Subject: 250k payout - view eligibility (June)

From: Mid-Year Policy Review <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 10:48:03 -0700

Greetings Atompub-archive,

Ever thought about how your family would survive if you weren't around?
Protect your loved one's for less than $1 a day.

- No Medical Exam
- Choose Coverage Amount
- Instant Approval if qualified

Confirm Policy Here -> http://www.normalbub.com/june/policy/update.index

- Member Policy Approval
[June 14, 2014]

We hope you found this policy update useful.
To stop further notifications - write Member Update Systems at 9 1 6 7 R O A D _1 7 7_Oakwood, OH 45873
or visit http://www.normalbub.com/3kfk/slei3/skfole.xmsks

 to work right down the street and came here weekly. The hummus and pita are so fresh. We met Joe since we always came in and he was such a nice guy. 

I loved that this place has a community/neighborhood feel to it. I love a family owned restaurant with a friendly staff and amazing food!  When you are waiting for your order you get to taste a free falafel and it's so crispy and full of flavor. This is the best Mediterranean food I've ever had. And I've tried a lot. If you come here you will leave very happy I promise.I ordered the Gyro Plate and my wife got the Lemon Chicken Plate.  I thoroughly enjoyed my plate. The gyro was great, the rice was perfect, the hummus was smooth (though I would have liked more olive oil), and the salad was actually not bad (I prefer thick, creamy dressings over the Italian-like, vinegary kind).

I tried a bite of my wife's chicken and I thought it was fine. If you read my other reviews, you'll know I'm not a fan of chicken breast; I'd order the Shawarma or Kabob if I wanted chicken.

I liked that the pita came out warm. It seems like such an easy thing to do, but a lot of restaurants don't heat their pitas. It makes a world of a difference when you eat a warm piece of pita as opposed to a cold one.

I also got to try a falafel. Now, I'm not that experienced with falafels, but I have to say I did like Joe's. Not too dry (I've had some really dry ones) and well-seasoned. I'd be open to ordering that next time.
mm, his proof shows that if f(0)=x then x=0, so it shows that f(0)=0. As for the rest, I will have to think on it, but it looks like a valid argument that you will have to divide the numbers into groups of 4. Cause the only thing that I can think that would make it invalid is the fact that x=y (x!=0), but this can't happen as this would mean f(f(x))=x and not -x.   JPvdMerwe Jun 25 '13 at 13:15
  	  	
@a1kmm: The proof does cover that case, though it could stand to be made more explicit. If f(0)-2 (that's -2^{32}, represented as 0x80000000), then the above proof that f(0)=0 holds, as it shows that if f(0)=x, then x = -x. So suppose, as you suggest, that f(0)=-2 . Then, )=f(f(0))=-0=0, so we've removed two numbers, and the remaining 2(mod 4) numbers must be divided into 4 equally-sized groups, which is impossible. (Note we can't have f(x)=-2 for any other xand x, because we'd need 0=f(-2)=f(f(. So these two numbers 0 and -2 are disconnected from the rest.)   ShreevatsaR Jun 25 '13 at 14:05
1	  	
@a1kmm: Sorry, -2 above should have been -2. Anyway, the case where f(0)0 (and so is actually the easier case, as we showed these two are disconnected from the rest. The other case we need to consider is that f(0)=0, but f(x)=for some x0,. In that case, f(=f(f(x))=-x (note -x can't bebecause no such x exists). Further let f(-x)=y. Then f(y)=f(f(-x))=x. Again y can't be (as f(y)=x, but f(-2=-x, and x is not 0). So, -2=f(x)=f(f(y))=-y, which is impossible. So indeed 0 and -2 must be disconnected from the rest (not the image of anything else).   ShreevatsaR Jun 25 '13 at 14:52
  	  	
I have to disagree with you on this. All you need to do is take the input int, cast it to a bit array (or just read it in as one, if the language allows that), then group them into pairs based on the sign bit, then just pick another one of the bits - doesn't matter which one - then cycle through them. This will only work if the language allows signed zeros though.   will Jun 25 '13 at 19:51
1	  	
@will There are no signed zeros, if (as I assume) we're talking about two's-complement 32-bit integers.   goffrie Jun 26 '13 at 0:49
  	  	
@ShreevatsaR Absolutely. The argument of the answer is almost correct. From the question, it is not explicit what -n is supposed to mean if n is the negative number with no positive counterpart. But most languages ignore this kind of overflow and defines -n == n in that case. Now, looking at the proof of this answer above, we see that from x == -x we can not conclude that x is zero, only that x is zero or 0x80000000. So either f fixes both these values, or it swaps them. So, the same conclusion you had. For other numbers than these two, the number is distinct from its oppositeought was also to solve this using a global variable, even though it kind of felt like cheating for this particular question. I would however argue that a global variable solution is the best solution given the specifications in the question. Using a global makes it very easy to understand what is happening. I would agree that a done != done would be better though. Just move that outside the if terviewer that ge
 ts annoyed when I ask for more information (while possibly questioning the relevance of his question in the process) is not an interviewer I necessarily want to be working for/with. So I will keep asking questions like that in interviews. If they don't like it, I'll probably end the interview to stop wasting both of our time any further. Don't like the "I was only following orders" mind set