[QUOTE=Christenson;265610]LN2, you don't *have* to prove your statement about being a very early employee of google...but we don't have to believe it, either. [/QUOTE]

I saw a billboard ad one day. Find the first 10-digit prime number in sequential digits of "e" and go to that number ".com"

I wrote some code, took a stab at it, and posted the result above ^^^.

It took me to the next step, which I answered correctly also, and that led me to a recruiting site for what turned out to be Google.

Take it or leave it, just stop bringing it up already.

[QUOTE=LiquidNitrogen;265620]I saw a billboard ad one day. Find the first 10-digit prime number in sequential digits of "e" and go to that number ".com"

I wrote some code, took a stab at it, and posted the result above ^^^.

It took me to the next step, which I answered correctly also, and that led me to a recruiting site for what turned out to be Google.

Take it or leave it, just stop bringing it up already.[/QUOTE]

You weren't responsible for mis-spelling Googol I hope.
Or was that previously patented?

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WANNqr-vcx0]Can't let opportunities go by[/url]

David

[QUOTE=LiquidNitrogen;265620]I saw a billboard ad one day. Find the first 10-digit prime number in sequential digits of "e" and go to that number ".com"

I wrote some code, took a stab at it, and posted the result above ^^^.

It took me to the next step, which I answered correctly also, and that led me to a recruiting site for what turned out to be Google.

Take it or leave it, just stop bringing it up already.[/QUOTE]

That provides a bit of detail that makes you a lot more believable...now hopefully you've seen the worst of us. We have all levels here, both technically and emotionally. I'm reminded, gently, that identity through the internet is quite complicated; just ask the various people thinking they were talking to children in chat, then finding out that it was the cops when the cuffs come out after they prove their identities by going to meet said child in person.

Now, figuring out that the Apple OS was keeping 2 bits of 32 in RAM for tags, and working around it...that's a decent "real programming" hack, in the vein of "Real Programmers Don't use Pascal"(they just use negative subscripts in FORTRAN to modify the operating system)....one of my sort of pet projects is figuring out how to make an OS truly secure in the presence of arbitrary code. The virus situation is truly getting scary.

[QUOTE=chalsall;265540]Just putting this out there for consideration...

Might you give us your name?[/QUOTE]

Anyone like to play Clue?

The name of the game may seem at first, 'mystery'. I like to play more than once, but not more than twice.

Google is my friend.

Three minutes of no error and the game is often done.
When you choose the right search terms, you'll find what you've won.
[COLOR="White"][SIZE="1"]sudo chmod 200 w.file[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Christenson;265623]
Now, figuring out that the Apple OS was keeping 2 bits of 32 in RAM for tags, and working around it...that's a decent "real programming" hack[/QUOTE]

But even for a long time, Windows wasn't "32-bit clean," was it? Do you know anyone who could (in the past) assign more than 2 GB to a single executable even when they had more RAM? Somehow Micro$oft was doing something with one of its bits, or just not allowing it for other reasons, since 2 ^31 is 2 GB.

[QUOTE=LiquidNitrogen;265620]I saw a billboard ad one day. Find the first 10-digit prime number in sequential digits of "e" and go to that number ".com"

I wrote some code, took a stab at it, and posted the result above ^^^.

It took me to the next step, which I answered correctly also, and that led me to a recruiting site for what turned out to be Google.

Take it or leave it, just stop bringing it up already.[/QUOTE]

Neat Story- In your opinion, is there a one book out there that gives the best history of Google? There must be some fascinating stories in the background of that company. Thanks-

Norm

I see this thread has gotten sidetracked.

:smile:

I will just refrain from posting so this eventually dies down.

Windows? Clean? In no sense of the word I can think of...I use it because I have to, not because I want to...it's a classic example of the "Second System Effect" (see Mythical Man Month" by Fred Brooks).

[QUOTE=LiquidNitrogen;265590]Yeah, and you were butting into the middle of a real-time conversation. My question was not posted @ the group, my question was posted to an individual who was online at the same time as me.
[/QUOTE]

This is an open, public forum. If you don't like it, you can leave.





[QUOTE]

If you could have used your "math powers" you would have observed these posts were a mere 8 minutes apart. Someone with non-retarded socializing skills that was used to interacting with people in "real life" would understand something of this nature.
[/QUOTE]

Why should I or anyone else bother to observe the timing of the posts?
And the moderators have expressed a sever distaste for the name-calling
that you exhibit here (i.e. 'retarted').

[QUOTE]

If you want to accuse me of something, then why don't you "nitpick" and accuse me of the correct thing: being too lazy to send him a personal message on the forum.[/QUOTE]

I do accuse you of being too lazy to study the mathematics required
to conduct an intelligent discussion.

[QUOTE=LiquidNitrogen;265649]Somehow Micro$oft was doing something with one of its bits, or just not allowing it for other reasons, since 2 ^31 is 2 GB.[/QUOTE]Microsoft was probably just dealing with issues similar to those IBM encountered back in the 1970-80s when it extended its S/370 addresses from 24 bits to 31 (not 32) bits. The high-order bit in 32-bit integers is treated as a sign bit by many machine instructions. In IBM's case, it was non-trivial to comb an operating system to find all cases where the earlier programmers, operating under the assumption that addresses occupied only the low-order 24 bits of a fullword integer, used instructions that might give different results depending on whether the sign bit was 0 or 1.

[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/31-bit[/URL] has a more detailed explanation.

So does [URL]http://edwardbosworth.com/My3121Textbook_DOC/MyText3121_Ch08_V01.doc[/URL] but mixed with a lot of other S/370 addressing non-31-bit details.

Now, Microsoft wasn't extending its addressing from 24 bits AFAIK, but the same considerations of treating the high-order bit differently from all the rest would still apply.

One thing to note is that [i]int[/i] is easier to type than [i]unsigned[/i]. Therein lies the problem, lazy programmers using ints for everything, even in situations when unsigned was the proper choice. How many times have we seen array index variables being declared as ints?