QuickSelect is average case n, and is, roughly, quick sort where you throw away one of the sides each time and recurse on the other. This has a fat tail for cases where you pick a bad pivot (similar to quicksort), but you can median-of-medians your way out of that problem if someone cares. (Median of medians being where you subdivide the array into, say, 5 arrays, recursively compute the median on those, and pick the middle median as your pivot, which guarantees linear progress per iteration)
I used to translate classic interview questions into not-spoiled-on-the-internet ones by doing this kind of batch to incremental conversion. The count-the-islands one was fun but hard to fit into a 45minute interview.
Eventually most of those started getting spoiled too lol.
Split locks are weird. It’s never been obvious to me why you’d want to do them unless you are on a small core count system. When split lock detection rolled out for linux, it massacred perf for some games (which were probably min-maxing single core perf and didn’t care about noisy neighbor effects).
Frankly, I’m surprised split lock detection is enabled anywhere outside of multi-tenant clouds.
Popular blogger from roughly a decade ago. His rants were frequently cited early in my career. I think he’s fallen off in popularity substantially since.
This is more of a typing game than anything else. It rejected “blackcapped chickadee” (wanted black-capped chickadee). Frankly that felt a bit tedious on a phone. Had to scrub through to correct and lost.
My suspicion is that the bot was a fairly standard chess bot, but the difficulties were set based on computation time. As airplane computers got better, it turned into a beast.
As a result, if you tried this on older planes, it might have been “easier”
For my personal usage of ai-studio, I had to use autohotkey to record and replay my mouse deleting my old chats. I thought about cooking up a browser extension, but never got around to it.
Legitimately, they are often too hard. Balancing the problems is quite challenging.
On top of that, the solutions often make the problems seem much intimidating than they are (not that they are easy). Most solutions involve a lot of “happenstance”, where someone tried something and it got an outcome that was useful, which they build on top of. This makes the solutions look crazy complicated (“how would i have ever thought of this!?”), when in reality they are Rube Goldberg machines built out of duct tape and baling wire.
I’ve only solved a few Google CTF problems, and one of them was the one I wrote, lol. That was nearly a decade ago though.
It has a number of gaps, but it is mostly there. It doesn't build, it doesn't have source for some of the service calls iirc (SVC_.*), and the AGESA source isn't open (though a replacement is in progress, openSIL).
This is typically used for anti-spam/anti-malware. FB has a lot of automation to try to stop obviously malicious content. Just, sometimes, it hits things that aren't malicious. I'm most familiar with the malicious links that, when you click them, cause you to spam your friends with the same link.
People don't notice this automation exists, except when it doesn't work. Then they either complain "Why didn't XYZ get caught! This is obviously spam! I could write better automation." or "OMG they banned dreamwidth!".
It's possible they extended this (or something similar) to filter out sites with hate speech/"community guideline violations". And in that case some sub-domain of dreamwidth posted something horrible. And then the automation slammed the hammer on the whole domain.