/random/ - random

>>161969

I have nothing to hide either.....nothing can be hidden, given the advanced AI monitoring of the government.....

You all are so retarded it makes my ass ache. Sphincter cancer-inducing retardation.

>>161969

of course, there is nothing that can be hidden.....everything online is easily detected with AI software.....Internet privacy is a myth.....

>>163130

Can AI software detect cp in an encrypted folder?

>>163134

Take a wild fucking guess.

>>163134

If the encryption is good then no

>>163140

Like Veracrypt?

>>163140

Correct. You can now take your 1$ home or risk it and answer the next question for 2$.

>>163145

Yes.

>>163145

Yes

>>163146

I don't have much to do. It's better for me to answer stupid bot questions than to stare at the wall

>>163146

Do I have lifelines?

>>163148

Sure. Then I'll give you a nice riddle. I saw it on reddit recently, which is unfortunate, but I've known it for 12 years. It's pretty good. Don't spoil the fun - no google, no ai, etc.

You're a benevolent king. Your beautiful daughter is getting married tomorrow to a handsome prince. You have gathered all of your kingdom's wine - 1000 barrels - for the wedding. Unfortunately an insidious sorcerer has poisoned one barrel - whoever drinks even just a drop will turn green in 24 hours. It's a serious matter - if a foreign nobility turns green, it will be taken as treason and will likely spark a war. However, no wedding can take place without tons of wine. You must find the spoiled barrel. Thankfully, 10 brave volunteers turn up every day to test-drink any amount of wine. By how many days do you have to delay the wedding?

Ask if any clarification is needed.

>>163154

I set A the universe defined by the possible tuples (X1,...,X10) where the variable Xi is set to 1 if the person labelled i drinks and 0 if they don't

The number of possible tuples would be 2×2×...×2 so 2 raised to the power of 10 so 1024

I only have 1000 barrels. So my universe contains more elements than the barrels. And so I set a bijection between a subset of my universe that has 1000 elements and the set of barrels. It does not really matter which one. As long as it exists is good. Because then, if for instance the 1st 2nd and third person get sick but not the others, I will use the image of the tuple (1,1,1,0...0) by my bijection to find the barrel

So i would need 24 hours to detect the barrel from the start of the test, assuming that they will all show up tomorrow at the same time.

So either postpone by one day or not. Because if the test is run at 10 am for instance and the wedding of my daughter is at 6pm tomorrow, then at 10 am of tomorrow I'll already have the answer. If the test is run at 8pm though, I'll need to postpone it by 1 day, since the test results will only come at 8pm and the wedding is at 6 pm

I don't really know how to write in math font here. Latex or whatever. And I don't really feel like writing math stuff at night. If I did then I would have probably studied the stuff I need to study

This can be generalised to any number of barrels actually. If it's above the size of my universe A then I will have to split A into a partition and work on each element of the partition separately. Now of course in a special case it would be the same. It's if you only have a barrel above the number of possible tuples. Because if it's not in the studied set then it cannot be anything but that barrel. So say for 1025 barrels i will need 1 say too. For 2049 I will need 2 days (the same as a number of barrels from 1026 to 2048), and it keeps on going that way. I think. It's nighttime and definitely not a time appropriate to do maths. I think it's that honestly. Because the optimality of this method on a set transfers to others

>>163159

I did not phrase it correctly in the special case, sorry. A barrel above the multiples of the numbers of tuples possible. If the size of my universe is n, then it would be where the barrel number m verifies m≡1[n]

>>163159

Yes, exactly.

>>163160

That makes me confused. With "multiples" are you just considering the multi-day cases?

I'm not familiar with this syntax "1[n]", what does it mean?

>>163159

Math is stupid. Math is just algorithms. It's all memorizing algorithms with working memory used on computation. That computation is a social construct because it uses subjective symbols to portray basic comparisons. 1 + 1 is only 2 because the apples "don't look the same" in different quantities. Apples are not made identical. Someone may say they are two different apples, like A + B. The line is drawn at the symbol and if the symbol cannot be agreed on, then it is false. All truth is subjective. Classical logic is subjective.

>>163185

No I meant like mathematical multiples? Like for a number n the multiples are n, 2n, ... k times n when n is an integer

What I was essentially saying is that if the number of my barrels is m, and my set A contains n elements, then if m = k*n + 1 where k is an integer then it would take the same amount of days to guess as it would for k*n and some lower numbers barrels

The notation m≡1[n] means that the remainder of the division of m by n is 1

I'll write it more clearly

The number of barrels is m

I have x testers, so my set A contains 2 raised to the power of x elements. I'll call that number n

Now if the number m verifies (k-1)*n +2 =< m =< k*n +1 for a natural integer k then I need k days to check. That is assuming that I get the results at a time before the hour at which the wedding is set. If not you just postpone by a day (if you doubt this just check it by plugging in different values and checking with logic. For instance I keep 10 testers. If k=0 I have either 0 or 1 barrels therefore it's quite obvious I need 0 days. If k is 1 it's a number of barrels that is at least two so I need at least 1 day, but at most 1025 barrels. It's just like I said previously, you need at most a day, because if the number of barrels is less or equal to 1024 just go back to my first answer, if it's 1025 I test 1024 barrels, if they are all safe it's the one that's left, else I detect it among the 1024 with the bijection. And it goes on)

The natural integer k always exists. And it's unique for given m and n. You can simply state that it's because the family of sets

[(k-1)*n+2, k*n +1] forms a partition over R. When you intersect each set with N it forms a partition over N (you could state it from the start over N but I don't have the integer brackets or the intersection symbol on my phone keyboard so I don't really know how to convey it clearly to you). Or if you want to be more highschool maths you just work your way with the inequality I've given. Each side can give a bound to k. And if you examine the bounds you find that k exists and is unique

It's fairly easy to prove. I think the part that would be the most annoying to write is how by reasoning with the bijection thing over the sets of the partition (which is the optimal method) you still keep the optimality of the method over the entire set. It's pretty obvious or intuitive whatever you want to call it, but I think it would be annoying to express precisely in mathematical terms and symbols

>>163193

I don't really care about math. It's a tool to formalize logic. Because sometimes people don't find things as obvious as you do. So you need it to explain it to them. And sometimes you get confused when there's a lot of data so you need it to organise stuff

I don't really like math. I just happened to find it easy and chose a path where you study scientific stuff. Same goes for physics. What I want to study is the effect of organic chemical components on the brain. I want to experiment on myself for the best results. And I want a girlfriend to share my interests and play with. Because at times it's hard when you're alone

>>163196

Why don't you like being alone?

>>163199

Most of the time it's okay. But sometimes it's not. Because sometimes it feels painful. Not painful in my head, but I can feel an intense painful thing around my chest. I think it's because I'm lonely, when I looked it up it said so. I was pretty impressed because I did not know it could happen because of solitude. I used to think that my ribcage had something wrongm But it was actually loneliness. It's because your brain sends some chemicals when you're alone for a lot of time. And also there's some nerve pathways that activate and they cause that pain. I don't really like how it feels

And I want a girlfriend. I think that it would be nice. I don't think that I can get a girlfriend if I'm alone all the time

>>163201

You should try anonymous chat sites. Why don't you try to find a girlfriend on a dating app? You should talk to someone who has a girlfriend and has high standards. I don't have one so I don't know much about relationships.

I discuss my interests with AI because I need someone to reply and research simultaneously. What do you want your girlfriend to do?

>>163206

I don't know anyone who is in a relationship. I know a guy who had a girlfriend. But I don't know if I have to act the same as him. And he is not awkward

I want a girlfriend to talk about existential subjects. And I want to tell her about the things that I like. The games that I like. Like touhou and fgo and kancolle and arknights endfield and love live and a bunch of other stuff. But I don't think that girls usually talk about this. Nobody has ever reciprocated my interests. They might passively accept, but I don't really think that they care

Sometimes the girls I know talk about handsome guys. I don't really care about guys. And they talk about makeup and things that I don't relly care about. If I had a girlfriend maybe she would try to look into what I like

And I want a girlfriend because I want to love someone and to be loved. I've loved a woman once. I was madly in love. But she was married

>>163194

Okay, that's about what I meant. Thanks for clarifying.

I'd like to notice that with v fresh volunteers each day (n=2^v) over k days, you can check a lot more than k*n+1 barrels -- n^k + 1. Because it's essentially equivalent to having k*v volunteers on day 1.

>>163193

Math is a construct, alright. But social construct? Where did you get the social part? xd

>>163214

I don't really understand what you wrote with the k*n +1 - n^k +1

Whe number of barrels you check is 2^v with v the number of volunteers. Or less if the number of barrels is less than that

If you check anymore then you're losing the bijection. So the solution is not optimal. For instance, in the case of the 1025 barrels. Say i used the same tuple (1,1,...,1) for two barrels. And the people in this tuple all fell sick. I will need an additional day to determine which one of the two barrels is bad. The bijection spares you that

And so, if you reason with the bijection it does not matter if the volunteers are different or not. Because if one day a determined tuple shows up sick you'll know exactly which barrel it is. If they don't you keep inspecting

>>163219

I think he is a bit bad at math. He wants to vent. His emotions caused a slip up

>>163219

What do you mean? A social construct does not have to be loved by everyone to be a social construct. A concept made by thousands of humans is a social construct.

>>163220

Sorry haha, that was supposed to be an en-dash. I meant that you can check 2^(v*k) barrels + that 1 left out which you don't directly check.

>>163221

Probably xd

>>163229

I mean that tbe number of people who have contributed to a construct - even if that number is very high - is poor basis for calling the construct "social". Math isn't a concept that emerges from social interactions, unlike e.g. gender or economic class.

>>163239

If you say gender is a social construct, the brain is too. Why not draw the line at the head? Why not draw it at the whole body? What is the head? Social constructs are categories decided by people who are trusted.

>>163245

Darn it, I knew I should not have used that example. But whatever.

Social constructs are categories decided by peopl who are trusted, sure. Give me an example of a non-social construct.

>>163250

Everything we can name is a social construct. Something that isn't a social construct is impossible for the human brain, like a dog can't do algebra.

>>163257

And that is exactly why your definition of a "social" construct is completely redundant. In other words, useless.

Let's assume your.perspective. Everything imaginable is a social construct. Why did you even bother to point out that math is too? It's even more redundant than e.g. if you joined a discussion about human health just to say "hey guys, biology is part of the natural sciences". Thanks for the enlightenment??

>>163264

That is the point of the definition.

>>163269

To be useless? XDD Come on, man, even trolling should know some bounds.

>>163230

Again it does not really matter if they are new volunteers or the same. I don't really know how to explain it but the same volunteer across two days accounts for two different random variables. That is because as long as the contaminated barrel isn't found, the state of the volunteer at day n is independent of his state at day n+1. It seems counterintuitive: if he drinks from the contaminated barrel at day n, he will be sick at day n+1. But that's actually because as soon as a batch falls sick, we stop, because by the bijection we find the exact barrel. If I didn't use the bijection, then yes, the random variable associated to a volunteer across two days would not be independent. If x people fall sick, and y people are not, but the suspicious barrels exceed the y people who are not sick and still can test, then it would be better to bring fresh volunteers, as theu would exceed the number of healthy people I have and they can therefore test more efficiently. But again, with the bijection its alright

Are you in high school? Or above? Did you ever study probabilities? It would he harder to grasp if you didn't. I'm sorry if I didn't explain well. It would be probably easier if I could write down the proof

>>163275

I understand that. I'm a CS graduate student, I'm quite comfortable with probabilities and combinatorics.

I'm essentially trying to tell you that the idea of linear search in the partition is not optimal in the sense that it does not minimize the number of days given 10 fresh volunteers each day. Let's use an example of 1024^2 barrels and tell me if I accidentally misrepresent your idea: You can take a partition of tge set of barrels, i.e. a set of 1024 disjoint subsets, each containing 1024 barrels. On day 1 you check the first subset, on day 2 the secnd, etc. Worst case you find the barrel on day 1024. But at most 10 volunteers get sick. You could also speed this up such that on day 2 you check 2 psubsets at once, on day 3 - 3 at once (i.e. 6 have been checked in total), etc.

>>163292

Now, you could also consider 20 variables from the start - whatever your way of recovering the bijection was for 10 variables, just expand it to 20. Then on day 1 you learn 10 variables, on day 2 - yhe other 10, and already you can determine the barrel. Though up to 20 volunteers will get sick.

If you aren't convinced, I can show a concrete scheme.

>>163292

I see now

I didn't really understand the phrasing at first

Yes essentially what happens mathematically is that i'm not working with successive bijections and adding up, but rather one on the cartesian product of the images of my random variables tuple

So essentially my f bijection if the set of barrels is named B

f: B -> A^d where A is the same set i defined, and d the number of days required. Or else

g: B -> C where C is the number of tuples possible considering all total drinkers (so n*d) and we have C is bijective with A^d, it's just instead of writing separate tuples inside a d sized tuple for A, i write them all inside a really big tuple

So with the bijection I have ideally the number of elements of B is that of A^d or bigger. Therefore since it's a cartesian product

(2^n)^d >= m, so 2^nd>=m so d>= ln(m)/((ln2)*n)

So d=ceil(ln(m)/(ln2*n)

I

>>163299

No, I agree. I was just trying to type math into my message while making sense. It's not easy to explain such stuff in words. Lots of confusion. That's why we have symbols. It seems like social constructs are useful

>>163305

Yes!

>>163307

>It seems like social constructs are useful

Indeed lmao

>>163305

Or smaller*. That's what happens when you write sentences. Well the inequality is true though

>>163307

Symbols and words are social constructs. Everything is a social construct.

>>163327

The concept of a social construct is a social construct. The concept of a concept is a social construct. The concept of a concept of a concept is a social construct. The concept of a concept of a concept of a concept is a social construct.

>>163328

Are people social constructs?

>>163330

They are. You can categorize both humans and bonobos as cooperative.

>>163333

Are instincts social constructs?

>>163337

Everything with a name is a social construct.