Ultimate proof of Magnetic Vortex, free book and videos

[TheoriaApophasis]

I am about algorithm design.

FEEBLE PREMISE ASSHOLE


to have an algorithm spit out accurate INFO, you have to first have a Logical Premise and working Theory to being with.


Its asshole idiots like you that design APPs and programs to solve things they dont even know a damn thing about.


Worse than a bean counter is an idiot like you who would DESIGN a program to spit out BEAN YIELDS per year based off of a narrow spectrum of harvest yield, skewing results radically.

Wisdom is something you have none thereof. 



Tell me son, is good math with a 100% flawed premise and therefore nonsense output TRUMPED  by a logical sound premise and retroductive conclusion?

Its over your head by MILES.

[profitis]

Hey apohasis if you can get hold of one of these panels or anything like it you will silence all infrared photo-critics.these panels are so sensitive to temperature that they glow at room temperature.put your mag and ball ontop it and send regular photo in the dark and presto

[sarkeizen]

to have an algorithm spit out accurate INFO, you have to first have a Logical Premise and working Theory to being with.

I'm talking about algorithm design - closer to what Computer Science was and less is today.  Your use of "logical premise" and "working theory" are too poorly defined to be discussed. Please do better next post .

I'll see if I can guess whatever you're on about though.  Perhaps you mean that to design an algorithm you need domain specific knowledge?  i.e. You can't/shouldn't create an algorithm to sort names of presidents without knowing something about presidents.  There are lots of good reasons to not do this one is utility - If you were to make a president-name-sorter it might not work for sorting the names of breakfast cereals (or fruit bats).  Another is provability - the internal assumptions in "what makes a president" is just something people made up and varies from place to place.  So it becomes difficult to prove that this algorithm is better than any other potential president-sorter without resorting to some other better defined construct (an ascii-represented-text sorter).  A third is post hoc optimizations are often easy to do.  e.g. Choosing the initial bounds for a binary search can make it faster and from that is the rule-of-thumb that "premature optimization is the root of all evil".  That is, optimizing before you have an actual product (which is different than an algorithm) is often a bad idea because it's often difficult to predict where developer time would be the most useful.

So your cute diatribe aside Russell is probably my inferior when it comes to algorithm design.

[TheoriaApophasis]

So your cute diatribe aside Russell is probably my inferior when it comes to algorithm design.

apples and oranges son,  how old are you boy? 



and YOU are INFERIOR to the dumbest oldest blindest FISH in the sea when it comes to breathing underwater.



take your false analogies and comparisons and stick them back up your ass from whence they came.

[sarkeizen]

apples and oranges son

Dude, it was you who claimed that Russell was "smarter than 99%" - I just showed that he was kind of a fuckwit compared to me in a specific respect - demonstrating a point that metrics like that are kind of stupid.  Then you seemed to want to talk about algorithm design - where you appear to be something of a fuckwit compared to me.

Now that we've exhausted everything you can argue about you're sodding off.