The Geniuses' Thread

**Timbuk2**

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

C++, to convert between kgs, stone and pounds, depending on which conversion the user wants to do.
(I know it's fairly basic, but I'm only doing Intro to Programming)

You get to do C++ in Intro to Programming?

We did Processing.
Processing is not good.

**Timbuk2**

Eugh processing - what's the point in that?

Yea our lecturer said that this he changed to C++ from Processing as the head of the department told him to, or something. It's probably the same lecturer as you had.

**Timbuk2**

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Eugh processing - what's the point in that?

Yea our lecturer said that this he changed to C++ from Processing as the head of the department told him to, or something. It's probably the same lecturer as you had.

Thank God he did. It'd be a balls-load of work if you wanted to do any programming next year if you'd had to do processing. I really don't know what he was thinking.

ihavequestions

I feel smart enough to post in this thread now I just fixed a completely broken and fallen apart plug, and it is now working to give me internet Finally put my A in physics to some use!!

Fad

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Eugh processing - what's the point in that?

Yea our lecturer said that this he changed to C++ from Processing as the head of the department told him to, or something. It's probably the same lecturer as you had.

Pollastri?

Intro to Programming 2 was just a sham.... there was almost NO programming involves other than a project that we got a single lecture of programming tips for.....

**Timbuk2**

Fad wrote: »

Pollastri?

Intro to Programming 2 was just a sham.... there was almost NO programming involves other than a project that we got a single lecture of programming tips for.....

Yep, same guy. Does he also do Intro to Programming 2?

I like him - he explains things quite well and doesn't go too fast, but goes fast enough that we actually get some work done. I wish he wouldn't use the microphone though, it's much easier to hear him when he takes it off.

Fad

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Yep, same guy. Does he also do Intro to Programming 2?

I like him - he explains things quite well and doesn't go too fast, but goes fast enough that we actually get some work done. I wish he wouldn't use the microphone though, it's much easier to hear him when he takes it off.

He didn't last year, Damien Dalton did it, he also taught Intro to Computer Architecture, and he pretty much just taught the ICP2 class a lot of CA and gave us a project (Implementing a game of X's and O's, which, with our standard of programming, was a bit of a nightmare).

The whole Intro to programming classes did nothing but screw me over this year though, never got taught Java and need to know it for this year.... >_<

**Timbuk2**

Ouch! Computer Programming is something which is used a lot more in the Actuarial Field than is thought in universities, based on my various visits and work experiences in insurance companies (by work experience, I mean watching actuaries doing their job and talking to them, I didn't actually do anything myself).

They write scripts that do the calculations that they program. Java is used, but what seems to be used nearly everywhere, and oddly not thought in university (afaik) is Excel combined with VBA macros. Excel seems simple, but there's a huge depth to it that I didn't realise!

As an aside, I don't think that looking at slides of code is a satisfactory way of learning programming in any shape or form. Why Into To Programming doesn't have any tutorials and/or labs is beyond me?

This is going to sound strange, but I learned Visual Basic when I was younger (by myself, just for fun). The irony is that I could do a whole lot more back then with VB, just reading one of my dad's books by myself, than I can now with C++. Obviously Visual Basic is that bit easier, but just the object-orientated element of it produces more tangible and visually appealing programs - the console programs that we are currently making in C++ aren't very practical. I'm probably missing the point though.

Also, I'm not actually sure whether he is teaching us C or C++ - he keeps referring to it as C/C++, but we choose C++ as the language when writing programs in the compiler (CodeBlocks). Is there a big difference? If you know one, could you do the other?

sock puppet

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Ouch! Computer Programming is something which is used a lot more in the Actuarial Field than is thought in universities, based on my various visits and work experiences in insurance companies (by work experience, I mean watching actuaries doing their job and talking to them, I didn't actually do anything myself).

They write scripts that do the calculations that they program. Java is used, but what seems to be used nearly everywhere, and oddly not thought in university (afaik) is Excel combined with VBA macros. Excel seems simple, but there's a huge depth to it that I didn't realise!

Oh really? I would have thought that'd all be involved in an actuarial degree. Think I start doing that sort of stuff this year.

**Timbuk2**

sock puppet wrote: »

Oh really? I would have thought that'd all be involved in an actuarial degree. Think I start doing that sort of stuff this year.

I'm not 100% sure, to be honest - I should check it out, I could well be wrong. I have also lost the ability to distinguish between thought and taught - that is embarrassing.

cocoa

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Also, I'm not actually sure whether he is teaching us C or C++ - he keeps referring to it as C/C++, but we choose C++ as the language when writing programs in the compiler (CodeBlocks). Is there a big difference? If you know one, could you do the other?

Some might describe C++ as object oriented C, so a lot of the syntax is the same, hence his referring to C/C++, although if you're not using object oriented concepts you may as well be doing C really...

I did some excel macros in first year of my engineering course, wasn't really made clear how useful they are. I think most students would like to learn some simple scripting early on, stuff like bash with grep and awk (= powerful) and maybe some ruby and/or python. Quick and dirty instead of theoretical and clean (useless for the first few years of study) would be very refreshing...

**Timbuk2**

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Ouch! Computer Programming is something which is used a lot more in the Actuarial Field than is thought in universities, based on my various visits and work experiences in insurance companies (by work experience, I mean watching actuaries doing their job and talking to them, I didn't actually do anything myself).

They write scripts that do the calculations that they program. Java is used, but what seems to be used nearly everywhere, and oddly not thought in university (afaik) is Excel combined with VBA macros. Excel seems simple, but there's a huge depth to it that I didn't realise!

As an aside, I don't think that looking at slides of code is a satisfactory way of learning programming in any shape or form. Why Into To Programming doesn't have any tutorials and/or labs is beyond me?

This is going to sound strange, but I learned Visual Basic when I was younger (by myself, just for fun). The irony is that I could do a whole lot more back then with VB, just reading one of my dad's books by myself, than I can now with C++. Obviously Visual Basic is that bit easier, but just the object-orientated element of it produces more tangible and visually appealing programs - the console programs that we are currently making in C++ aren't very practical. I'm probably missing the point though.

Also, I'm not actually sure whether he is teaching us C or C++ - he keeps referring to it as C/C++, but we choose C++ as the language when writing programs in the compiler (CodeBlocks). Is there a big difference? If you know one, could you do the other?

One company might use matlab, one might use VBA macros, in a high-profile hedge fund with access to large computing capabilities you might hand-code it all in C.

If you learn general programming, the extra training once you join a company is minimal.

Fad

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

As an aside, I don't think that looking at slides of code is a satisfactory way of learning programming in any shape or form. Why Into To Programming doesn't have any tutorials and/or labs is beyond me?

Money afaik.

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

This is going to sound strange, but I learned Visual Basic when I was younger (by myself, just for fun). The irony is that I could do a whole lot more back then with VB, just reading one of my dad's books by myself, than I can now with C++. Obviously Visual Basic is that bit easier, but just the object-orientated element of it produces more tangible and visually appealing programs - the console programs that we are currently making in C++ aren't very practical. I'm probably missing the point though.

You have to start small. I'm in second year and our programming still isn't overly practical, but I could in theory program something useful if I had the time and motivation. In second semester there's a module called Software engineering (For every year in CS) where you spend the entire module doing projects and writing tests for them and what not.

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Also, I'm not actually sure whether he is teaching us C or C++ - he keeps referring to it as C/C++, but we choose C++ as the language when writing programs in the compiler (CodeBlocks). Is there a big difference? If you know one, could you do the other?

C++ is C with classes, so it adds object orientated funtionality to C (Well not just that, but that's one of the main things). OOP will eventually make sense, but on a small scale program, it doesn't seem to be all that useful.

Pygmalion

Assembly language programming tbh :P.

Pfft, assembly :P

>>>+[[-]>>[-]++>+>+++++++[<++++>>++-]++>>+>+>+++++[>++>++++++<<-]+>>>,<++[[>[->>]<[>>]<<-]<[<]<+>>[>]>[<+>-[[<+>-]>]<[[[-]<]++<-[<+++++++++>[<->-]>>]>>]]<<]<]<[[<]>[[>]>>[>>]+[<<][<]<+>>-]>[>]+[->>]<<<<[[<<]<[<]+<<[+>+<<-[>-->+<<-[>+<[>>+<<-]]]>[<+>-]<]++>>-->[>]>>[>>]]<<[>>+<[[<]<]>[<<]<[<]+[-<+>>-[<<+>++>-[<->[<<+>>-]]]<[>+<-]>]>[>]>]>[>>]>>]<[>>+>>+>>]<<[->>>>>>>>]<<[>.>>>>>>>]<<[>->>>>>]<<[>,>>>]<<[>+>]<<[+<<]<]

Brain**** interpreter, in Brain****. Although it's not my creation. I'm not quite insane yet.

Pygmalion

Deleted User wrote: »

Brain**** interpreter, in Brain****. Although it's not my creation. I'm not quite insane yet.

Brain**** is for fun, not srs work. Assembly is for both.

Pygmalion

Pygmalion wrote: »

Brain**** is for fun, not srs work. Assembly is for both.

Well, it can be extended to get srs work done. Crain**** comes to mind. :P

**Timbuk2**

Actuary Jokes

The ACTUARY's PRAYER
Our model, which art in nowhere.
Guessing be thy name.
Thy assumptions come,
Thy will be done in future as it was in the past.
Give us this day our premium rates,
and forgive us our lousy estimates,
as we forgive those who supply us with crappy data.
Lead us not into insolvencies,
and deliver us from auditors.
For thine is the #NAME?, #DIV/0!, and #VALUE!,
forever and ever. Amen.

--

Question: How many actuaries does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer:
a) How many did it take last year?
b) How many do you want it to take?
c) None, after credibility weighting, we have indications that the bulb is still lit.
d) None, the insurance department is not allowing any modifications to the bulb at this time.
e) Have any of our competitors changed bulbs yet?
f) None, they prefer to leave us in the dark.
g) Five: one to screw it in, and four more to estimate the length of its life before being screwed in.
h) The same number that it took last year, adjusted for trending.
i) One- But he/she has to do battle first with Sales and Marketing over the issue.
j) One- But first, it takes ten years to pass the exams.

--

What does an Actuary use as a contraceptive?
His personality

--

Actuaries like to have fun ... when nobody is watching.

--

What is the difference between an introverted actuary and an extroverted actuary? An introverted actuary stares at his own feet during a conversation, while an extroverted one stares at the other person's feet.

--

Two actuaries are duck hunting. They see a duck in the air and they both shoot. The first actuary's shot is 20 feet wide to the left. The second actuary's shot is 20 feet wide to the right. The actuaries give each other high fives, because on average they shot it.

--

Definition of a computer: An actuary with a heart.

--

Did you hear about the actuary who was so negative, when he walked into a room people would look around and say, "Who just left?"

--

What does an actuary's wife do when she has insomnia? She rolls over and says, "Tell me again, darling. Just what is it you do for a living?"

--

An actuary is flying on an old-style 4 prop plane to the annual meeting. Partway through the flight one engine conks out. The pilot comes over the intercom to advise the passengers that one engine is dead, but the plane is perfectly capable of flying on three, although this will delay their arrival time by one hour. A while later, the pilot advises the passengers that unfortunately, a second engine has ceased to function. He reassures them that the plane can fly on only two engines, but their arrival time will now be delayed by 3 hours. Shortly after, the pilot has more bad news - the 3rd engine is not working, but he reassures everyone again that the plane is perfectly capable of continuing with only one engine working, but that their arrival time will now be delayed by 7 hours. At this news, the actuary can no longer contain his frustration. He turns to the passenger sitting next to him and says "Boy that's just great - if the 4th engine stops working we're going to be up here forever!".

--

Definition of a joke to an actuary: Something that ALMOST makes him or her laugh.

---

---

What an excellent use of my free hour between lectures :rolleyes:
/Nerd

KnifeWRENCH

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

Two actuaries are duck hunting. They see a duck in the air and they both shoot. The first actuary's shot is 20 feet wide to the left. The second actuary's shot is 20 feet wide to the right. The actuaries give each other high fives, because on average they shot it.

^ Love that one!

On a semi-genius related note, I am currently trying to pick my top 5 preferences for my physics project. Eugh. =/

Richard Cranium

**Timbuk2**, I can confirm that financial maths really does get as boring as you probably feared/expected. Friends of mine in different mathsy courses are doing chaos theory, modelling and quantum physics, whereas I get to learn all about pensions and effective compound rates of interest.

Woo :rolleyes:
/grumble

After Timbuk2 gave out yesterday about the Lotto in the arrgh thread, I whipped out Python and gave this script a run:

http://pastebin.com/Hr3c9NcV

And it turns out, the average winnings per week work out at €2.0453. This figure is so high really though, because of the Jackpot amount.

It becomes clear that it's a waste of money to play the lotto when we calculate our chances of winning anything in a particular pick:
0.0238340785703

Considering you have a minimum of two picks per card, at a cost of €3, it's most definitely not worth it.

sock puppet

Deleted User wrote: »

After Timbuk2 gave out yesterday about the Lotto in the arrgh thread, I whipped out Python and gave this script a run:

http://pastebin.com/Hr3c9NcV

And it turns out, the average winnings per week work out at €2.0453. This figure is so high really though, because of the Jackpot amount.

It becomes clear that it's a waste of money to play the lotto when we calculate our chances of winning anything in a particular pick:
0.0238340785703

Considering you have a minimum of two picks per card, at a cost of €3, it's most definitely not worth it.

Obviously. But expected value isn't the only thing you should consider. I didn't see Timbuk2's post but I find it odd that as someone studying actuary he'd give out about the logic of playing the lotto (if that is what he said). It's pretty much the reverse of insurance albeit which more unfavourable odds. For someone on a low income €3 a week can easily be found, and the potential reward is very large. Though anyone on a six figure salary or something who still plays it is indeed braindead.

edit: a portion of the money you spend on your ticket does go towards charity too.

sock puppet

sock puppet wrote: »

Obviously. But expected value isn't the only thing you should consider. I didn't see Timbuk2's post but I find it odd that as someone studying actuary he'd give out about the logic of playing the lotto (if that is what he said). It's pretty much the reverse of insurance albeit which more unfavourable odds. For someone on a low income €3 a week can easily be found, and the potential reward is very large. Though anyone on a six figure salary or something who still plays it is indeed braindead.

edit: a portion of the money you spend on your ticket does go towards charity too.

I agree with the charity motivation, and obviously there's some entertainment value in it, but it's still a waste of money, just not necessarily a bad idea, in the same way of spending my money on nights out is a waste of money but still worthwhile.

**Timbuk2**

Well Actuarial Maths is all about calculating the chance, or probability, of something happening and applying a financial value on it to ensure that the insurance company / bank remains profitable yet competitive.

For example, how much extra should we charge Man X over the same-aged Man Y, because X smokes and Y doesn't. In order to examine how likely it is that X dies before Y, past data and statistics are looked in, in combination with many other factors!

In terms of the Lotto, the chances of winning are so small, that for 95% of people they will spend more money on tickets than they will receive in prizes, be it small prizes or lotto jackpots. Imagine, for the sake of a silly argument, that somebody came into an insurance company and asked to be insured against not winning the lotto. What sort of premium do you think he'd pay?

I don't think a Lotto is in anyway similar to insurance. I think of insurance as more of an investment - i.e. you pay now, and under the circumstances that something happens, we will pay out and cover the losses etc. It isn't a case of 'OK so you've had a car accident we'll just randomly decide if we'll pay out or not' - it's a guaranteed return if something happens. Lottery tickets bought every week never cease being sunk costs as you have over 99.999% chance of not winning the jackpot any particular week!

Although I do love how every single intro stats class will warn you of the horrific dangers of extrapolating (i.e. making inferences based on a data set about data outside of the range of a data set) and then actuaries who learn statistics go off and make a career out of extrapolating.

They're some lads. :P

(They really account for these problems for the most part, through theory and approximation. It's just funny how they break the underlying principles of the subject that is the foundation of actuarial maths).

**Timbuk2**

That's an extremely good point, I never even thought of that

Those Intro to Stats classes are mad. Everytime I read a survey in the paper now I'm immediately and irrationally skeptical.

"Two fifths of voters want Cowen gone"

O RLY? They need to print more details about how the surveys are conducted, being honest - that's the fun part! The Irish Times seems to be better than most, but in some American Broadsheet publications they give a full account of exactly how the poll/survey was conducted, and the exact wording and nature of all the questions asked as well as who did the research and who funded the project, etc.

**Timbuk2**

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

That's an extremely good point, I never even thought of that

Those Intro to Stats classes are mad. Everytime I read a survey in the paper now I'm immediately and irrationally skeptical.

"Two fifths of voters want Cowen gone"

O RLY? They need to print more details about how the surveys are conducted, being honest - that's the fun part! The Irish Times seems to be better than most, but in some American Broadsheet publications they give a full account of exactly how the poll/survey was conducted, and the exact wording and nature of all the questions asked as well as who did the research and who funded the project, etc.

Very true. To what degree of certainty did they calculate this since they're inferring about a population? Are the assumptions of this inference correct (usually that it's normally distributed)...
The list would be quite long if we enumerated it.

As an aside, I now have a research area in mind for The Postgrad Years: basically this.

sock puppet

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

I don't think a Lotto is in anyway similar to insurance. I think of insurance as more of an investment - i.e. you pay now, and under the circumstances that something happens, we will pay out and cover the losses etc. It isn't a case of 'OK so you've had a car accident we'll just randomly decide if we'll pay out or not' - it's a guaranteed return if something happens. Lottery tickets bought every week never cease being sunk costs as you have over 99.999% chance of not winning the jackpot any particular week!

The reason I brought up insurance was as another example of the utility of money really. It's a guarenteed pay out but the the odds of you claiming are quite small. Our house has never been robbed and probably never will be. If we applied the same calculations as you did with the lotto we'd conclude that home insurance is a waste of money.

Lottery tickets cost so little that almost any consumer can easily afford them so they're not losing much.

sock puppet

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

That's an extremely good point, I never even thought of that

Those Intro to Stats classes are mad. Everytime I read a survey in the paper now I'm immediately and irrationally skeptical.

"Two fifths of voters want Cowen gone"

O RLY? They need to print more details about how the surveys are conducted, being honest - that's the fun part! The Irish Times seems to be better than most, but in some American Broadsheet publications they give a full account of exactly how the poll/survey was conducted, and the exact wording and nature of all the questions asked as well as who did the research and who funded the project, etc.

I believe RedC give a breakdown of the methodology used on their website. Anything conducted by the paper themselves is going to be on more shaky ground as you said

sock puppet

sock puppet wrote: »

The reason I brought up insurance was as another example of the utility of money really. It's a guarenteed pay out but the the odds of you claiming are quite small. Our house has never been robbed and probably never will be. If we applied the same calculations as you did with the lotto we'd conclude that home insurance is a waste of money.

Lottery tickets cost so little that almost any consumer can easily afford them so they're not losing much.

Ah yeah. I see where you're coming from, but a) much more people's houses get robbed than win the jackpot and b) while winning the jackpot is a fantastic bonus for your quality of life, losing your house without insurance is one of the single most disastruous things that can happen to you.

I'd say the difference in quality of life between somebody with no home and somebody with a home compared to somebody with a home and somebody with a home and obscene wealth is huge with the former being the largest difference.