When post is not-good then nobody comments on it. When post is good then people drag it here on HN but avoid commenting on the blog. So it is true that it will be empty 99% of the time.
The reason I said it's one is from the perspective that the software is a combination of spiking potentials and chemical reactions. If you haven't read "On Intelligence" by Jeff Hawkins, you should. Though his results/theory may not even be close to the real explanation behind our brain, it sets a good stage for the topic.
Rating 3/10. I don't think this article is written by someone who knows the topic well.
e.g. you don't too complicated math as claimed in this line:
>> It is known that all P problems are NP problems; the proof requires math which is too complicated for this article but may be explained in the future.
For P problems can be solved easily and then the solution can be easily verified. This means all P problems are NP problems too.
I would agree that the math required is not 'complicated' from the point of view of anyone with basic understanding of discrete logic, but it's certainly too complicated to express in simple english terms that are understandable at the level i was shooting for.
if you want to do the proof that all problems in P are also in NP, you have to explain the notion of a decision problem and show that any np-complete numerical optimization problem can be converted to a decision problem without increasing its computational complexity by more than a function bounded by a polynomial.
someone named 'balabiot' changed the article by adding an incorrect 'proof' that P is a subset of NP, at the same time you made this post. the incorrect proof reads:
All P problems are NP problems: if a problem is easy to
solve, to check an answer you just solve it and check that
the results match.
this invalid proof makes the assumption that an np-complete problem has a single solution. many np-complete problems have multiple solutions; there many be many ways to pack the knapsack, color the graph, or satisfy the boolean circuit. if you are presented with a valid solution, but the algorithm you use to solve the problem instance produces a different, but also valid solution, your comparison would fail.
note that simply solving the problem (because it is in p) is NOT the same thing as verifying a solution correct.
