cjp (07/19/82)
I do not denigrate the use of the computer for this problem, per se. I am, however, among those who used only their brain, paper, and pencil. My interest in the problem was not to see how fast I could produce the answer, but to give myself a small challenge. Since I knew exactly how to program the problem, I preferred to use the "reasoning" approach instead. I found the process of solution to be, despite its simplicity, rather enjoyable. I concede some of A. Kaminsky's point about the power of "enlightened computer use". However, I claim that there are times when it pays to set aside the machine and use one's intellegence unfiltered and unbounded by the structure of a program. What brings me to say this is the fact that, in the same 5 minutes in which I solved the problem with pencil and paper, I too discovered the pattern of "219...978 * 4 = 879...912". It became obvious, once the restrictions on the value of 'C' in "ABCDE" were spelled out. That kind of knowledge, in my opinion, is stronger than the empirical observation made possible by Kaminsky's program. Of course, that program did show other things that my little brainstorm did not address. Still, I wonder how many of you "program the solution" people out there stopped thinking (unlike Kaminsky) once the machine spit out the answer? Conclusion: both types of problem solving can be worthwhile. Charles Poirier