What exactly is the debate over then? lol

I just meant the statement "Each iteration should have ~10% chance to find an unsorted pair," which I don't think it true.

My algorithm should work on that specific instance, though, because about 1/4 of the (i,j) pairs are unsorted. (I'm not picking them consecutively)

After reading the solution, I see why this doesn't work — the statement was not just not obvious, it was in fact false

Repeat k~log n times:
choose 2 random indices i < j
if a[i] > a[j] return "unsorted"
return "sorted"

I think the above would work? Each iteration should have ~10% chance to find an unsorted pair (maybe not obvious), so only error with .9^k < 1/poly(n)

I’d be interested to see kills divided number of encounters - I feel like that’s a better gauge for what to be worried about

Are these from public posts on Venmo? I didn't think they reveal the amount of money transferred

That’s a cool result! Is there a bound on the runtime of the simulator in terms of the runtime of A?

👋🏻

Exactly! The comments like the above are what came up when I was searching, but it’s not what I mean by “a signed pun”