I just explained to you the reasons why you are wrong which you have conveniently disregarded. Instead of rising up to the challenge or admitting failure, you

I just explained to you the reasons why you are wrong which you have conveniently disregarded. Instead of rising up to the challenge or admitting failure, you make broad sweeping generalizations like you could learn 99% of any CS concept in less than a day, and that any challenge that you are not willing to do (or likely cannot), is because the challenge has no "real-life" application. Not only did you read the paper incorrectly, trying desperately to find holes in it, but you try to change the subject by calling me naive in my refusal to allow you to just say "memoize" as the answer to any algorithmic challenge. I think it is clear to anyone else reading this that you are in the wrong here.