Hey CnC

Did you get the response to that math question?

No he didn't.

Yeah, sorry for not responding. Midterms week has been killing me.

Your information sparked shit I hadn't thought about/done since like high school, so thanks so much. I got the problem all figured out and turned in. APPRECIATE IT.

Since we're talking to CnC. I actually got that programming stuff figured out on my own and I'm doing a pretty ace job in my classes. I'm receiving a reward next Wednesday for actually having the highest average out of all the students in those classes.

So, what I mean to say is, I really appreciate your offer. And I didn't come to you because I just wanted to get it on my own and work shit out. Just don't want you to think I thought you wouldn't come through for me.

So what was the original problem? Or was that shit just a typo in the text book?

Loxx O))) wrote:

Since we're talking to CnC. I actually got that programming stuff figured out on my own and I'm doing a pretty ace job in my classes. I'm receiving a reward next Wednesday for actually having the highest average out of all the students in those classes.

So, what I mean to say is, I really appreciate your offer. And I didn't come to you because I just wanted to get it on my own and work shit out. Just don't want you to think I thought you wouldn't come through for me.

That's fine -- I would prefer you understand and complete it on your own; you'll learn and understand it better that way.

Cghost21 wrote:

So what was the original problem? Or was that shit just a typo in the text book?

I'm doing a type of error correction and detection in networks, and we're analyzing the cyclic code to find its capabilities by using polynomials. Here is the original statement, taken from the book if you're curious:

A generator with a factor of x + 1 can catch all odd numbers of errors. This means that we need to make x + 1 a factor of any generator. Note that we are not saying that the generator itself should be x + 1; we are saying that it should have a factor of x + 1. If it is only x + 1, it cannot catch the two adjacent isolated errors (see the previous section). For example, x4 + x2 + x + 1 can catch all odd-numbered errors since it can be written as a product of the two polynomials x + 1 and x3 + x2 + I.

CnC... what kind of work do you do?

I'm a Junior in college, double majoring in Computer Science and Information Assurance. I'll ( hopefully ) have a new job soon working at a software security firm. After that i'll be interning for the NSA.

Wow. You're pretty set, huh?

CnC6 wrote:

I'm doing a type of error correction and detection in networks, and we're analyzing the cyclic code to find its capabilities by using polynomials. Here is the original statement, taken from the book if you're curious:

A generator with a factor of x + 1 can catch all odd numbers of errors. This means that we need to make x + 1 a factor of any generator. Note that we are not saying that the generator itself should be x + 1; we are saying that it should have a factor of x + 1. If it is only x + 1, it cannot catch the two adjacent isolated errors (see the previous section). For example, x4 + x2 + x + 1 can catch all odd-numbered errors since it can be written as a product of the two polynomials x + 1 and x3 + x2 + I.

Book has a typo then, that's not correct.