4 ms·
getting something that looks "reasonably random" to casual inspection by human beings, using only O(1) space. 7 (+/- 2) is the magic number. However, you make
by stcredzero 8y ago
getting something that looks "reasonably random" to casual inspection by human beings, using only O(1) space.
7 (+/- 2) is the magic number. However, you make a good point. This is highly dependent on exactly how large the data is, and how "casual" the human are.
- Dylan16807 8y agoThe size of working memory... that sounds like a threshold for taking an already-randomized list and turning it into another one that looks different on casual inspection. Even with a small size like 200 a shuffler that weak won't do a good job of turning sorted into unsorted, even at a glance.
- stcredzero 8y agoa shuffler that weak won't do a good job of turning sorted into unsorted, even at a glance. That depends on how casual the inspection is.
- Dylan16807 8y agoI would expect the most casual inspection to actually be the least affected, since it would be be the most focused on the first letter or two of each entry.