Author |
Topic: calculation puzzle (Read 3858 times) |
|
joker
Global Moderator
member is offline


Gender: 
Posts: 157
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #8 on: Dec 29th, 2015, 1:29pm » |
|
How can someone be banned from a public forum just to view a puzzle? Amazing!
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tsh73
Full Member
member is offline


Gender: 
Posts: 210
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #9 on: Dec 29th, 2015, 4:09pm » |
|
Richard, I posted reply of three identical bluatigro posts on forum with most users. I did not recalled that you will not be able to see it.
So I repost my musings here, for your viewing pleasure.
Dec 14 It is a number puzzle. Each number present single digit You are to find single permutation which makes all conditions ("dfbf / bgak = b" etc) true. As for now, it tries to check all possible permutations And it goes checking each possible number That gives us 10^10 possible variants. So you just as well could quit waiting
But using some maths (or wits, or both) you can significally decrease that time. After all, such kinds of puzzle are supposed to be solved by paper and pen...
(I did some guesses on 4 of digits and got answer in some 20 minutes - not exactly sure - while reading Wiki on Guardian Dark/Summining Dark)
Dec 21 I've got same result. Here are observations I made: Code:that makes 'c' equal to 0 Code: that makes e=b+1 Code: that says e=b+h, hense h = 1 Also, Code: leaves 'b' only be 1, 2 or 3.
With that, revised code: Code:'5928 / 2964 = 0002
' - + +
'1181 + 0300 = 1481
'4747 - 3264 = 1483
''dfbf / bgak = b
'' - + +
''hhfh + ecc = hkfh
''kjkj - ebak = hkfe
for a = 0 to 9
for b = 1 to 3 '0 to 9
for c = 0 to 0 '0 to 9
for d = 0 to 9
'for e = 2 to 4 '0 to 9
e=b+1
for f = 0 to 9
for g = 0 to 9
for h = 1 to 1 '0 to 9
for j = 0 to 9
for k = 0 to 9
scan
q$ = str$( a );b;c;d;e;f;g;h;j;k
if ispermutation( q$ ) then
print q$
a$ = str4$( d , g , b , f )
b$ = str4$( b , g , a , k )
c$ = str4$( 0 , 0 , 0 , b )
d$ = str4$( h , h , f , h )
e$ = str4$( 0 , e , c , c )
f$ = str4$( h , k , f , h )
g$ = str4$( k , j , k , j )
h$ = str4$( e , b , a , k )
j$ = str4$( h , k , f , e )
if val( a$ ) / val( b$ ) = val( c$ ) then
if val( d$ ) + val( e$ ) = val( f$ ) then
if val( g$ ) - val( h$ ) = val( j$ ) then
if val( a$ ) - val( d$ ) = val( g$ ) then
if val( b$ ) + val( e$ ) = val( h$ ) then
if val( c$ ) + val( f$ ) = val( j$ ) then
print a$ + " / " + b$ + " = " + c$
print " - + +"
print d$ + " + " + e$ + " = " + f$
print g$ + " - " + h$ + " = " + j$
end
end if
end if
end if
end if
end if
end if
end if
next k
next j
next h
next g
next f
'next e
next d
next c
next b
next a
end
function str4$( x , y , z , w )
str4$ = str$( x ) ; y ; z ; w
end function
function ispermutation( q$ )
uit = 1
for i = 0 to 9
if instr( q$ , str$( i ) ) = 0 then
uit = 0
end if
next i
ispermutation = uit
end function
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline


Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #11 on: Dec 29th, 2015, 5:34pm » |
|
on Dec 29th, 2015, 1:29pm, pnlawrence wrote:| How can someone be banned from a public forum just to view a puzzle? Amazing! |
|
Forum administrators have a number of tools available to control access, one being that certain sections of the forum can be (and indeed in the case of the LB forum are) configured to be visible only to 'members' but not to 'guests'. They may include 'sensitive' sections such as bug reports which they don't want passers-by to see.
As a non-member (and not being allowed to be a member) it's not surprising that I cannot view the 'sensitive' areas, but one might like to think that I would be allowed to see the same sections of the forum that 'guests' can, which I presume to include the 'puzzle' thread that Anatoly linked to. But that is not enough for the LB forum administrators; they don't want me to be able to see anything!
To achieve that I am banned by IP address, which means that any attempt to view the LB forum, even as a guest, results in the error message I quoted. Since my internet connection uses a static IP address it is very difficult for me to bypass that block, other than by connecting from an internet café, WiFi hotspot or 3G/4G cellular data connection (which we don't currently have where I live).
To answer Anatoly I have tried connecting via a proxy server (anonymising service), and can sometimes succeed using that method, but if my presence is spotted the IP address of the proxy server gets banned as well - blocking access not only to me but to anybody else who tries to connect via that service! So doing so is not really worth the effort, and is antisocial.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
joker
Global Moderator
member is offline


Gender: 
Posts: 157
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #12 on: Dec 30th, 2015, 1:49pm » |
|
Anatoly, you are a moderator on the LB forum. Why don't you get this resolved.
Clearly there is a vendetta against a major contributor to the BASIC community.
It is terribly embarrassing.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline


Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #13 on: Dec 30th, 2015, 2:35pm » |
|
on Dec 30th, 2015, 1:49pm, pnlawrence wrote:| Anatoly, you are a moderator on the LB forum. Why don't you get this resolved. |
|
As I have said before, I was told that the moderators had voted to lift the restrictions on my membership, and to allow discussion of LBB there, but that the decision had been vetoed by Carl. If that's the case, Anatoly can't do anything about it.
Precisely why Carl was allowed a veto is another matter. As far as I am aware he has no formal administrative role at the LB forum (it's supposed to be a 'community' forum, unlike the LB Yahoo Group which is Carl's official support outlet to do with whatever he likes).
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AAW
New Member
member is offline


Posts: 22
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #14 on: Dec 30th, 2015, 6:18pm » |
|
on Dec 30th, 2015, 1:49pm, pnlawrence wrote:Anatoly, you are a moderator on the LB forum. Why don't you get this resolved.
Clearly there is a vendetta against a major contributor to the BASIC community.
It is terribly embarrassing. |
|
Richard was placed on moderation at the official Yahoo Group many years ago.
He was first banned at the Community Forum in May, 2011. These events happened long before he ever conceived of LBB.
on Dec 29th, 2015, 5:34pm, Richard Russell wrote: But that is not enough for the LB forum administrators; they don't want me to be able to see anything!
To achieve that I am banned by IP address,
Richard. |
|
That is not correct. The cause/effect are reversed. You are banned by IP, therefore you cannot see anything.
on Dec 30th, 2015, 2:35pm, Richard Russell wrote:Precisely why Carl was allowed a veto is another matter. As far as I am aware he has no formal administrative role at the LB forum
Richard. |
|
As I have said before. Carl has been co-owner of the Community forum since Day 1. Since Day 1, he has had complete access to the main admin account. The forum was conceived to be run by Carl and the community. Carl does perform functions as the main admin/owner.
It is a pity that things have not worked out. Carl and Richard have different points of view and different ways of expressing them.
The best thing for the community is to simply write and discuss code, coding techniques, theories, etc. Grow as programmers. Enjoy what you do. Use the tools that suit you best. Acrimony is not productive.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline


Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #15 on: Dec 30th, 2015, 9:56pm » |
|
on Dec 30th, 2015, 6:18pm, AAW wrote:| These events happened long before he ever conceived of LBB. |
|
Untrue. LBB v0.00 - I still have a copy - is dated July 2011, and it existed in the earlier guise of LB2BBC (adapted from the even earlier QB2BBC) well before that.
Quote:| That is not correct. The cause/effect are reversed. You are banned by IP, therefore you cannot see anything. |
|
So perhaps you can explain what banning me by IP address achieves other than to stop me reading the LB forum.
Quote:| As I have said before. Carl has been co-owner of the Community forum since Day 1. |
|
I'm not aware of you ever having said that before. If it's the case you should stop pretending that the forum is run in the interests of the 'community' when it is not.
Quote:| Acrimony is not productive. |
|
That works both ways!
Please don't abuse the privilege of being allowed to post in this forum by using it as a platform to suggest that I am in the wrong and you are in the right, when you know very well that it is not the case.
Richard.
|
|
|
|
AAW
New Member
member is offline


Posts: 22
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #16 on: Dec 30th, 2015, 11:06pm » |
|
on Dec 30th, 2015, 9:56pm, Richard Russell wrote:acrimony
That works both ways!
Richard. |
|
My last paragraph was not directed at you, Richard. It was directed at pnlawrence. Quote:| The best thing for the community is to simply write and discuss code, coding techniques, theories, etc. Grow as programmers. Enjoy what you do. Use the tools that suit you best. Acrimony is not productive. |
|
I could respond to your other questions and comments, but will not do so, since it might be seen as an attempt to use your forum to "abuse the privilege of being allowed to post in this forum by using it as a platform to suggest that I am in the wrong and you are in the right"
I also apologize to bluatigro for participating in the highjacking of his puzzle thread.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline


Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #17 on: Dec 31st, 2015, 12:35am » |
|
on Dec 30th, 2015, 11:06pm, AAW wrote:| I could respond to your other questions and comments, but will not do so |
|
In that case I formally request that the IP-address ban against me be lifted.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Chris Iverson
New Member
member is offline


Gender: 
Posts: 4
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #18 on: Dec 31st, 2015, 01:10am » |
|
on Dec 30th, 2015, 9:56pm, Richard Russell wrote:| Untrue. LBB v0.00 - I still have a copy - is dated July 2011, and it existed in the earlier guise of LB2BBC (adapted from the even earlier QB2BBC) well before that. |
|
Forgive me, but I fail to see how July is earlier than May.
on Dec 30th, 2015, 9:56pm, Richard Russell wrote:| So perhaps you can explain what banning me by IP address achieves other than to stop me reading the LB forum. |
|
It prevents you from creating a new account at the LB Conforums to continue to violate our rules, as you have done so in the past. Administrators of any forum, not just the LB Conforums, rather frown on someone creating a new account when their first one is banned for breaking the rules, only to turn around and continue to do so!
You were IP banned after you repeatedly continued to use the PM system to break our rules, even after bans.
on Dec 30th, 2015, 9:56pm, Richard Russell wrote:| I'm not aware of you ever having said that before. If it's the case you should stop pretending that the forum is run in the interests of the 'community' when it is not. |
|
The administrators of a website have the right to dictate policy on that website. Am I wrong?
We are a support community for those using Liberty BASIC. That is, the trademarked, official IDE developed by Shoptalk Systems, found at libertybasic.com.
We will gladly help anyone looking for assistance or to learn LB, and we have had many people over the years join the forum, learn from them, and then contribute themselves. You know, kind of like a community.
I would know. I was one of those people. I joined the LB forums ten years ago now. I learned very much. I made mistakes. I was helped by many wonderful people, including yourself!
Then I became knowledgeable enough that I was able to start helping people. Now, ten years later, I am one of the administrators of the forums, and I am quite proud of it.
Additionally, we have never tried to hide or disguise the fact that Carl is an administrator of the forum, and as such, does have major input into the policy decisions of the forum.
For one thing, if he/we wanted to hide that, we wouldn't have his own, personal, clearly named account listed as an Administrator of the forum.
What Alyce said is true: Carl and Richard have differences of opinions that have, so far, been unable to be resolved.
|
|
|
|
joker
Global Moderator
member is offline


Gender: 
Posts: 157
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #19 on: Dec 31st, 2015, 02:01am » |
|
Quote:| ... I learned very much. I made mistakes. I was helped by many wonderful people, including yourself! ... |
|
And I've learned very much from Richard, myself.
However, you and your cohorts have kept others from doing the same. All for some sanctimonious argument that has no meaning to the "community" in general.
Get off your high horses and solve this problem. Do it for the good of the "community" that you speak of so often.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Chris Iverson
New Member
member is offline


Gender: 
Posts: 4
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #20 on: Dec 31st, 2015, 02:21am » |
|
I'm sorry, but, Richard's actions have made it clear that he refuses to be bound by the rules stated on our forum.
As the administrators, we have the right to make and enforce those rules.
Therefore, we have denied Richard access to the forum.
I was sad to have to ban Richard. But that's how things turned out.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline


Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #21 on: Dec 31st, 2015, 09:04am » |
|
on Dec 31st, 2015, 01:10am, Chris Iverson wrote:| Forgive me, but I fail to see how July is earlier than May. |
|
Read Alyce's comment and my reply. What she said was untrue.
Quote:| It prevents you from creating a new account at the LB Conforums |
|
It does no such thing. I can easily create a new account by connecting from an internet café, a WiFi hotspot, a cellular radio or an anonymising proxy server as I said before. Since doing so is a once-off exercise that is not a significant inconvenience.
Quote:| to continue to violate our rules, as you have done so in the past. |
|
The rules have retrospectively been changed to allow you to claim that. For example the rules used to state that promoting a language other than Liberty BASIC is not permitted, but LB Booster is Liberty BASIC so promoting it was not contrary to the rules. But now the rules have been changed to specifically refer to Carl's implementation of the Liberty BASIC language.
I have never, and would never, break the rules as they were stated at the time.
Quote:| Administrators of any forum, not just the LB Conforums, rather frown on someone creating a new account when their first one is banned for breaking the rules, only to turn around and continue to do so! |
|
I created new accounts because I had not broken the rules and because I was being prevented from doing exactly what the rules (at the time) encouraged, which was to use Private Messaging instead of posting on 'sensitive' subjects. No attempt was ever made to communicate directly with me, to request that I stop sending PMs, or to explain why my account had been deleted. The forum was, and is still, run in an autocratic way without any attempt to act fairly.
Quote:| You were IP banned after you repeatedly continued to use the PM system to break our rules, even after bans. |
|
On the contrary I was using the PM system in accordance with, and as encouraged by, the rules. If you have the old rules archived you will see that they specifically stated that if a particular subject is not allowed to be posted one should use the PM system instead.
Quote:| The administrators of a website have the right to dictate policy on that website. Am I wrong? |
|
They can dictate policy, but they should act in a way that benefits the members of the forum. They should also not retrospectively change rules so as to falsely claim they have been broken.
Quote:| We are a support community for those using Liberty BASIC. That is, the trademarked, official IDE developed by Shoptalk Systems, found at libertybasic.com. |
|
So it now seems. It would be of much greater benefit to the community if the forum were to support the Liberty BASIC programming language, not just a particular, rather unsatisfactory, implementation.
Quote:| What Alyce said is true: Carl and Richard have differences of opinions that have, so far, been unable to be resolved. |
|
Carl himself has never complained about LBB, indeed as you know he has publicly stated that "it is a legitimate artefact" that people should "feel free to use" if it suits their needs.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline


Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: calculation puzzle
« Reply #22 on: Dec 31st, 2015, 09:50am » |
|
on Dec 31st, 2015, 02:21am, Chris Iverson wrote:| I'm sorry, but, Richard's actions have made it clear that he refuses to be bound by the rules stated on our forum. |
|
Please stop repeating the claim that I have broken rules (as constituted at the time); I have not and would not knowingly break forum rules.
Of course, however carefully the rules are framed there can be room for 'interpretation', and it may be that the forum administrators felt that the rules did not accurately reflect what had been intended. But in that event there is a responsible and fair way to proceed: the member who has inadvertently broken the intended 'spirit' of the rules should be contacted and the situation explained. The rules can then be changed, in consultation with the forum membership as a whole since they need to be aware of the proposed changes and how they might be affected.
But that is not how the LB forum administrators reacted. Instead I was banned with no explanation and no attempt having been made to contact me directly. The rules were then changed without the membership being consulted or informed.
The 'issue' has never had anything to do with rules. It is simply that I have created an implementation of the Liberty BASIC language which in most respects is better than Carl's original, something which I would remind you I was entirely entitled to do under the laws governing Intellectual Property Rights (the syntax of a language is not protected, but a particular implementation is).
This has created a perceived conflict between Carl's commercial interests and the best interests of Liberty BASIC users, and to the extent that the LB forum is trying to serve both those interests this is proving difficult to resolve in a way that is fair to all parties.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|