How many Fs?

[fazstp]

Cool, thanks Felix. I'll give it go a bit later and let you know.

<bows in reverence to the QC master >

[fazstp]

Hmmm. Tried it and didn't get any images saved. I do get the iSight feed on screen with the interval countdown.

Had a look under options and I don't have a save location option, just the interval.

I'm running OS 10.4.11 does that make any difference?


Tried opening it in Quartz Composer (version 2.1.1 (17.1)) and got these errors;

> Macro Patch
Cannot create node of class "QCPlugInPatch" and identifier "ImageWriterPlugIn"

> Macro Patch
Cannot create connection from ["output" @ "Multiplexer_3"] to ["inputImage" @ "PlugInPatch_ImageWriterPlugIn_1"]

> Macro Patch
Cannot publish input port ["inputPath" @ "PlugInPatch_ImageWriterPlugIn_1"]

> (null)
State restoration failed on <QCPatch = 0x0DD43760 "(null)">


Checked in Console but didn't see anything there under QC.

[NovaScotian]

Quote: Originally Posted by Felix_MC hmm, that's strange. To test it, I looked for my old USB webcam, and plugged it into my computer. After installing Macam the camera was finally recognized by my mac. I tested it out with the screen saver, and everything seemed to work..

I'm using the built-in camera on the rim of the screen of a 17" MacBook Pro Intel Core 2 Duo running Leopard 10.5.4.

Quote: Tell me, when the screen saver is running, do you see your iSight's video feed on the screen? It's set to stretch to fit the whole screen.

I see the iSight's video feed in the ScreenSaver Preference Pane's right-hand Preview pane.

Quote: Also, do you have any other apps open that are using the iSight? Such as iChat maybe, even though you are not in a video conversation.

Nope.

Quote: Lastly, go to applications/utilities/console, and in the 'String Matching' search box in the top right corner enter "QC". Are there any results coming up, especially from the "_eference" sender? What do they say under 'message'?

09/03/08 9:18:05 PM System Preferences[1110] *** Message from <QCPatch = 0x21F6E3B0 "(null)">:
Cannot create node of class "QCPlugInPatch" and identifier "ImageWriterPlugIn"

[Felix_MC]

I noticed the problem this morning right before going to school when fazstp posted the Quartz Composer Errors, but I didn't have time to reply with a solution. NovaScotian further confirmed the problem.
In all the errors you can see "QCPlugInPatch" and "ImageWriterPlugIn". 'QCPlugInPatch' is a class to which external (non build-in) patches belong to. "ImageWriterPlugIn" is the external patch which I used to generate images. It was actually part of the developer examples for Quartz Composer Plug-Ins which I compiled and installed to Quartz Composer.
I did that quite a while ago, and I've used it so much, that I forgot it wasn't one of the build-in patches.
You can download the patch here:
http://tgraphicz.890m.com/ImageWriter.plugin.zip
To install it put the file in /Library/Graphics/Quartz Composer Plug-Ins/
If the folder doesn't exist (which it usually won't if you don't have any other plug-ins installed), then create it. Careful with the spaces and capitalization.
This should work

[fazstp]

I found this on apple dev;

Quote: In Mac OS X v10.4, all patches were built-in to Quartz Composer. Starting in Mac OS X v10.5, you can create custom patches and package them as a Quartz Composer plug-in.

So maybe I can't use the plugin under Tiger.

Thanks anyway. I guess I can just use my digital camera to take the cover shots. Probably would have been helpful if I thought of that before you went to all that trouble .

[cwtnospam]

I just realized that there was no php solution posted!

PHP Code:

<?php
$string="FINISHED FILES ARE THE RESULT OF YEARS OF SCIENTIFIC STUDY COMBINED WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF YEARS";
for ($i=0; $i < strlen($string); $i++)
    {
    $chrcount[$string[$i]]++;
    }
echo $chrcount['F'];
?>

[fazstp]

So I have five pairs of socks, each pair with different coloured toes. What are the odds that whenever I look through a basket of fresh washing I will find one of each colour before I finally find the pair to one of them?

[cwtnospam]

5 * 4/9 * 3/8 * 2/7 *1/6 = 5/126

[tw]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam 5 * 4/9 * 3/8 * 2/7 *1/6 = 5/126

actually, I think it's this: 8/9 * 6/8 * 4/7 * 2/6 = 8/63

[fazstp]

I assume that calculates the odds for the first basket. How does it stack up for each subsequent wash?

[tw]

Quote: Originally Posted by fazstp I assume that calculates the odds for the first basket. How does it stack up for each subsequent wash?

since each wash is independent of every other wash (i.e. the ordering of socks in load 1 does not affect the ordering of socks in load 2), the probability would be the same for every load. or is that not what you have in mind?

[Jasen]

Just to add some heresy to the thread:

    Function CountFs(ByVal s As String) As Integer

        Dim fcount As Integer = 0
        s = s.ToUpper

        Do While s.Contains("F")
            If s.IndexOf("F") > -1 Then
                fcount += 1
                s = s.Substring(s.IndexOf("F") + 1)
            End If
        Loop

        Return fcount

    End Function

[fazstp]

Quote: Originally Posted by tw since each wash is independent of every other wash (i.e. the ordering of socks in load 1 does not affect the ordering of socks in load 2), the probability would be the same for every load. or is that not what you have in mind?

I didn't really have anything in mind. It just seems to happen every wash that I will find five different coloured socks before I find a pair. This is disturbing to me . If you flip a coin 500 times and get heads 500 times is it still 50:50 odds on getting heads?

[tw]

Quote: Originally Posted by fazstp I didn't really have anything in mind. It just seems to happen every wash that I will find five different coloured socks before I find a pair. This is disturbing to me . If you flip a coin 500 times and get heads 500 times is it still 50:50 odds on getting heads?

well, the more pairs of socks you have, the greater the probability. for instance, with ten paris of socks, the odds are a little better than 50% that you'll get five singles before you find a match. plus there's the psychological factor - you notice when you don't find a pair quickly, you don't notice when you do.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by tw actually, I think it's this: 8/9 * 6/8 * 4/7 * 2/6 = 8/63

Oops! I should have thought about it before typing. Shouldn't it be 5 * 8/63 though, with it being 8/63 given that you've pulled a blue sock or a red one, etc.

[EatsWithFingers]

Quote: Originally Posted by fazstp If you flip a coin 500 times and get heads 500 times is it still 50:50 odds on getting heads?

Yes. If you flip a (fair) coin 1,000,000 times and always get heads, then the chance of getting heads the next time is still 50:50. That is the nature of independent events - past outcomes have no bearing on future outcomes.

However, the odds of getting 500 heads in a row before you start is 0.5 ^ 500 which is very small indeed.

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam Shouldn't it be 5 * 8/63 though, with it being 8/63 given that you've pulled a blue sock or a red one, etc.

No - tw is right:

• It doesn't matter which of the ten socks you pull out first: 10/10 = 1
• The second sock cannot match the first: 8/9
• The third sock cannot be matching either of the first two: 6/8
• And so on...

Therefore, the answer (as tw stated) is 1 * 8/9 * 6/8 * 4/7 * 2/6 = 8/63.

[tw]

Quote: Originally Posted by EatsWithFingers It doesn't matter which of the ten socks you pull out first: 10/10 = 1 The second sock cannot match the first: 8/9 The third sock cannot be matching either of the first two: 6/8 And so on...

or put another way, there are five colors to choose from, so the '5 *' part is arguably correct, but the probability of picking a particular color (say red) is 1/5 --> 5 * 1/5 = 1...

[fazstp]

Quote: Originally Posted by tw plus there's the psychological factor - you notice when you don't find a pair quickly, you don't notice when you do.

Today I got red, dark-blue, light-blue, red so it would seem there is nothing unnatural going on.

On to my next stupid question


I got a subscription offer today for National Geographic. On offer as a gift for subscribing is a full-size world map. Logistics aside as to how I would even read a world map at 1:1 scale, I'm wondering how big I need to make my letter-box to take delivery of this thing? And if I do take up the offer just how many forests am I destroying to make the paper?

[tw]

Quote: Originally Posted by fazstp Today I got red, dark-blue, light-blue, red so it would seem there is nothing unnatural going on. On to my next stupid question I got a subscription offer today for National Geographic. On offer as a gift for subscribing is a full-size world map. Logistics aside as to how I would even read a world map at 1:1 scale, I'm wondering how big I need to make my letter-box to take delivery of this thing? And if I do take up the offer just how many forests am I destroying to make the paper?

depends on paper thickness. some mathematician calculated that you can only fold a standard size piece of paper at most 8 times before it becomes too thick to be folder further (try it - it's surprisingly true). however, since the surface area of the earth is 510,072,000 km2 (196,939,900 square miles), getting it down to something close to mailbox size (I'm using a 1 foot edge as an estimate) would take 26-27 folds (where each fold divides the current width by half). surprisingly few, actually. of course, the thickness of the thing would increase exponentially (doubling the first fold, quadrupling on the second octupling on the third...) 2^27 is 134217728, so multiply that by the base thickness of your paper to find out its width (I think that means that if your paper was one micron thick, the final folder version would be 1 foot square, but 440 feet thick).

I don't feel like working out the differential equation for the optimal fold size given a particular paper width, but suffice it to say that it would be tough to read while you were driving.

[Woodsman]

Quote: Originally Posted by fazstp I got a subscription offer today for National Geographic. On offer as a gift for subscribing is a full-size world map. Logistics aside as to how I would even read a world map at 1:1 scale, I'm wondering how big I need to make my letter-box to take delivery of this thing? And if I do take up the offer just how many forests am I destroying to make the paper?

I think it was Jonathan Swift did a story about a mad king who commissioned a 1:1 map of the kingdom. His wise men made it, but see, it covered the kingdom in the most literal sense, shutting the sun and rain out so the crops died. Eventually it broke up, and to this day, the story goes, you can see fragments of the Map patching the roofs of peasant hovels.

I would hope that a full-size map would feature you reading a full-size map?