QT display all the quality of HD 1080p - or not?
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: bible stuff
Next: Recommend OCR programs?
From: Mark Conrad on 22 Jun 2010 01:23 Okay, I give up, I am one of the stupid 98 out of a hundred who give up before they solve this puzzle. Way too many facts for my feeble brain to juggle at the same time. I will have to look up the answer. I disagree with Michelle, if I were a detective, I would sure as heck want to be up against a stupid criminal, rather than someone who can solve such puzzles. Einstein (no one knows his real IQ) give us a puzzle like this, for he stressed examining assumptions, and once wrote: "The important thing is to not stop questioning." All the necessary facts are here. Assumption is that the "criminal" had been a constant customer at a local pet fish store, but no one had been able to identify exactly who that customer was. Facts: There are 5 houses in 5 different colours In each house lives a person with a different nationality.. These 5 owners drink a certain beverage, smoke a certain brand of cigar and keep a certain pet. No owners have the same pet, smoke the same brand of cigar, or drink the same drink. Hints: The Brit lives in a red house. The Swede keeps dogs as pets. The Dane drinks tea. The green house is on the left of the white house. The green house owner drinks coffee. The person who smokes Pall Mall rears birds. The owner of the yellow house smokes Dunhill. The man living in the house right in the centre drinks milk. The Norwegian lives in the first house. The man who smokes Blend lives next to the one who keeps cats. The man who keeps horses lives next to the man who smokes Dunhill. The owner who smokes Blue Master drinks beer. The German smokes Prince. The Norwegian lives next to the blue house. The man who smokes Blend has a neighbour who drinks water. The question for the Einstein test is ... WHO KEEPS THE FISH?
From: Doug Anderson on 22 Jun 2010 01:43 Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> writes: > Okay, I give up, I am one of the stupid 98 out of > a hundred who give up before they solve this puzzle. > > Way too many facts for my feeble brain to juggle > at the same time. > > I will have to look up the answer. > > I disagree with Michelle, if I were a detective, I would > sure as heck want to be up against a stupid criminal, > rather than someone who can solve such puzzles. Well, if crime prevention was a riddle duel between detectives and criminals a la Bilbo and Gollum in The Hobbit, you'd have a point. In fact, outside of the occasional mystery book, that really isn't what crime detection is about. OJ didn't get off because he was better at riddles than the detectives. And Bernie Madoff didn't get caught because the detectives out-riddled him. So don't worry - your future career as a criminal is just as likely having failed to solve this logic puzzle.
From: krishnananda on 22 Jun 2010 01:47 In article <210620102223136233%aeiou(a)mostly.invalid>, Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> wrote: > The question for the Einstein test is ... WHO KEEPS THE FISH? No one. The cat eats them all.
From: Mark Conrad on 22 Jun 2010 02:07 In article <0v39wfaahc.fsf(a)ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Well, if crime prevention was a riddle duel between detectives and > criminals a la Bilbo and Gollum in The Hobbit, you'd have a point. Crime prevention, such as it is in this country, is partly about outwiting the criminal. A witless detective, such as me for example, is going to have a much lower success rate than a highly intelligent detective who is good at tying together non-obvious facts. Non-obvious facts like the ones in the Einstein Puzzle. The only thing obvious to me was that the Swede was not the Terrible Fish-Petting Criminal. All the other relationships were too subtle for my brain to figure out, even though those relationships were staring me in the face, obvious as hell. Hmmph, I looked at the answer, it was certainly obvious, and a severe dent to my ego. < grumble > Someone here restore my faith in mankind by solving this obviously solveable puzzle - - - or is everyone here as stupid as I am. I hope not. I would like to think there are a few intelligent humans around, for all our sakes. Mark-
From: Thomas R. Kettler on 22 Jun 2010 07:58
In article <210620102307310084%aeiou(a)mostly.invalid>, Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> wrote: > In article <0v39wfaahc.fsf(a)ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson > <ethelthelogremovethis(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Well, if crime prevention was a riddle duel between detectives and > > criminals a la Bilbo and Gollum in The Hobbit, you'd have a point. > > Crime prevention, such as it is in this country, is partly about > outwiting the criminal. > > A witless detective, such as me for example, is going to have > a much lower success rate than a highly intelligent detective > who is good at tying together non-obvious facts. > > Non-obvious facts like the ones in the Einstein Puzzle. > > The only thing obvious to me was that the Swede was not > the Terrible Fish-Petting Criminal. > > All the other relationships were too subtle for my brain > to figure out, even though those relationships were staring > me in the face, obvious as hell. > > > Hmmph, I looked at the answer, it was certainly obvious, > and a severe dent to my ego. < grumble > > > Someone here restore my faith in mankind by solving this > obviously solveable puzzle - - - or is everyone here > as stupid as I am. > > I hope not. I would like to think there are a few intelligent > humans around, for all our sakes. Did you make a grid where you log what can and cannot be a relationship between two pieces of info (person in this house doesn't have birds, smoker of this lives in yellow house, etc._ I won't indicate the results since I don't want to spoil it for someone else, but if anyone is interested in seeing the Excel spreadsheet I used to get the answer, email me privately applying the sig below. -- Remove blown from email address to reply. |