### Flavio Villanustre

Shared publicly -Clever thought from Ingo Molnar, around computational complexity (as a response to Andrea Arcangeli, regarding the autonuma patch).

He doesn't account for space expansion, which seems to occur with constant acceleration, and increases the number of states over time. There is still hope for those wishing to create more inefficient algorithms. :)

I think I'll be using this tagline for some time:

"IIRC all physical states of this universe fit into a roughly 2^1000 finite state-space, so every computing problem in this universe is O(2^1000), i.e. every computing problem we can ever work on is O(1)."

He doesn't account for space expansion, which seems to occur with constant acceleration, and increases the number of states over time. There is still hope for those wishing to create more inefficient algorithms. :)

I think I'll be using this tagline for some time:

"IIRC all physical states of this universe fit into a roughly 2^1000 finite state-space, so every computing problem in this universe is O(2^1000), i.e. every computing problem we can ever work on is O(1)."

Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote: > You can talk pretty much anything down to O(1) that way. Take > an algorithm that is O(n) in the number of tasks, since you > know you h...

1

1

Add a comment...