There is this LWN article (that I wrote about it):
96 karma · joined July 9, 2012
If the bisect script fails because of another problem, it is often possible to refine the script, or run bisect again on a fixed up branch.
7) when it's Bob turn to play, the number of stones on the board is always odd
Alice wins because of 7) and 4)!
- if Bob removes one stone and the result is that it adds a stone both on the left and right side of the board, then Alice replays the stone that Bob just removed,
- otherwise whatever Bob plays, Alice plays the same thing on the other side of the board (symmetrically regarding the middle of the board)
This ensures that:
5) the situation is always symmetrical after Alice played
6) when Bob plays once and then Alice plays once, if the nb of stone on the board increased since before Bob just played, then it increased by an even amount
1) at most nb of stone increase by one each time one player plays
2) nb of stone cannot decrease unless the board is full of stones
3) no one can lose unless the board has been full of stone at least once; this is because until the board has been full of stones it is possible to increase the nb of stone by adding one and this is a new position because of 2)
4) as soon as there are n - 1 stones, the player who puts the last stone wins; because there are n - 1 different positions left with n - 1 stones and n - 1 is even
http://www.barrelstrength.com/2013/12/31/ramachandran-iq/
where there is:
"Intelligence (says Prof. Miller at page 189 of Spent) is positively correlated to:
brain size
speed of performing basic sensory motor tasks (“reaction time is a factor”, as the cop said in Blade Runner)
height
symmetry of face and body
semen quality (!)
health, physical and mental
longevity
sexual attractiveness for long term relationships"
In this article, "The play deficit":
http://aeon.co/magazine/being-human/children-today-are-suffe...
there are these very interesting sentences:
"Other research, by the psychologist Mark Runco and colleagues at the Torrance Creativity Center at the University of Georgia, shows that scores on the TTCT are the best childhood predictors we have of future real-world achievements. They are better predictors than IQ, high-school grades, or peer judgments of who will achieve the most."
TTCT is "Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking".
People should really be much more interested in metrics like TTCT, rather than IQ tests, SAT tests or other not very relevant metrics.
http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/suppliers/
And JP Morgan, Chase and American Express are sponsoring the US Open:
http://www.usopen.org/sponsorship/
...
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/outrageo...
But note that dealing with Iran, Sudan and some other countries forbiden by the US State Department is legal in many european countries.
Either your project should be open source or it should be aimed at non-programmers like finance or accounting people.
I think the best plan might be to create an open source tool first and then, when the product start to be good enough, sell special packages around it for finance/accounting.
But I don't try to impose my standards, or any work place standard, upon others.
Why do you think there is any abuse?
If you see 2 guys in the street, one insulting the other one, how do you know there is any abuse?
Couldn't they be very good friends that have been talking to each other like that since years? In this case, is there any abuse?
But if you are working on a code base with hundreds of commits per month, I wish you a lot of luck. Your 10s of seconds might easily become days.
On a big codebase you might even want to automate bisecting as much as possible. See http://lwn.net/Articles/317154/ where Ingo Molnar says:
>>> for example git-bisect was godsent. I remember that years ago bisection of a bug was a very [laborious] task so that it was only used as a final, last-ditch approach for really nasty bugs. Today we can [autonomously] bisect build bugs via a simple shell command around "git-bisect run", without any human interaction!