Is there a FORTH interpreter? That could just plain clench it.
In my experience the power consumption of the Palm III varied significantly. I think there was a switchmode power converter of some sort in it, and it could be good or very, very bad, depending on individual device. Probably related to the capacitor in it. That's how I vaguely remember it, anyway.
The uses for that single number are as follows:
a) Some class of people like to claim "mine is bigger", which requires a single number. While that is stupid, most people "understand" this type of reasoning.
b) Anything beyond a single number is far to complicated for the average person watching TV.
In reality, things are even more complicated, as speed and compression ratio depend both on the data being compressed, and do that independently to some degree. This means, some data may compress really well and do that fast, while other data may compress exceedingly bad, but also fast, while a third data set may compress well, but slowly and a 4th may compress badly and slow. So in reality, you need to state several numbers (speed, ratio, memory consumption) for benchmark data and in addition describe the benchmark data itself to get an idea of an algorithm's performance. If it is a lossy algorithm, it gets even more murky as then you need typically several quality measures. For video, you may get things like color accuracy, sharpness of lines, accuracy of contrast, behavior for fast moving parts, etc.
It depends far too much on your border conditions. For example, LZO does compress not very well, but it is fast and has only a 64kB footprint. Hence it gets used in space-probes where the choice is to compress with this or throw the data away. On the other hand, if you distribute pre-compressed software or data to multiple targets, even the difference between 15.0% and 15.1% can matter, if it is, day 15.0% in 20 seconds and 15.1 in 10 Minutes.
Hence a single score is completely unsuitable to address the "quality" of the algorithm, because there is no single benchmark scenario.
Regulate exchanges. You can do whatever you want with your cryptocurrency, but it's not worth the electricty needed to keep it alive until you can exchange it for hard currency. For example, most of the "we accept bitcoin" companies do not handle bit coin at all. Instead they simply outsource the payment to an exchange which delivers hard currency to the company at certain exchange rate when customer pays in bitcoins.
Exchanges need to interface with standard payment systems. As a result, they are vulnerable to government intervention.
"congrats you effectively "experimented" on your users."
That's not experimenting. generic research on overall performance is not the same as selecting a sample of users, and conducting tests on them specifically to change their response.
You're definition is so loose it's useless.
Now, I need to experiment ans see if I can get home from work.
My local DMV gets me in and out of the office in a few minutes. I've never encountered any time when their computers weren't functioning properly. I could, of course, use the BMV website instead of going into the local office, but I'm old fashioned that way. What state do you live in, so I can make sure never to move there?
Since douching is harmful and not needed, I would disagree with your statement.
At least you can keep your current health insurance, though.
I know a physicist who is ethical, but when he speaks outside his expertise, he becomes a douche. Really irritating.
Note that she said that after the election, eh?
People who are butthurt because entities other than their trade unions can now give huge amounts of resources to political campaigns are a little laughable.
ON smokers, and the industry that keeps paying money to prevent their cancer causing products to be regulated by the FDA so they can keep the chemicals they use under wraps.
There are ethical douche-bags?
Believe it or not, there are FDA approved douche-bags which are produced by ethical companies, and sold by ethical retailers.