I AM an engineer, thank you. A linear ordering along one dimension is called a "partial ordering", which is often quite useless, even for an engineer:-/
Your method doesn't "sort" the spaghetti. It aligns their ends against the same reference ( the table top ), which has nothing to do with sorting. They will still be, in your hand, in haphazard "order", i.e. there will be no order at all, as the shortest may very well end up immediately next to the longest.
Strings T ( the "text" ) and P ( the "pattern" ) both use an alphabet A of N symbols. Index each of A's symbols with a distinct odd prime number p1...pN. [ only odd primes as I personally don't like 2, the "oddest prime of them all";-) ] String T has length M. Raise each prime index in T to the power of its location <= M in T, multiply them all, yielding a number sigT ( for signature of T ). [ begin counting locations with 1, not with 0, in which case you'll lose the information about T's first symbol... ]
Do the same thing for P, yielding a number sigP.
if sigT mod sigP yields zero, T contains P.
Example: T = "ABRE". A -> 3, B-> 5, R->67 (the 18th odd prime), E->13 so sigT = 3^1 * 5^2 * 67^3 * 13^4 = 644256903225
P = "BR". B->5, R->67 so sigP = 5^1 * 67^2 = 22445
644256903225 mod 22445 = 0, so T contains P.
Computational complexity: depends on complexity of the 2 multiplication steps. sigT will by definition be the largest number ( humongous, actually, for genome sequences ). So you'll need a very efficient multiplication algorithm; the best one I know is Schönhage-Strassen with complexity O(log n log( log n ) ).
I also had immediate associations with "Paradise Lost" and "Paradise Regained". Must be too old / too much of a fucking intellectual. Still, even this won't make me leave my books and watch TV.
This huhcorp site is one of the funniest I've seen in recent times.
Just for the record, and entirely coincidentally: this morning I was called by a recruiter, asking if I'm interested in being interviewed for a position of "Senior IT and Enterprise Architect". Tomorrow. I thought "yeah, why not". So I said I'll go. I'm wondering what kind of birdshit-buzzwords are going to fall on my head tomorrow. Can't wait.
Your experiment sounds interesting. Wanting to model the earth, however, you omit a major part, however: the oceans, as an energy reservoir. You should add a certain amount of water. For sure, the experiment needs to be done. How can you be so sure it never has been ?
... but for the fact that, each and any and every time AGW is mentioned on Slashdot, we have a majority of comment posters either flat-out denying AGW or engaging into a shouting-and-flaming war. There seems to be no other subject polarizing the/. public as strongly as AGW. Why is that ?
Has the environmental impact of such megalithic data centers (both of building one and running one) ever been computed ? Wait, you'd need another data center to... aw, sh***.
An ex-colleague of mine, a scientist, is the technical lead in a now nearly-ended EU-financed R & D project, named CRISMA: http://www.crismaproject.eu/. They delivered and tested a series of tools that show actors such as fire-brigade commanders, higher-ranking police officials etc. etc. what the consequences of their actions are in case of an emergency. For example: a city has 30 ambulances. Sending 20 of them to the first place with heavy reported casualties after an earthquake leaves 10 to deal with anything else. Now repeat the simulation while sending over only 15, or 10 ambulances. Learn about what good and bad scenarios are. Such stuff would have been great if it had been at the disposal of Japanese emergency coordinators before Fukushima...
LOL you seem to be right. One does indeed wonder if they do know at all. Some official saying this may, however, not yet be a clear and final violation of the Treaty itself. At least I think so, as "NASA Office of the Inspector General" does not fully equal "US Government" or "US State", being rather an government-run institution. If NASA were challenged to hand over moon rocks to any, say, research institute and then refused to do so by claiming "they're government property" and were backed by Congress or Senate, then, hell yes.
Heck, you may be right, though only in the case they chase the rock as their "property". If the excuse is "we need those rocks for scientific research / lab examination" then they adhere to, at least, the letter of the Treaty. (Whether or not they adhere to the Treaty's **spirit** is something that could only be assessed by the UN itself. But then again, IANAL.)
At VW and its contractors, as well as at BMW and Porsche - these are the ones I explicitly know about - that would be prohibited. You would, however, be required - in quite a rigid way - to indicate clear authorship of the patch; even subsequent changes to the patch itself must be auditable.
"Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the Moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person." ( Article 11, paragraph 3 ).
On "other celestial bodies" however, e.g. asteroids, the Treaty is silent regarding property and appropriation.
You're wrong. Java uses references, not pointers. And Java references are garbage collected, as pointed out by more than one poster in this thread. Quite the difference.
I know all this. Funny that there seems to be hardly any golden/middle road between the hardcore use of pointers and having full-fledged garbage collection. There was an effort, around the time Java took off - 1996-ish - to bring Ada 95 and Java closer together: http://www.adahome.com/Tutorials/Lovelace/hello.ada .
Slashdot Mirror
I AM an engineer, thank you. A linear ordering along one dimension is called a "partial ordering", which is often quite useless, even for an engineer :-/
Your method doesn't "sort" the spaghetti. It aligns their ends against the same reference ( the table top ), which has nothing to do with sorting. They will still be, in your hand, in haphazard "order", i.e. there will be no order at all, as the shortest may very well end up immediately next to the longest.
Strings T ( the "text" ) and P ( the "pattern" ) both use an alphabet A of N symbols. ;-) ]
:-)
Index each of A's symbols with a distinct odd prime number p1...pN. [ only odd primes as I personally don't like 2, the "oddest prime of them all"
String T has length M.
Raise each prime index in T to the power of its location <= M in T, multiply them all, yielding a number sigT ( for signature of T ). [ begin counting locations with 1, not with 0, in which case you'll lose the information about T's first symbol... ]
Do the same thing for P, yielding a number sigP.
if sigT mod sigP yields zero, T contains P.
Example: T = "ABRE". A -> 3, B-> 5, R->67 (the 18th odd prime), E->13
so sigT = 3^1 * 5^2 * 67^3 * 13^4 = 644256903225
P = "BR". B->5, R->67
so sigP = 5^1 * 67^2 = 22445
644256903225 mod 22445 = 0, so T contains P.
Computational complexity: depends on complexity of the 2 multiplication steps. sigT will by definition be the largest number ( humongous, actually, for genome sequences ). So you'll need a very efficient multiplication algorithm; the best one I know is Schönhage-Strassen with complexity O(log n log( log n ) ).
Just slurps enormous amounts of memory
I also had immediate associations with "Paradise Lost" and "Paradise Regained". Must be too old / too much of a fucking intellectual. Still, even this won't make me leave my books and watch TV.
Mod parent up into the sky!!
This huhcorp site is one of the funniest I've seen in recent times.
Just for the record, and entirely coincidentally: this morning I was called by a recruiter, asking if I'm interested in being interviewed for a position of "Senior IT and Enterprise Architect". Tomorrow. I thought "yeah, why not". So I said I'll go. I'm wondering what kind of birdshit-buzzwords are going to fall on my head tomorrow. Can't wait.
There are signs of regularly flowing water in my bathroom. No need to get excited about aliens. Although...
Use one series of primes for major.
Use a second series of primes for minor.
Use a third series of primes for patches/micro/bug fixing.
The three sets of primes should be disjoint.
For each release, multiply major with minor with micro. That is your unique version number.
You may add some sugar by adding powers of these primes for various locales, database compatibility etc. etc.
I had not expected so dryly pedantic an answer at such a question. Slashdot, yeah... <sigh>
( Disclaimer: I do know about GF Arithmetic. )
Nobody expects either party to truly disarm. The important point: to keep them talking, instead of (virtually or really) shooting at each other.
Bono. C. Theron. Shakira. Branson.
Your experiment sounds interesting. Wanting to model the earth, however, you omit a major part, however: the oceans, as an energy reservoir. You should add a certain amount of water. For sure, the experiment needs to be done. How can you be so sure it never has been ?
... but for the fact that, each and any and every time AGW is mentioned on Slashdot, we have a majority of comment posters either flat-out denying AGW or engaging into a shouting-and-flaming war. There seems to be no other subject polarizing the /. public as strongly as AGW. Why is that ?
Has the environmental impact of such megalithic data centers (both of building one and running one) ever been computed ? Wait, you'd need another data center to... aw, sh***.
What is this GirlFriend arithmetic you are referring to ?
Users galore, in their thousands and millions, but no one really loves it. At least - did you ever hear one say "I love Excel" or "I love SAP" ?
"Nobody wants to respond to your comment"
Funny, then, that you respond. Like the crook in "Fargo" who, fed up with his fellow crook, is blabbering all the time about being silent.
An ex-colleague of mine, a scientist, is the technical lead in a now nearly-ended EU-financed R & D project, named CRISMA: http://www.crismaproject.eu/. They delivered and tested a series of tools that show actors such as fire-brigade commanders, higher-ranking police officials etc. etc. what the consequences of their actions are in case of an emergency. For example: a city has 30 ambulances. Sending 20 of them to the first place with heavy reported casualties after an earthquake leaves 10 to deal with anything else. Now repeat the simulation while sending over only 15, or 10 ambulances. Learn about what good and bad scenarios are. Such stuff would have been great if it had been at the disposal of Japanese emergency coordinators before Fukushima...
Just RTFA. This is not a general judgment; it is about one particular case.
i.e., utterly non-interesting. Computers are there to be programmed, not to play games upon. (I do make an exception for chess, though.)
Same thing for VR. Utterly boring and plain, compared to
1) reality
2) programming
LOL you seem to be right. One does indeed wonder if they do know at all. Some official saying this may, however, not yet be a clear and final violation of the Treaty itself. At least I think so, as "NASA Office of the Inspector General" does not fully equal "US Government" or "US State", being rather an government-run institution. If NASA were challenged to hand over moon rocks to any, say, research institute and then refused to do so by claiming "they're government property" and were backed by Congress or Senate, then, hell yes.
Heck, you may be right, though only in the case they chase the rock as their "property". If the excuse is "we need those rocks for scientific research / lab examination" then they adhere to, at least, the letter of the Treaty. (Whether or not they adhere to the Treaty's **spirit** is something that could only be assessed by the UN itself. But then again, IANAL.)
At VW and its contractors, as well as at BMW and Porsche - these are the ones I explicitly know about - that would be prohibited. You would, however, be required - in quite a rigid way - to indicate clear authorship of the patch; even subsequent changes to the patch itself must be auditable.
"Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the Moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person."
( Article 11, paragraph 3 ).
On "other celestial bodies" however, e.g. asteroids, the Treaty is silent regarding property and appropriation.
You're wrong. Java uses references, not pointers. And Java references are garbage collected, as pointed out by more than one poster in this thread. Quite the difference.
I know all this. Funny that there seems to be hardly any golden/middle road between the hardcore use of pointers and having full-fledged garbage collection. There was an effort, around the time Java took off - 1996-ish - to bring Ada 95 and Java closer together: http://www.adahome.com/Tutorials/Lovelace/hello.ada .
Nothing really came from it, AFAIK. Alas, alas...