Stock Market JackPot Review

[sagasan42]

Remember the days of the 1.44 MB floppy disk? Back then the thought of runaway duplicate file creation seemed almost laughable since the limited storage space was a natural deterrent to wasting it. We couldn't imagine the cavernous storage options that would evolve over the next 30 years, inviting thoughtless duplication of files under a multitude of scenarios. How Stock Market JackPot Review many times have you copied your friends music collections, or their movie collections, pictures, or downloaded torrents, or copied a folder somewhere else and forgot about it? (disclaimer: do not perform any illegal copying or some very rich people might not get all the money they deserve). This can't help but lead to rampant duplication of your files and surprisingly, that large hard drive no longer seems so cavernous...

You're first reaction to this might be: I can use a simple file search utility to locate all copies of a file named 'hello.mp3'. While true, how would you know which files have duplicates? Would you perform this search a million times if you had a million files? This also assumes that all your duplicates are named 'hello.mp3', which is rarely the case because you may have pulled this file from other people that exercise different naming conventions (e.g. 'hello-2011.mp3'). Another issue is that some files can be considered the same, even though their filename and even their contents are different when examined on a byte-by-byte level. Maybe you have two files, 'hello.mp3', and 'hello.ac3'. Both are the same song, but are entirely different in terms of the data.

http://gofishtalk.com/profiles/blogs/stock-market-jackpot-download

Even worse is when the filename is completely irrelevant to the contents. For example, one might rip their CDs to their hard drive and end up with a correct MP3 header tag, but the file name might end up like 'Track 1.mp3'. There are going to be a lot of Track 1's if you rip all your CDs this way. For number 1) It is fairly easy to determine an exact match (files have exactly the same binary data) and if you are only looking for exact matches, the first byte mismatch will end the comparison. For the most part, exact matches are exceedingly rare so it takes but a few bytes to discount a potential match, making this type of match comparison very quick. However, a proximity match between file contents becomes a much more tedious and complex operation that demands all considered files to be fully read, which requires an exponentiating comparison algorithm that quickly becomes insurmountable with only a few thousand files. Simply not an option.

For number 2) Probably the most deceptively complex part of comparing two filenames would be the ability to determining just 'how close' the filenames are. For example: 'test.mp3' and 'test.zip' are actually only 50% of a match (partial or subjective matches are called a fuzzy match). Things improve to 100% when you remove the extension. How about 'hello.txt' and 'hell and back.mp3'. The first file matches the second by 80%, but the second only matches the first by 31%. Moreover, trying to determine just how close two filenames are can be very CPU-intensive, especially when considering the potential need to cross-compare millions of files; each file comparing against each-and-every other file; another exponentiating nightmare, though one with a much higher ceiling than cross-comparing file binary contents. Cross-comparing a million filenames is still well within reasonable reach of most modern multi-core CPU's.

http://www.enriqueiglesias.com/profiles/blogs/stock-market-jackpot-...