Except if the kid posts information relating to school on his blog (his class schedule, what time he has lunch, etc.), it remains school business and thus the school has the right to regulate it. Thats what is being prohibited by this rule (for those of who just read the title or/. summary and not the actual FA).
"Of course this is one of the major problems associated with federal funding of religious programs for charity or education. These charities can discriminate and there are no federal protections for these folks who are discriminated against even though the source of the funds are federal in nature."
I get where the free speech cries are at least coming from (even if they did forget to RTFA), but I'm really confused where you get discrimination out of this.
Anyways, in response to your rant, there are numerous laws restricting how a charity must act if it wants federal funding.
Then why didn't more companies buy rights to SCO Linux to avoid paying potential court costs?
I can attempt to sue anyone I like. That doesn't mean it will ever go through or that they have to take it seriously. And yes, that is a nice feature of the American justice system, that individuals and companies who feel they have hurt have the ability to seek reparations through the legal system.
And before you start bullshitting about how this is an instance of big business bullying around the little guys with their rich lawyers, please try to RTFA. Or at least just the title, it doesn't have too many big words. This is one of the little guys.
At least until the IBMs, MSs, and Suns in the world counter sue and drive them into bankruptcy.
And remember when SCO tried to charge royalties for Linux? I think only two small companies actually agreed to pay something. Small business owners are not that gullible.
So you are comparing an entry level job to a managerial job? And you think that is a fair comparison?
Add to that, how many people truly work 80 hours a week? I don't mean those who come home tired and claim they working 10 hours a day, 8 days a week, but who in reality may actually end up in the 60-70 hour range for a few months during the release cycle. I mean those who really are sitting in their cube, working at their computer, for 80 hours a week all through the year, and apparently with only two weeks of vacation and no holidays. I don't think it will be as many as you suspect.
Yeah, I remember that anonymous "spouse of an EA employee" letter that came out earlier this year. $5 says the employee was in reality banging a co-worker in the evenings and then telling their spouse that they were stuck in the office 'working'.
Yeah, in a place like America shows like South Park or Family guy or virtually antyhing on PBS that dare to make fun of or criticize Christians or Republicans would never make on the air. And forget about seeing a show whose sole purpose was to mock the president.
There is an easy solution for forgetful people that many banks already use. Allow them to just reset their password by inputing in the answer to a "secret question" like "What is the name of your hometown". Its foolproof!
...unless of course someone else has access to the name of your hometown.
...which they could easily get from your driver's license when they pick your pocket to get your bankcard.
On second thought, maybe carying around a copy of your password is actually more secure.
You must have been a real pain in the ass to your friends when you were playing games as a kid.
"You must be baiting me, or just exaggerating to make a point. Many word problems revolve around information that is known to one party in the "story" but not another. The devil is in the details."
And obviously that is not the case here. It is not required for every little detail to be specified, or else the riddle would be pages long. People asked if they were allowed to use the chalice to bash the king's head in. Should he have specified in the origional post that the king is a kung fu expert? Nor is it specified that the cells didn't have backdoors leading to freedom. Nor is it specified that k must be an integer. Get the picture?
If you nitpick too much, virtually any riddle is unsolvable. Consider the sample riddle given for this discussion, with the 50 quarters. Its never specified that both sides of each quarter is different. As written, its perfectly possible for some (or even all) of the quarters to be one sided. If so, it is unsolveable.
And as far as your list of posts go, at least one just misunderstood what the poster meant by k (I seem to remember it was around 2 am at the time), and I can probably find just as many, if not more, claiming they can answer yes the first time because they all went through the main room to get to the cells. All that means is that people don't read things clearly at 2 am on a Sunday morning.
Yes, if this was a formal mathematical proof, he would have to have specified at the beginning "For any non-negative integer k...". However, this was not a formal mathematical proof. It was a riddle. You know, like for fun. Get it?
I was merely repeating the parents wording for literary effect, so I cannot comment on how it was initially chosen or what the parent meant to say. However, it certainly fits in this context. From the dictionary:
Exercising power or serving a function without being legally or officially established: a de facto government; a de facto nuclear storage facility.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you are not supposed to cite traditional encyclopedias as your de facto source either. They are intended to be easy to use references, not as the basis for something you write in a paper.
In defense of the Wikipedia, thats not all that new of a problem. People have always tried to take the easy road in terms of finding sources. Once it was World Book, then it was first web page that came up from a Lycos search, now its the Wikipedia.
Whats truly scary is the number of people defending the use of the Wikipedia as a de facto source of information.
So/. is more concerned with ease of use than actual innovative technology? What has the world come to? I'll just pray that all the normal posters are just stuck manually editing some Slackware configuration files.
And I'm not disputing that it is winning, just that they are not the fathers of this technology. Thanking them is thus like thanking Microsoft for the computer because they are the ones who brought it to the masses. Not that there are not people out there who don't do that, just that you don't usually find too many of them posting here.
" k is obviously a known constant, the question is known to whom."
Obviously to everyone, or there would be no point in mentioning it.
"As you noted the original poster has had to clarify this several times throughout the thread. If it was so obvious, why all the clarifications?"
I believe he has also had to clarify multiple times that the king was asking if they had been all in the room since they were origionally locked in their cells, even though that was explicitly stated in the origional problem. You have no idea the crap I have had to explain to people on/. All that means is that the world is full of idiots who like to type.
The vast majority of people who posted got it. If it was so confusing, how were they able to do that?
Why? What did Apple do that was new? Mp3 players existed before the iPod, and mp3 players that also play video existed before the video iPod. All they did was make them look pretty, of poorer quality, limited choice as to what formats it supports, and charge more for them. Next thing you know you guys will thank Microsoft for "inventing" the operating system.
And as far as purchasing music and TV online, the only reason they were able to do it where others failed was because the owners of the content let them. They have been many little guys over the years who have attempted to do this, they just didn't have the connections to make it happen.
Sure, they got a short term gain in publicity, but what happens when it becomes the norm for people to just buy TV shows off the net instead of watching them on their local affiliate? Sure, that may be great for you with your ethernet connection, nice computer, and if you feel like watching it on the go your iPod, but it sort of sucks for the affiliate owner, and for all of those on the other side of the digital divide (oh wait, I forgot, this is/. so they don't exist as far as we are concerned).
Along with the increased popularity of cable/satellite TV and the Internet in general, local affilates (along with the people who depend on them for news and entertainment) are in trouble.
Generally speaking, in mathematics when a phrase like "The king is allowed to manipulate the cup himself, k times", k is a known constant. And since this is/. (home for geeks) and the title of this discussion is "Your Favorite Math/Logic Riddles", this is an acceptable language to use. And if you really had any doubt, the origional poster has clarified that on several occasions.
Its also not stated that the prisoners will ever be fed in their cells, does that mean that any solution needs to found within a few days before the prisoners are fed? Neither is it explicitly stated that the prisoners have an understanding of a number system, does that mean we cannot assume that they know how to count? Stop nitpicking. The problem is obviously both clear and solvable as several people have now found apparently independent solutions to it.
You don't need to know. I've explained to you almost this exact same strategy to you ad nauseum. At this point either you really suck at math, or you are so irrationally pissed off because you couldn't figure out a riddle that you are being deliberately dense.
"You have most certainly not taken that into account. All your responses make the exact same problem: that you assume you know how the king's going to use his flips. You don't."
That is 100% incorrect. My solution makes no such assumption. There is an error in it as discussed here, but it is not related to what you are saying and can be easily compensated for. Just because you cannot find a solution does not mean it cannot be solved. Lose the damn ego, its just a riddle.
If the king never flips it, you still get to that count. If he faked it k times, then after (n-1)(k+1), then the prisoners would have flipped it (n-1)(k+1)-k times. The maximum number of flips that are possible without one of the prisoners entering the room is (n-2)(k+1)+k. If you do the algebra, you should find the latter value is less than the former, so if you get the (n-1)(k+1), you know everyone has been in there.
My previous solution (each prisoner but one flips it one way k+1 times and then the other guy just counts how many times he flips it back, then say everyone has been in there once they get to (n-1)(k+1)) does have a flaw, in that the king can use his flips to counter the other prisoner's flips instead of using them to fake them. Right before he calls the leader, he can flip it back to the origional position and the leader will never count it, thus he will never get to (n-1)(k+1).
However, this can easily be solved by increasing the number of times each non-leader prisoner flips it by k. If they each flip it 2k+1 times, then the leader can wait until he gets to a count of (2k+1)(n-1)-k.
Proof that it is reachable: Since the prisoners will flip it (2k+1)(n-1) times and the king can only cancel out k of those with his flips, this count will be eventually reached.
Proof that everyone will have visited the room at this time: The worst case scenario would be if every non-leader prisoner but one has flipped it all 2k+1 times and the king has used all k of his flips in the same direction. This will cause the count to reach (2k+1)(n-2)+k. I believe if you do the algebra, you will find this is one less than the required (2k+1)(n-1)-k. In order to get that last flip, the last prisoner will have to go into the room.
If you also consider that you don't know which way the chalice will be initially, you can just assume it will be one way. If it is not, you can assume the king has used one of his now k+1 flips to make it that way, and adjust the formula as needed.
The origional solution required the prisoners to only flip it once. If you have flipping each time they can, thats even worse. Now instead of being stuck in the dungeon for all eternity, you get beheaded. Once you get to n+k flips, you don't know if each guy flipped it once or if one guy flipped it n times.
"Debbie Frost, spokewoman for Mountain View, California-based Google, noted that the software uses information already available from public sources"
You don't hear lines like this when people are talking about how great Google Maps are. From reading the "Praise Google" ads (er, I mean 'articles') on/. recently you would think Google invented aerial photography.
Yes, I have taken that into account. Read practically every other response I have written on this thread. This count is reachable if the king never uses a flip.
And then if the king refuses to flip the cup at all? They will never get to n+k. You need a count that is reachable if the king doesn't touch the chalice and one that can be messed with up to k times.
"Close, but the problem with the riddle - and why I agree that this is a hoax riddle that's been made up - or very poorly expressed - is that the king can flip the chalice (0..k) times. Knowing k is useless information. The chalice cannot provide information because the king may flip it just once, or not at all."
But this solution takes that into account. If the king never flips it, we still will get to (n-1)(k+1) on our own once everyone has flipped it the maximum number of times. If he does flip it k times, he still will be unable to fake enough flips to make it appear everyone has been in there if someone has yet to be called.
"
The "only two people have ever solved it" seems nonsense to me too. If this is genuinely the case, and the solution is as hideously complex as the OP seems to take such glee in stating, either the OP is claiming he is a genius of Einsteinian proportions, or he was not in any position to credibly examine the solutions given to him."
I don't believe he ever said he was one of the two who solved it, and it was his roommate who gave it to him, he didn't make it up. And I can think of a lot of riddles that very few people have been able to solve (as far as I know) because I havn't asked it too many times. Anyways, I'm much more likely to believe his claim that there is a solution than your claim (after thinking about it for what, a few hours?) that it cannot be solved.
Slashdot Mirror
Except if the kid posts information relating to school on his blog (his class schedule, what time he has lunch, etc.), it remains school business and thus the school has the right to regulate it. Thats what is being prohibited by this rule (for those of who just read the title or /. summary and not the actual FA).
I get where the free speech cries are at least coming from (even if they did forget to RTFA), but I'm really confused where you get discrimination out of this.
Anyways, in response to your rant, there are numerous laws restricting how a charity must act if it wants federal funding.
I can attempt to sue anyone I like. That doesn't mean it will ever go through or that they have to take it seriously. And yes, that is a nice feature of the American justice system, that individuals and companies who feel they have hurt have the ability to seek reparations through the legal system.
And before you start bullshitting about how this is an instance of big business bullying around the little guys with their rich lawyers, please try to RTFA. Or at least just the title, it doesn't have too many big words. This is one of the little guys.
And remember when SCO tried to charge royalties for Linux? I think only two small companies actually agreed to pay something. Small business owners are not that gullible.
Add to that, how many people truly work 80 hours a week? I don't mean those who come home tired and claim they working 10 hours a day, 8 days a week, but who in reality may actually end up in the 60-70 hour range for a few months during the release cycle. I mean those who really are sitting in their cube, working at their computer, for 80 hours a week all through the year, and apparently with only two weeks of vacation and no holidays. I don't think it will be as many as you suspect.
Yeah, I remember that anonymous "spouse of an EA employee" letter that came out earlier this year. $5 says the employee was in reality banging a co-worker in the evenings and then telling their spouse that they were stuck in the office 'working'.
See, now thats being extremely sarcastic.
On second thought, maybe carying around a copy of your password is actually more secure.
"You must be baiting me, or just exaggerating to make a point. Many word problems revolve around information that is known to one party in the "story" but not another. The devil is in the details."
And obviously that is not the case here. It is not required for every little detail to be specified, or else the riddle would be pages long. People asked if they were allowed to use the chalice to bash the king's head in. Should he have specified in the origional post that the king is a kung fu expert? Nor is it specified that the cells didn't have backdoors leading to freedom. Nor is it specified that k must be an integer. Get the picture?
If you nitpick too much, virtually any riddle is unsolvable. Consider the sample riddle given for this discussion, with the 50 quarters. Its never specified that both sides of each quarter is different. As written, its perfectly possible for some (or even all) of the quarters to be one sided. If so, it is unsolveable.
And as far as your list of posts go, at least one just misunderstood what the poster meant by k (I seem to remember it was around 2 am at the time), and I can probably find just as many, if not more, claiming they can answer yes the first time because they all went through the main room to get to the cells. All that means is that people don't read things clearly at 2 am on a Sunday morning.
Yes, if this was a formal mathematical proof, he would have to have specified at the beginning "For any non-negative integer k...". However, this was not a formal mathematical proof. It was a riddle. You know, like for fun. Get it?
Not to mention the mods that modded these up.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you are not supposed to cite traditional encyclopedias as your de facto source either. They are intended to be easy to use references, not as the basis for something you write in a paper.
Whats truly scary is the number of people defending the use of the Wikipedia as a de facto source of information.
And I'm not disputing that it is winning, just that they are not the fathers of this technology. Thanking them is thus like thanking Microsoft for the computer because they are the ones who brought it to the masses. Not that there are not people out there who don't do that, just that you don't usually find too many of them posting here.
Obviously to everyone, or there would be no point in mentioning it.
"As you noted the original poster has had to clarify this several times throughout the thread. If it was so obvious, why all the clarifications?"
I believe he has also had to clarify multiple times that the king was asking if they had been all in the room since they were origionally locked in their cells, even though that was explicitly stated in the origional problem. You have no idea the crap I have had to explain to people on /. All that means is that the world is full of idiots who like to type.
The vast majority of people who posted got it. If it was so confusing, how were they able to do that?
And as far as purchasing music and TV online, the only reason they were able to do it where others failed was because the owners of the content let them. They have been many little guys over the years who have attempted to do this, they just didn't have the connections to make it happen.
Along with the increased popularity of cable/satellite TV and the Internet in general, local affilates (along with the people who depend on them for news and entertainment) are in trouble.
Its also not stated that the prisoners will ever be fed in their cells, does that mean that any solution needs to found within a few days before the prisoners are fed? Neither is it explicitly stated that the prisoners have an understanding of a number system, does that mean we cannot assume that they know how to count? Stop nitpicking. The problem is obviously both clear and solvable as several people have now found apparently independent solutions to it.
You don't need to know. I've explained to you almost this exact same strategy to you ad nauseum. At this point either you really suck at math, or you are so irrationally pissed off because you couldn't figure out a riddle that you are being deliberately dense.
That is 100% incorrect. My solution makes no such assumption. There is an error in it as discussed here, but it is not related to what you are saying and can be easily compensated for. Just because you cannot find a solution does not mean it cannot be solved. Lose the damn ego, its just a riddle.
If the king never flips it, you still get to that count. If he faked it k times, then after (n-1)(k+1), then the prisoners would have flipped it (n-1)(k+1)-k times. The maximum number of flips that are possible without one of the prisoners entering the room is (n-2)(k+1)+k. If you do the algebra, you should find the latter value is less than the former, so if you get the (n-1)(k+1), you know everyone has been in there.
However, this can easily be solved by increasing the number of times each non-leader prisoner flips it by k. If they each flip it 2k+1 times, then the leader can wait until he gets to a count of (2k+1)(n-1)-k.
Proof that it is reachable: Since the prisoners will flip it (2k+1)(n-1) times and the king can only cancel out k of those with his flips, this count will be eventually reached.
Proof that everyone will have visited the room at this time: The worst case scenario would be if every non-leader prisoner but one has flipped it all 2k+1 times and the king has used all k of his flips in the same direction. This will cause the count to reach (2k+1)(n-2)+k. I believe if you do the algebra, you will find this is one less than the required (2k+1)(n-1)-k. In order to get that last flip, the last prisoner will have to go into the room.
If you also consider that you don't know which way the chalice will be initially, you can just assume it will be one way. If it is not, you can assume the king has used one of his now k+1 flips to make it that way, and adjust the formula as needed.
Any objections?
The origional solution required the prisoners to only flip it once. If you have flipping each time they can, thats even worse. Now instead of being stuck in the dungeon for all eternity, you get beheaded. Once you get to n+k flips, you don't know if each guy flipped it once or if one guy flipped it n times.
You don't hear lines like this when people are talking about how great Google Maps are. From reading the "Praise Google" ads (er, I mean 'articles') on /. recently you would think Google invented aerial photography.
Yes, I have taken that into account. Read practically every other response I have written on this thread. This count is reachable if the king never uses a flip.
And then if the king refuses to flip the cup at all? They will never get to n+k. You need a count that is reachable if the king doesn't touch the chalice and one that can be messed with up to k times.
But this solution takes that into account. If the king never flips it, we still will get to (n-1)(k+1) on our own once everyone has flipped it the maximum number of times. If he does flip it k times, he still will be unable to fake enough flips to make it appear everyone has been in there if someone has yet to be called.
" The "only two people have ever solved it" seems nonsense to me too. If this is genuinely the case, and the solution is as hideously complex as the OP seems to take such glee in stating, either the OP is claiming he is a genius of Einsteinian proportions, or he was not in any position to credibly examine the solutions given to him."
I don't believe he ever said he was one of the two who solved it, and it was his roommate who gave it to him, he didn't make it up. And I can think of a lot of riddles that very few people have been able to solve (as far as I know) because I havn't asked it too many times. Anyways, I'm much more likely to believe his claim that there is a solution than your claim (after thinking about it for what, a few hours?) that it cannot be solved.