The Postman's Dilemma
jdawe
my postbox but a letter happened to be addressed to PO Box 444 not
mine which is PO Box 417.
So, I took the offending letter into the post office and said:
"looks like I've received someone else's mail by mistake"
To which the postman replied:
"What number is it?"
"444"
"What number is yours?"
"417"
"Hmm, close"
At which point I stopped and stared at him for a bit. He turned around
and showed the letter to a co-worker who confirmed in broken english:
"444,417 close! Very close!"
I thought this was a bit strange so I went back outside and looked at
my postbox and sure enough because of the way they were laid out 444
was only 3 PO boxes away from mine.
The problem here is that the inverse of 'close' is 'far' so the
opposing operands:
Close
or
Far
are not appropriate for this operation. They are for a completely
different opposing operation.
The opposing operands for mail PO box delivery are:
Right box
or
Wrong box
There is no near or far involved.
Something else you might have noticed here is that the word 'postman'
was used not postie or postperson to which you might accuse me of not
being 'politically correct'. Well, The Postman's Dilemma, is of course
the title of an old english movie but nonetheless it is a good mistake
to pick up on.
Not only should the correct opposing operands always be used for the
correct opposing operation but we must also never choose to recognise
one operand at the expense of the other.
For example, looking back at the Postman's Dilemma.
If the postperson only chose to recognise one operand 'Wrong box'.
Then he\she would never post any letter he\she would always think that
if they put it in this box or that box it would always be wrong
regardless of whether the numbers matched up.
or
If the postperson only chose to recognise the other operand 'Right
box'. Then he\she would post the letter in any box and think he\she
was right regardless of whether the numbers matched up.
So, the Postman's Dilemma is a great example to remember:
To use the correct operands for the correct opposing operation.
+
To never favour one operand at the expense of its opposing equivalent.
-Josh.
Androcles
"jdawe" <mrj...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7b39af4a-8554-460a...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
Just imagine how the owner of box 444 felt when he didn't know
he'd not gotten a letter. My three older brothers were never born,
leaving me the only son my parents ever had. My pal Billy had an
older brother and he taught Billy China was a long way off before
I'd ever heard of China. I miss them, they could have taught me a
lot when I was six years old if they'd only existed.
Helmut Wabnig
wrote:
444 - 417 = 27
The deviation in percentiles is
100* 27 / 444 = 0,0608 * 100 = +/-3 % hit accuracy
which is not bad.
(referenced to the larger value)
Your neigbour will rather put himself into the center and calculate
100 *27 /417 = 6,5 % missing rate
which is not that good as one might want.
For the postman it is a 100% success anyway because finally
the letter arrived at the correct receiver. (your neighbour)
w.
Androcles
"Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat> wrote in message
news:vut5k515ikikrr9m2...@4ax.com...
> Your neigbour will rather put himself into the center and calculate
Don't you mean "nigbour", wabnegh?
Helmut Wabnig
Hmm.
My Langenscheidt has only 600000 word entries,
only that one is missing, Sir Androcles.
What a shame.
w.
Androcles
"Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat> wrote in message
"neighbour" is missing, wabneigh?
Wab a shame. The Americans right "neighbor" but that's not write either.
tadchem
"Close" and "far" as you use them here are adjectives.
Adjectives do not have inverses.
Operators are verbs (processes).
If "close" is taken to be an operator, then its inverse is "open."
Operands are objects upon which operations are performed. In your
example, the operands are "box" and "letter".
It is also apparent that the word 'postman' in your example is an
"inoperand."
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
tadchem
<snip repost>
> 444 - 417 = 27
> The deviation in percentiles is
>
> 100* 27 / 444 = 0,0608 * 100 = +/-3 % hit accuracy
> which is not bad.
'Bad' or 'good' imply value judgements, which are necessarily
dependent totally upon the cisrumstances and the judge.
My wife is 64 inches tall. If I was to make an error of 3% of that
value during lovemaking, I would find myself locked out of the house
and sleeping in the car (again).
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
Uncle Al
>
> A funny thing happened to me the other day.
If it involves your chronic inconceivable suffering, ha ha ha.
> I picked up my mail from
> my postbox but a letter happened to be addressed to PO Box 444 not
> mine which is PO Box 417.
Diversity mailhominid.
> So, I took the offending letter into the post office and said:
>
> "looks like I've received someone else's mail by mistake"
How do you know who you are, then who somebody else is?
> To which the postman replied:
>
> "What number is it?"
>
> "444"
Wrong mail is coded 666. Look in your Bible (unless you are a
Catholic).
> "What number is yours?"
>
> "417"
>
> "Hmm, close"
What is the standard deviation for mail delivery? The variance?
> At which point I stopped and stared at him for a bit. He turned around
> and showed the letter to a co-worker who confirmed in broken english:
>
> "444,417 close! Very close!"
An Asian would have emoted "Vely Crose!" Did you hear words like
"pendejo" or "albondigas?" "Pinche panoche?" (Are you a South
American tamarin with a tufted head?)
> I thought this was a bit strange so I went back outside and looked at
> my postbox and sure enough because of the way they were laid out 444
> was only 3 PO boxes away from mine.
"Vely Crose!" The mailhominid was only off by one, except for the
two. "Vely Crose!" indeed.
> The problem here is that the inverse of 'close' is 'far' so the
> opposing operands:
[snip rest of crap]
If you number your box in English, of course delivery will be
screwed. We number our box in Linear B and never have a problem. Our
mailman is an formerly unemployed Mycenaean dialectician. Yasoo!
Hupa! Try it (the Linear B, not the hupa).
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
Androcles
"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:4B43DF66...@hate.spam.net...
Mission accomplished.
Bigot.
Gordon Stangler
You have just gone on my list of favorite people. That post is pure
win.