I was struggling to understand that for a long time too. It seems like it's a mix of being told that just saying no is not polite and an aversion to conflict. Especially when stating needs.
Some parents actively discourage their children to state their needs clearly and concisely from a very very young age.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the Linux Kernel itself does not enforce a directory structure at all. It's the user space (including the init ram image) that mounts the system directories wherever they want them.
Edit: Besides inside mountable system filesystems like sysfs or /proc etc
That is called racing to sleep iirc and is a valid cpu scheduling technique. It works on the assumption that doing nothing (sleeping is the term there) is much more energy efficient than doing anything even if slowly, so much so that you make up the energy spent to boost to top speed.
Let me give another counterexample.
Let x be the binary expansion of pi i.e. the infinite string representing pi in base 2.
Now you will not find 2 in this sequence by definition but it's still a non-repeating number.
Now one can validly say that we restricted our alphabet and we should look only for finite strings with digits that actually occure in the number. The answer is the string "23456789" concatenated with x.
No this does not work. Counter example can be found in the comments here of a non-repeating number that definitely does not contain all finite strings.
Edit: I think the confusion is about the word non-repeating. Non repeating does not mean a subsequence cannot repeat but that you cannot write the number as a rational or with a finite decimal representation. I.e. it's not 3.ba repeating. Where a is a finite sequence that repeats infinitely and b is a finite sequence.
Edit edit: another assumption you make is that pi does not go into a loop of some kind. You would need to prove that.
Yea, there are 13 more