Geek Squad

I suppose we could relatively easily implement most of those algorithms using C or C++ if you let me know when you're ready... and once you have access to shared libraries containing various common functions, you might just need to set up a conditional jump.

Perhaps we should attempt to execute all of this directly in Assembly instead. 🍿

northernviper4 said:That decision tree issue isn't actually relevant—I only brought it up as an example of a problem I ran into during a job interview. 🙂
What he's doing here is state-space searching, and there are plenty of different algorithms for that.

I suspect he tackled it using a tree structure.
Standard recursion and backtracking—though he likely implemented some kind of time limit to prune the results so it wouldn't run indefinitely.
The guy wasn't allowed to Google anything; he just went with the first thing that came to mind.

Fair point—those are search trees. I don't think he used probability. Honestly, it’s been so long since college that most of that has slipped my mind. 😁
He really should have looked it up; he would have found a much better solution. 😁

Gregory Smith21 said:Implementing most algorithms in C or C++ is trivial—just let me know when you're ready. Once you have shared libraries for the core functions, all you really need to do is set up the conditional jumps.

Let’s try doing the whole thing in Assembly then. 🍿

Going back to basics? 😬

That would certainly be an arduous task. 🤣

I'm going to take a moment to see how much I've forgotten—remember that old riddle about the boat, the Wolf, the goat, and the cabbage? 😬

Well, check out the sequel. 😬
https://www.mit.edu/_download/r...toraStanja.pdf


Lab assignment: The Jealous Husbands Problem
Write a program that utilizes a Breadth-First Search to find the optimal
solution to the Jealous Husbands problem.
The problem is defined as follows: three husbands and their wives must
cross from one side of a river to the other using a single boat. At no
point can a wife be left in the presence of another husband unless her own
husband is also present. The boat can carry a maximum of two people and cannot
travel empty.
The optimal solution is the one requiring the fewest steps. The program should
output the solution as a sequence of operators and states leading to the target
state.

Gregory Smith21 said:Implementing most algorithms in C or C++ is a breeze—just let me know when you're ready... Once you've got shared libraries for all those common functions, all you're really doing is setting up conditional jumps.

Let’s just go ahead and do the whole thing in Assembly then. 🍿

But what's the point of using an assembler for that? I mean, why overcomplicate things when there are way easier ways to get it done? Honestly, nobody is out here using Assembly for actual development or hacking anymore—why would you want to bash your head against an assembler when you have so many other languages at your disposal?

Nowadays, if you want to program something or run some code, Java and Python are more than enough—with Ruby and PHP as solid backups.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:Going back to basics? 😬

That would certainly be a bloody mess to untangle... 🤣

I decided to take a quick look at just how much I have forgotten lately; do you all recall that old riddle involving the boat, the Wolf, the goat, and the cabbage? 😬

Well, consider this follow-up... 😬



A laboratory assignment: The Jealous Husbands Problem

Write a program that utilizes a breadth-first search to find the optimal

solution to the jealous husbands problem.

The scenario is defined as follows: three husbands and their wives need to

cross from one side of a river to the other using a single boat. At no

point in time can any wife be left in the presence of

another husband unless her own husband is also present. The boat can

carry a maximum of two people and cannot travel empty.

An optimal solution is defined as the one requiring the fewest possible steps. The program should

output the solution as a sequence of operators and states leading to the target

state.

Yes, indeed, you still have the Tower of Hanoi, the cannibals and missionaries, and so on... 😬

Anthony Nguyen81 said:Perhaps it is time that we consider returning to the fundamental principles of our craft, though I suppose such a suggestion might seem somewhat regressive to some. I have been reflecting on whether our current trajectory has perhaps moved too far away from the core essentials, and I find myself wondering if a return to the basics might actually be beneficial for us all. It is a difficult thought to settle on, but maybe there is value in simplicity after all. 😬

I suppose that might turn out to be quite a bloody business, if I'm being honest. 🤣

I decided to take a little trip down memory lane just now to see how much I’ve managed to forget, and I found myself wondering if you all might recall that old riddle about the boat, the wolf, the goat, and the cabbage? 😬

I suppose you might want to keep an eye out for the sequel? 😬
I suppose I should probably mention that I’ve come across this particular document regarding the current state of affairs, though I can't say for certain how much weight one ought to give it without further context. It seems to be an analytical overview, and while I might be overthinking things, there appears to be quite a bit of data packed into these pages that could potentially influence our understanding of the situation at hand. I guess it is worth a look if you have the patience for it, even if my interpretation might be somewhat tentative.


I suppose this could be considered a laboratory assignment: I suppose there is a certain complexity surrounding the issue of jealous husbands that warrants some reflection. It seems to me that this particular dynamic can become quite heavy within a marriage, potentially creating an atmosphere of distrust that is difficult to navigate. I guess one might wonder whether such behavior stems from deep-seated insecurities or perhaps a misunderstanding of boundaries within a partnership. Maybe it isn't always about a lack of faith in one's spouse, but rather an internal struggle that the individual hasn't quite mastered yet. It feels like a delicate situation where communication often fails to bridge the gap between suspicion and security, though I realize my perspective is just one way of looking at it.
I suppose one might consider writing a program that utilizes a breadth-first search algorithm to identify an optimal path, though I imagine the specific implementation would depend quite heavily on the particular constraints of the problem at hand. It seems to me that if one were to approach this task, they would likely need to structure the logic around exploring all neighboring nodes layer by layer to ensure that the first solution encountered is indeed the most efficient one possible. Perhaps it would be wise to carefully consider how the queue is managed during the traversal, as that could ultimately determine whether the search remains performant or becomes somewhat cumbersome as the dataset grows larger.
I suppose there might be a way to address the issue of jealous husbands, though I suspect it is a rather complicated matter to unravel. Perhaps if one were to approach the situation with a great deal of patience and perhaps a bit of careful communication, a resolution might eventually emerge, though I can't say for certain how that would work in practice.
The problem could perhaps be framed in this manner: there are three husbands and their respective wives who need to...
I suppose one might attempt to cross from one side of the riverbank to the other using just a single boat. Perhaps, if one were to consider the nuances involved, it might be possible to manage such a feat, though I guess there are certainly many variables that could complicate the process.
I suppose there might come a moment where it becomes necessary to ensure that neither of the spouses is present during certain proceedings.
I suppose it might be considered appropriate to discuss a second husband, provided that her current husband isn't actually present in the conversation. A boat could potentially...
I suppose it might be best to limit the capacity to no more than two people, as I suspect the vessel simply wouldn't be able to stay afloat if it were traveling empty.
I suppose one might argue that the most optimal solution is simply the one that requires the fewest number of steps. It seems to me that a program should ideally...
Perhaps it would be best to express the solution by presenting it as a sequence consisting of both operators and states that ultimately lead to the target objective.
I suppose I should probably address the current state of things.

It seems that even a basic square root calculation would require an incredibly large number of lines of code if one were to implement it directly in Assembly. 😬

Charles Jones3 said:I suppose one might wonder what the actual purpose of using assembly would be in such a scenario. It seems to me that there are far more straightforward solutions available, so I am somewhat unsure why anyone would bother making things so unnecessarily complicated. In this day and age, assembly isn't really utilized for any meaningful development or hacking purposes anymore, as we have such a vast array of high-level programming languages at our disposal. It feels like an unnecessary struggle to spend all that mental energy breaking your head over assembly when much easier paths exist.

If you are looking to get into programming or even dive into the world of hacking, I suppose it might be enough to simply master Java and Python; perhaps Ruby and PHP could serve as secondary tools if you find they are necessary for certain tasks.

I suppose one might find themselves contemplating the intersection of Java programming and the various nuances of hacking, though I suspect such a topic could lead to an rather extreme geek debate if discussed at length. It is perhaps my belief that while Java is often viewed through the lens of enterprise stability and robust architecture, its role within the cybersecurity landscape is somewhat more complex than most people initially realize. One could argue that its managed memory environment offers certain protections, yet I guess there are still plenty of ways for vulnerabilities to manifest if the implementation isn't handled with absolute precision. 🤣

It is most frequently utilized for engineering tasks and kernel development, which leads me to wonder who might actually be in a better position to identify system vulnerabilities. I suppose one has to consider whether it is the individual relying on various JavaScript snippets to hunt for flaws, or perhaps the person capable of meticulously analyzing every single segment of a program's execution and memory allocation.

I suppose I am of the same opinion. ☕

northernviper4 said:Take a look at your posting history. It’s nothing but drama, sarcasm, and sheer stubbornness.
Besides—wasn't there an agreement long ago to just ignore each other? Go focus on yourself. You certainly have enough free time for some self-reflection.

Honestly, I haven't found a single one of your posts where you were actually sarcastic—or dramatic (at all).
Some people just need to be bypassed, so that 😁

northernviper4 said:Yeah, yeah, and then you've got the Tower of Hanoi, cannibals, and missionaries... 😬

I've heard of the Tower of Hanoi, as well as the cannibals and missionaries. 😬
It’s a classic set of examples. 👍

Gregory Smith21 said:Calculating a simple square root in Assembly already takes a massive amount of lines. 😬

True, that's basic level stuff. 😬

Gregory Smith21 said:I mean, you can write code to calculate a basic square root in Assembly in just a few lines. 😬

Java and hacking. 🤣

It’s mostly used for engineering and kernel development—so, who’s actually in a better spot to find system vulnerabilities? Is it the person poking around with random Java scripts, or the one capable of dissecting every single segment of program execution and memory usage?

I’m with you on that. ☕

Look, there's a massive difference between kernel development/engineering and how people hack these days. If you want to hack whatever you want, you just need Java and Metasploit—which, let's be real, is basically the go-to framework for every hacker and security pro out there.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:I suppose one might wonder if this could be considered a basic level. 😬

It is a beginner-level concept, really. However, I suppose one must be quite careful to ensure that no more than four out of eight ASCII characters end up in any single register during the process, depending on whether you are working with a 32-bit or 64-bit architecture, simply because otherwise, you run the risk of causing a buffer overflow. 😬

Charles Jones3 said:I suppose there is a significant distinction between actual kernel development and true engineering, and then there is what passes for hacking these days. It seems that if you want to hack anything at all nowadays, you really just need Java and Metasploit, which has become the primary framework utilized by almost every hacker and security professional out there.

I suppose I have to disagree with that assessment. In my view, an engineer or a kernel developer possesses a much deeper level of foundational knowledge due to the very nature of their profession, which arguably puts them ahead of a typical hacker. It seems to me that any engineer could potentially transition into hacking quite easily, whereas it isn't necessarily true that every hacker can effortlessly step into the role of an engineer.

I suppose I wonder what everyone might think about the current state of Metasploit and those various little setbacks we've been seeing lately. 🤣

I suppose one could argue that Metasploit is really intended for script kiddies who lack the fundamental understanding of how to manipulate memory at the processor level, or perhaps they simply don't truly grasp the underlying mechanics of how a computer actually functions. 😬

I suppose one could argue that the Metasploit framework is essentially just a collection of scripts and exploits targeting vulnerabilities that have already been patched, along with some basic shellcode. In my estimation, it doesn't really offer anything truly indispensable that couldn't perhaps be replaced by a simple calculator or some more standard, off-the-shelf software applications. ☕

Gregory Smith21 said:It's basic stuff—though you really have to watch out so you don't end up with more than 4/8 ASCII characters per register during the process (depending on whether we're talking 32 or 64-bit), otherwise you'll run into a buffer overflow. 😬

I finished college about 15 years ago—I haven't touched this kind of material in ages. 🤣
The devil is always in the details—absolutely. 🙂

Gregory Smith21 said:That's basic stuff. Though you really have to watch out—you can't have more than 4/8 ASCII characters in any register during the process (depending on whether we're talking 32 or 64-bit) because you'll end up with a buffer overflow. 😬

You're missing the point here. A systems engineer or a kernel developer knows way more than your average hacker just by the nature of their job. Any engineer can pivot into hacking pretty easily, but not every hacker has what it takes to become an engineer.

And what’s this talk about Metasploit and nonsense? 🤣

Metasploit is for script kiddies who don't actually know how to manipulate memory at the processor level—or frankly, don't even understand how a computer works. 😬

The Metasploit framework is basically just a pile of scripts and exploits for vulnerabilities that were patched ages ago, plus some shellcode. Honestly, it's nothing you couldn't replace with a calculator or some standard off-the-shelf software. ☕

You're totally mixing apples and oranges here—what exactly is your problem with Java and Metasploit? We're talking about a programming language versus a software tool; no actual pro is ever going to call either one "garbage." Java is an elite language and, let's be real, it's a hell of a lot more pleasant to work with than crusty old Assembly.

Nowadays, if you want to hack anything, you use the Metasploit framework, and that has zero to do with Assembly. You're conflating two completely different things.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:I suppose it has been about fifteen years since I was actually in college, so I haven't really dealt with any of those academic matters in a very long time now. 🤣
The devil always seems to hide within the smallest details, I suppose. 🙂

When you take a moment to consider the development cycle of any particularly complex software, I suppose it becomes clear why larger teams of developers are almost always required, primarily because of those intricate little details. A single, minor bug in the code can lead to catastrophic consequences, most often due to the persistent threat posed by hackers. Even in those cases, certain vulnerabilities tend to surface; it seems to me that it is really just a matter of the attacker's specific knowledge and their ability to spot the tiny nuances that the original programmers might have overlooked.

I suppose it could be argued that everything can eventually be disassembled, and perhaps one might find a way to decipher any given mechanism if they were to try hard enough. 😬

Charles Jones3 said:I suppose you might be mixing up apples and oranges here, because I really don't see what the issue is with using Java or Metasploit. In my view, these are programming languages and software tools that no legitimate professional would ever go so far as to call garbage. To be honest, I’ve always felt that Java is one of the most elite programming languages available, and it seems much more pleasant to work with than something as gritty and unforgiving as Assembly.

If you're looking to hack something today, I suppose you really just need the Metasploit framework, and honestly, I feel like there isn't much of a connection to Assembly here; it seems to me that you might be mixing up two completely different concepts.

I suppose one might wonder about the specific methodology used to identify vulnerabilities within a system through the use of Metasploit. Perhaps it involves a certain sequence of steps, though I imagine the process is quite complex and varies depending on the individual approach. 🤔

Most system vulnerabilities tend to stem from the exploitation of buffer overflow bugs within the software. I suppose one typically reaches that point by performing a detailed analysis of the disassembled machine code, which essentially means working directly through the Assembly.

It seems like Akiro might be mistaken, because if you aren't actually proficient in Assembly, you're basically just acting like a script kiddie, I guess.

As I have mentioned before, I suppose it could be argued that Metasploit is primarily used to identify and exploit vulnerabilities that have already been publicly documented and subsequently patched.

If one intends to uncover a zero-day vulnerability, I suppose it is necessary to analyze every single program down to its most minute detail. You find yourself running the software within a debugger, and since you frequently lack access to the source code—given that most programs aren't compiled with debug symbols—you are essentially left with nothing but the assembly code, which you must then painstakingly scrutinize.

I suppose everything eventually boils down to Assembly, sooner or later.

Engineers and kernel developers truly represent the alpha and omega of the tech world, possessing the unique capability to dismantle any platform they encounter. However, I find myself wondering if a professional engineer would ever actually stoop to such a level as to attempt breaking into someone else's systems.

Gregory Smith21 said:When you look at the development cycle of any complex software, you’ll always see more developers being brought in specifically because of those fine details. A single tiny bug can cause massive damage—mostly because of hackers. Even then, certain vulnerabilities always exist; it really just comes down to the skill and intuition of an attacker finding the gaps that the programmers missed.

Exactly.
When you're coding, you're working within some kind of framework—and let's face it, they are never perfect.
Most of the time gets swallowed up by edge cases, but if you slip up on something trivial, you could end up with a million different problems, honestly. 😁

northernviper4 said:Alright, so now we've officially hit the green zone. 🙂
Math vs. CS terminology 😁
That's actually an interesting question—never really thought about it before. What would be the common thread between problems that share that kind of solution? 🤔 Maybe there are some papers out there. Do you have access to any academic databases?

I do, but I honestly think you'd find the answer on Stack Exchange first—it’s such a natural question that someone's bound to have asked it. Back in the day, there was this guy on the forum, Melkor, who specialized in theoretical computer science—he could have answered this in his sleep.

The common factor in all those problems is that each one has its own (asymptotic) optimal solution. You could even refine that—like, some where the solution is actually constructible, while for others, you can just prove that an optimal solution exists even if it's impossible to actually build it. There's also the possibility of problems where you can prove it's impossible to determine if an optimal solution even exists. It's all about classification.

Anyway, maybe we should start an extreme geek debate about this—it feels a bit off to keep it here since we're supposed to stay on topic. 🙂 The thing is, I doubt the mods would want to open a new thread or move interesting posts from here over to a different section. 😳 ☕

bluebadger112 said:I suspect we might actually find an answer on Stack Overflow before we even get there, simply because this question feels naturally inevitable, and surely someone, somewhere, has already pondered it... Long ago on these boards, there was a user named Melkor who specialized in theoretical computer science, I believe, and he could have answered this for us with his eyes closed...

The common thread among all such problems is that each possesses its own (asymptotically) optimal solution. One could perhaps refine this further—distinguishing between those where such a solution is actually constructible, versus those where we can prove that while an optimal solution exists, constructing it is mathematically impossible... There is also the fascinating possibility of encountering a problem where it cannot be determined whether an optimal solution even exists, and proving that fact itself... Other problems simply lack such a solution altogether. Classification...

On a separate note, perhaps a dedicated extreme geek debate thread should be opened; it doesn't feel quite right to post here when our guidelines are limited to 🙂 The issue is, I doubt the moderator would bother opening a new topic or moving interesting posts from this 😳 ☕

Well, I also think the question is a bit of a non-issue... 😁
It makes sense that they share the trait of having an optimal solution. I was wondering if there was something else they held in common, perhaps regarding the underlying assumptions, the constraints, or the specific parameters of the problem itself...
I have a few colleagues I could ask.

You can certainly open a thread, and it wouldn't be particularly difficult to move the posts over if needed...
It would certainly be better if there were a specific forum for these kinds of discussions, though I do believe one of our community standards should be to explain the basics politely to anyone asking, without any condescension. I have never felt any shame in asking a trivial question myself... 😁

Anthony Nguyen81 said:Is it finally time to strip everything back and head back to the basics? Wouldn't it be just wonderful if we could all stop overcomplicating things and get back to what really matters? 😬

Man, wouldn't that just be one hell of a messy job to deal with? 🤣

I just went back to see how much I've actually forgotten lately, but does anyone else remember that old riddle about the boat, the wolf, the goat, and the cabbage? 😬

Are you guys staying tuned for the sequel? 😬
Check out this deep dive into the current state of affairs! Doesn't it just make you wonder what all these findings actually mean for our future?


Time for a little lab assignment! Is there anything more exhausting than dealing with the whole jealous husband situation? Honestly, don't you just wonder why some guys feel the need to be so incredibly possessive over nothing at all?
Can you believe how much fun it is to write a program that uses Breadth-First Search to find the absolute best path? Isn't it just incredible when you finally nail down that optimal solution?
How on earth do we even begin to tackle the whole issue of jealous husbands? Is there actually a foolproof way to solve that headache once and for all?
So, here's how the whole problem breaks down: we've got three husbands and their wives who all need to...
Can you imagine the sheer thrill of crossing from one side of the river to the other using just a single boat? Isn't it just wild how much simplicity can hold so much excitement?
Don't you just agree that there really should be a moment where we make sure none of the wives are around?
Imagine if she could just bring along a second husband, provided her current one isn't actually there to see it! Wouldn't that be something? A boat could easily handle it!
Can you believe it? It can only hold up to two people, and there's absolutely no way it can sail empty!
Isn't the most optimal solution always the one that gets you there in the fewest possible steps? I really feel like the program just needs to be streamlined!
Can you just imagine how much easier life would be if we could simply write out the solution as a sequence of operators and states that lead us straight to our goal? Wouldn't that be absolutely wonderful?
How's everything going with you all today?

I tried running through the whole thing in my head, but honestly, wasn't I just moving them around in circles? It felt like I was just shuffling the exact same group of people back and forth without actually getting anywhere! 🙄 Well, at least they got to cruise down the river together, right? I mean, what's not to love about that kind of pure, unadulterated romance? 😁

northernviper4 said:Honestly, I’m right there with you—don't you just feel like that whole thing is a complete non-issue? 😁
Of course, it’s totally logical that they both share an optimal solution! But I was actually wondering if there might be something else tying them together—maybe regarding their underlying assumptions, certain constraints, or even just how the problem itself is set up?
I've got a few coworkers I could probably pick their brains!

Why don't you just go ahead and start a new thread? Honestly, wouldn't it be so much easier to follow everything if we just moved all the posts over instead?
Wouldn't it be just wonderful if we had a dedicated thread for these kinds of discussions, and maybe even a rule that encourages everyone to kindly explain the basics to anyone asking without any of that judgmental mocking? Honestly, I’ve never felt even a tiny bit embarrassed about asking a totally basic question! 😁!

I am totally on board with this idea! Honestly, I had no clue you guys were diving into such fascinating topics here, but now that I know, I'm hooked! I’ve had to put my own coding courses on the back burner lately because life just keeps getting in the way, but can you blame me? I’ll definitely be lurking and following this thread closely, and who knows, maybe I'll even pop in with a silly question or two every now and then—because hey, isn't that the only way to actually learn something new?

Donna Doyle2 said:I tried to run through the logic in my head, and honestly, I was just shuffling them back and forth... basically moving the same people around in circles. 🙄 Well, at least they got some exercise on the river, I suppose; there’s a certain level of romance in that, isn't there? 😁

I am fully behind this concept! I had no idea you all were diving into such fascinating topics here. Sadly, I’ve had to push my own coursework to the side due to other commitments, but I intend to follow this thread with great interest, and perhaps I might drop in an occasional foolish question from time to time... because, after all, how else does one actually learn?

👍 I am quite pleased you shared that quote! 😁

Donna Doyle2 said:I tried running through the logic in my head—just mentally shuffling them around—and it turns out I was essentially just spinning my wheels. I was simply moving the same group of people back and forth without actually making any progress. 🙄 Well, at least they were trading jabs by the river—what else can you ask for? Pure romance. 😁

I honestly don't see how they could even make that transition—it just doesn't seem feasible. 🤣

A code for romance—now that’s something else. 🤣
But there has to be a way. 😬
You can't just shuttle them all over two by two—someone actually has to be in the boat to row it.
Initially, you typically send off a pair—but now the real question remains: who actually makes the return trip? The husband.

Then you bring in two more women to balance things out.
Well—it seems like everyone on the other side is a woman.
It’s a simple trade-off—you swap one back, and suddenly you’re dealing with men from this second group instead.

And that’s exactly where the dilemma lies—you have to figure out how to bring someone back.
You return one pair—and then you transfer the other.
That’s just a textbook deadlock. 🤣

I should probably do some digging online—I'm sure there's a solution out there somewhere. 😬

Anthony Nguyen81 said:Well, I don't see how they could possibly make the crossing either... 🤣

The code for romance, indeed... 🤣

But there ought to be some method to this madness 😬

You can't just ferry them all over two by two; someone actually has to pilot the boat...

At the start, you probably send one pair over, but then the question remains as to who returns... The husband, presumably...

Then you bring two more women across...

And suddenly all the women are on the other side...

So you take one back, while bringing the husbands of those two over...

And now we hit the impasse, because eventually, someone has to return...

You bring one pair back, then try to move the second...

But that leads straight into a deadlock... 🤣

One really should spend a bit more time surfing the web; surely there is a solution out there somewhere... 😬

What are the exact rules regarding the crossings and the permitted moves?
I have previously mapped out the state space for the cannibals and missionaries, and even for the wolf, the goat, and the cabbage. I could certainly do the same for this... 😁

Please ☕ direct any complaints regarding the title to my PMs 🐔