listening to the local bands. In a decent-sized city, it's not hard to find some group performing in local venues who fits your musical preferences. Most sell their own CDs too. I've found some really gems in these bands and I know that my money is going towards someone local.
Another place to look for CDs of local bands are in your music shops. Not the places that sell CDs, but the ones that sell the instruments. Frequently, the counter will have CDs from several local bands available for purchase.
And, in a vague attempt to be on-topic, the idea is interesting, but I'll be more impressed once they can get it to work without the gloves. If nothing else, couldn't you see as a nice input method for translating ASL to glossed English? Sure, it will take a lot more work to get any kind of grammar working, but just being able to translate individual signs to the English equivalents would be of great value in emergency situations and hospitals.
I never really understood that comment. It's kind of like saying, "That thinking thing? You're not really thinking... you just believe you are. It's all in your mind."
My last research into the matter was about 5 years ago and the materials may have been old then, but as I understand it, hypnosis doesn't remove the pain, but allows you to ignore it. This is an important distinction, as some of the physical reactions of the body occur in reaction to the pain. Also, there are some drugs which destroy the human body's ability to ignore pain. (They think... it works on people who claim to "be able to ignore pain.") They did a test (which sounded incredibly funny and sadistic) where they asked a well known hypnosis anesthesia guy and asked him to do tests. They had him induce trance, applied pain, nothing, applied more pain, nothing. Injected the drug and the guy started screaming his head off as all of the pain rushed in.
Hey! I remember that story... the sequels were pretty bad, though.
I do, however, have a problem with not being able to give 1 cent to the artist, without HAVING to give $1 to the record company.
Sure and you can. Many of these bands have an address for fan mail. Send them a few bucks. What are they going to do, send it back?
And as for the maintainer interpretting it, you're absolutely right that most people just throw up their hands. It's hard to interpret someone else's code for anything past the trivial. Doable, but hard enough that rewriting it often is a good way. Heh, besides which, it's amazing how many times I've thrown up my hands, rewritten the code, and by the experience found that I understood the original code.