Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Adam Lusk
Adam's posts

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Clearly the moderator was biased towards Clinton, by letting Trump open his mouth as much as he wanted.

Regarding toggling a form for accepting responses by script.

function test() {
var form = FormApp.create("Test form");
var item = form.addTextItem();
var itemResponse = item.createResponse("Hello world");
var formResponse = form.createResponse().withItemResponse(itemResponse);

The script will throw an error on the bold line, but from what I can see, it is the creation of the form response while the form is not accepting responses, that generates the error. If the setAcceptingResponses(true) is moved one line up, it works - so creating item responses does not require the form to be accepting responses.

This may be working as intended (after all, one can't actually view a form when it is not accepting responses), but I would expect the script to throw an exception on the createResponse() line.

My use case is to shut out potential responses for as close as possible to submitting a constructed response by script. I suppose the best you can do is generate all the item responses, and after accepting responses, construct the form response then.

Post has shared content

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Like almost all petitions, the signatures and support of the campaign will equate to nothing more than a collective stamp of the foot on the internet, but theres (sic) a warm, fuzzy feeling knowing you’re not the only person who picks their eyeballs up off the ground after they roll out of your head each time you’re faced with A Current Affair’s bullshit, sensationalist reporting.

Of course, you can also "petition" by not watching it. 

Post has attachment
Have been using Canva for a while and can recommend.

Post has attachment
Following on from the latest puzzle from +Mike McLoughlin...

This is one of my favourites, but perhaps a bit more "mathematical" than "logical". Whatever the case... I'm a nerd.

Two people have 3 hats stacked on each of their heads. Each hat is either black or white, and you can assume each hat was drawn from an infinite pool of black and white hats (or to put it another way, a coin flip determines the colour of each hat). So it is possible that each person could have 3 black hats on their head. Each person can see the other person's hats, but not their own.

The game: each person silently and simultaneously points to a hat on their own head (lowest, middle or top). The round is "won" if each person points to a white hat.

Now, if each person was to just randomly point at any hat on their head, it would seem the odds of winning each round would be 25%. The question: is there any predetermined strategy that can improve these odds? (Any form of communicating what hats are on the other person's head is not allowed.)

Post has attachment
I think I might nod and wink at this one...

Wait while more posts are being loaded