(Trivial) Algorithm Question of the Day

A latin square is an n by n square that contains all n numbers from 1 to n in every column and every row. For example,

1 2 3
3 1 2
2 3 1

is a 3 by 3 latin square.

Define a latin rectangle as an m by n rectangle, m < n, such that in every row all n numbers are present, and in every column no two numbers are the same. e.g. a possible 2 by 4 latin rectangle is:

3 4 2 1
2 3 1 4

Give a polynomial time algorithm that given any valid m by n latin rectangle, will extend it (by adding rows, without modifying the original rows in the latin rectangle) to form a valid n by n latin square.

No linear programming needed.

The other side of the aisle

I see marked similarities between the problems of the opposition in Singapore as well as the problems of the Democrats in the US Congress. Although the Democrats still have some say...

Recognize that the mass majority of the population are people working hard to earn a good living; they don't have the time to become politically or philosophically astute nor do they have the motivation to do so. Their main driving force in life is to provide for themselves and their family; as long as they are kept well-fed and materially satisfied, free speech and political activism remains a far secondary priority.

To this end, the right to an opposition only matters the moment things turn bad - for example, when the economy enters a recession.

There are two sides to this: Firstly, the PAP will certainly argue that in such times, you need a strong government willing to pursue unpopular programs in order to save the economy, such as perhaps tax increases for increased government spending (which, depending on your macroeconomic beliefs, may be a good or bad thing - short run it does increase output but in the long run it drives capital investment down which is bad for long-term growth etc etc), and for this it needs a mandate from the people.

On the other hand, the Democrats will argue that you need checks and balances in the system. Perhaps the disaster could have been averted if one party had not been driving full-steam ahead with some previous misinformed policy without opposition. Perhaps the party remains myopic to the problems they have created. In this case, you will want the ability to - for lack of a better phrase - "throw the bums out"; and this is far harder when one party controls a great majority of seats for you will need a great tidal wave of public opinion (a la Republicans 1994) to change the ruling party.

And this presents another problem, both for the Democrats in the US as well as the opposition in Singapore. Public Opinion for the mass majority of the Singapore public who don't have the time to become politically astute is swayed by the mass media. He who has more influence in the mainstream media wins the day. And this is why Gomez gets any coverage today. His matter is really trivial. In any other country, it would have been dismissed as a mere political ploy.

Points for your consideration

- Une -

The use of closed circuit cameras to monitor and discredit the opposition is such a typically Big Brotherly move, that I find it ludicrous no one has questioned THE PRESENCE OF VIDEO CAMERAS AT THE NOMINATION BOOTHS. Surely this is an absurd security precaution at best, and Orwellian dystopia at worst.

- Deux -

What is the utility of a minority candidate(??) form? Surely this only functions as a barrier preventing the minority races from participating in the political process - its effectiveness has already been demonstrated by the disenfranchisement of Mr. Games Jomez. Next up: female candidature forms.

- Trois -

Preferred methods of political debate:
Third World: Guerilla civil warfare.
Second World: Ice pick a la brainpan.
First World: Tarred with finest quality white goosefeathers, attractively wrapped in tape (colour: bureaucratic red).

- Quatre -

Legal question du jour: Was Mr. Games Jomez in fact lying when he warned of consequences? As he was undoubtably referring to the consequences of his own stupidity, are there grounds therefore for a defamation lawsuit against certain unspecified hooligans?

- Cinq -

Please peruse Ms. Chua Moong Hui's most excellent review of character flaws and their hitherto absence in all but the most deviant of human conditions. It is most droll.