arithma

The most appropriate behavior is implemented by regex.

Find the empty string and replace with say

  `($&)` 

where

  `$&`

refers to the captured variable, and with input

  `xyz`,

the result is

  `()x()y()z()`

With an empty input, the result is

  `()`.

The result of indexOf can consistently return the first index of the first half open subrange in a string. It just so happens that the first subrange of an empty string in an empty string is [0, 0).

The limiting case is also an interesting way to look at it:

  ()a()b()c()
  ()a()b()
  ()a()
  ()

I haven't done the analysis, but one major assumption that the whole result is based on is whether the rules of the game are pre-established or just revealed after the first pick. With an adversarial game host who has the option to reveal or not, maybe the result changes, but more importantly, it explains the intuitionistic refusal for some to buy the argument.

Are we siblings

Spherical Harmonics became extremely trendy in the graphics literature for dynamic lighting and pre-baked light maps of some sort, and completely dropped off at some point. Still remember some discussions and questions regarding how they're not easy to "orient".

I often don't comment code, especially in personal stuff, but when I occasionally do, which happens mostly when things get overwhelming, I find bugs or fix things that I was stuck on. Writing forces you to understand better, name better, and almost feels like providing you with another perspective, all without leaving your own self.

What I like about this approach is that if you are using any other protocols for transport, everything becomes instantly portable. Imagine having the same logic serving objects per IDs through HTTP and websockets. Rest makes things more clumsy. Though I would concede doing things the REST way, as in the app-server participating in the http headers/status enables caching and all sorts of things that would be hell to do through otherwise.

Interesting to think how many 10^6 faster gates would be needed to do the work of 10^9 at the same speed. Say take the 8086 and make it a million times faster. At about 30K transistors and 5MHz. A photonic 8086 apparently would run blindingly fast around anything available now.

Serial speed is always a gain up, no questions asked I guess.

Obviously all of that is over simplified, and not considering other components to any system that would be built (but hey, it's not like any of this is happening tomorrow anyway).

Computer science is much more like Mathematics than Physics. It feels wrong calling "computer science" a science, in the same sense of calling "Mathematics" science.

In addition to the other mentioned reasons, I guess it's valuable feedback for their providers, and if that feedback is acted upon, it's beneficial for them.

Bitcoin is more of ash rather than a battery in this analogy.

I like bitcoin (the idea, not the burning of the planet, even though it's only a temporary hack to bootstrap the whole thing). And hey, maybe it will encourage building nuclear mining farms, that will give their owners free bitcoin, and then we can use the nuclear plants.

The only defense I can stomach for Bitcoin's unfathomable energy consumption is that it might be only temporary. Is it worth it? So far, not that much, but I think developed-countries under-estimate the value of bitcoin, since they have more stable economies, and thus currencies, and enjoy freedom of moving their money, and data privacy...

I knew this was happening, but reading it, hey, maybe that's one way to get anti-gravity. Just loop the topology on itself. Obviously commenting in jest, but now I'm intrigued to see if someone has seriously considered this.

C++ expression-power has increased considerably since C++11, and I believe, semantically, Prime Number generation in both C++ and Python could be python-line for c++-(line[s]) translated. C++ approaching the comfort and ease of use of Python is a worthy goal to reach. The flip side is well appreciated too (Cython, where Python can converge to C++ performance is noteworthy as well).

We all at least are dumber than we'd like to be. Nobody would refuse a pill that would make them smarter. Sorry for off-topic, but this has been gnawing at me lately, feels like something is a miss about my cognition, only very subtle, nothing to go for any kind of practitioner. Is there any route actually for giving the good old fat bucket a rattle to make it work back at original capacity? Have you ever tried anything?

I know this is off-topic, if it annoys anyone, I could take it somewhere else, but thought people interested in this article might have experimented or self-reflected.

Just a question, isn't all criticism against bitcoin applicable to gold?

Money/Currency/Value in general can't be reduced or derived from first principles. You always have to take into account human nature, economic activity, and most unfortunately: psychology. So all criticism about how bitcoin inherently being pointless, sounds like off-tune. I want good reasons to/NOT-to buy in.

First-world country citizens kind of trust their governments to at least behave lawfully, or at least be eventually accountable. There are systems in place for transactions and accounting, and "everyone" has access.

The "Value" of bitcoin, coming from a struggling third-world country (Lebanon), is in the ability to be independent of a currency that is inflating quickly, being able to transact with the outside world (even if only in bulk) without being under the mercy of a failing financial system that is lurking around to take a share in every which way possible.

The energy consumption needs of bitcoin are an obvious drawback. But I don't think it's fair to brush away the whole thing for only that reason.

Disclosure: I own an embarrassingly small amount of bitcoin (~0.4BTC).