Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Logic [Was: Warning - Serious 'sudo' Flaw Compromises Security] Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2025 20:12:43 +0200 Lines: 55 Message-ID: References: <10cios3$25sim$2@dont-email.me> <10cj667$29n96$5@dont-email.me> <10cjf5m$2cnh5$2@dont-email.me> <10cl5qu$2q6c4$12@dont-email.me> <10cmkps$39hde$2@dont-email.me> <10cmt5g$3bg6j$1@dont-email.me> <-ZCcnbpqnNEEkHL1nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> <10ctpvt$17cip$1@dont-email.me> <2smdnb0rA9AEnG71nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net Rl6Nqd8TJa81b7bpHy/dbgzfbjLYiOeV7wgp8YB8PWTMEMqm8p X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:5Xt7bSEgDMALkgBtJm931MVwga0= sha256:1OuxNJVwU31hycqoaTK2yMEWWabXZ6/EX9N8RF1L3mk= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: <2smdnb0rA9AEnG71nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:76321 On 2025-10-18 04:55, c186282 wrote: > On 10/17/25 12:13, Rich wrote: >> c186282 wrote: >>> On 10/14/25 21:25, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 23:31:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2025-10-14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Anybody who buys a book with “philosophy” in the title ... probably >>>>>> shouldn’t be allowed to manage a software project. >>>>> >>>>> Ironically, an elective course on logic that I took in university was >>>>> labeled "Philosophy 302". >>>>> That's where I learned about things like De Morgan's theorem, which >>>>> comes in quite handy for programming. >>>> >>>> I didn’t think philosphers believed in logic ... ;) >>>> >>>> I found an explanation of De Morgan’s Theorem in a book on computing >>>> hardware, I think it was. Hard to believe you can find people who write >>>> software, who don’t understand it. I remember on the Python group some >>>> years ago getting into an argument with someone who didn’t seem to >>>> appreciate that the opposite of >>>> >>>>       a = b ∨ a = c >>>> >>>> was not >>>> >>>>       a ≠ b ∨ a ≠ c >>>> >>>> but >>>> >>>>       a ≠ b ∧ a ≠ c >>> >>>    Never even heard of DeMorgan >> >> The basics underlying boolean logic: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Morgan%27s_laws > >   Never heard of him until now. Figured out the >   relevant boolean/logic rules on the fly while >   writing my programs. I think I heard of those, in Digital Electronics. But the '∨' and '∧' symbols confuse me. I have forgotten how we would draw the tables of truth, and then do simplifications fast. Long time no see. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;