Application For Use 1. Name Of: Fill & Download for Free

The Earth’s population is 7.53 billion at the moment.You have to start with some assumptions:You’re using UTF-8 for your encoding, which can represent all names in a single character format. UTF-8 uses 1 to 4 bytes per character, with most languages using 1 to 3 bytes.You are storing names in their native character sets: Hanzi for Chinese names, Devanagari/Punjabi/Tamil/etc for Indian names, Arabic for Arab names, Roman for European names, etc.You’re using a variable-width representation.You allow arbitrary numbers of “names”, as people can have anywhere from 1 to a dozen or more names in some parts of the world.You care about storage efficiency, so you aren’t going to use a verbose representation such as XML.You do NOT care about lookup speed. You can add indexes later to speed up performance.You may need some metadata to indicate where the given name, surname, and other “extra” names happen to be.You may be able to do lots of optimizations, particularly with short Asian names; Chinese names, in particular are rarely more than 4 characters for the entire name when stored in Hanzi encoding.Other names at the other extreme are proper Spanish names, with several “parts”.Some names, such as some South Indian names, are quite long, so you have to allow for variable-length name representation.So, let’s say we have a representation such as<nbytes:1 byte int><bytes> for each name element (why? It’s easier to parse a length-encoded string than it is to parse a string looking for a magic terminal character, which is why I’ve never liked NUL-terminated C strings for high-speed, very large data storage applications.)So, a reasonable representation for each name is something like<nbytes-in-full-name:1 byte int> This is the total number of bytes in the name, including metadata.<nfields-in-name: 1 byte int> This is the total number of “fields” in the name. Most English names would have three fields for this, but some languages have only one name, while others may have several fields. So, it’s best to allow for arbitrary numbers of names, up to 255…<name-language:2 byte int> The language the name is from. This would be useful for determining which of the fields is the given name, the surname, and other parts of the name.<Name1><Name2>…<NameN> The actual names…My guess is a good upper-bound is something like 64 bytes per name, including metadata. This is probably an upper bound, particularly since 1.5 billion out of the 7.5 billion are Chinese names that could be represented with about 18 bytes or less in our format. Even though they take 3 bytes per character in UTF-8, there are at most 4 characters in Chinese names, and usually 2 or 3.So, at 64 bytes per name * 7.53 billion, you end up with 481,920,000,000 bytes, or somewhat less than 500 GB.This would fit in RAM in many newer database servers.Note that indexing the name-list structure would add a whole bunch of extra bytes to the representation…(Sure, storing this in RAM is kinda dumb. But I interpreted the question to be how many bytes - in RAM or a disk file - would it take to reasonably store all human names, and this is how I answered the question.)Update: if you normalized for redundant names - or just used a good Lossless compression algorithm - you’d probably get pretty awesome space reduction. This data would be ideal for dictionary-based compression algorithms…

If you believe Roman legions are famous for using short bronze swords, at some point you have internalized a misconception. Roman legions are famous for using a short iron sword, the name of which varies depending on which type of a spathological pedantry you prefer. Gladius hispaniensis or simply gladius are two of the more popular names you’ll encounter for the legionary sword.EDIT:Started writing this in response to a comment; figured it would be better as an edit:I’ve seen this before, where people get confused about what people used for weaponry when I think the confusion comes from not understanding how the ancient metallurgy industry affected the choice of metals for different martial applications. For many, many centuries after the Iron Age began, iron foundries had two important limitations that bronze foundries did not:They could not produce sheets of iron except at stupendous expense, andThey could not cast iron.The casting problem was solved first as I recall, at least for purposes of making literal cast iron. But cast iron is all but useless for armaments. Until well into the Middle Ages, unless you were stupendously rich, all ferrous armaments had to be hammered into things that were variations on rectangular strips. Thus, in antiquity, you could have iron sword blades, axe blades, spear blades, shield rims, mail armor, lorica segmentata, and things like that, but an iron helmet would have to be riveted together out of multiple pieces, and an iron breastplate was out of the question (again, except for the billionaires of the ancient world - and prior to ~400 BC, out of the question even for them).For things made of a large sheet of metal - breastplates, one-piece helmets, shield facings, greaves, things like that - bronze was the only realistic game in town for a long time even after the “Iron Age” had begun. The Greeks of the Persian Wars, fighting three hundred years into the Iron Age, had their spear heads, swords, and daggers made from iron, but their helmets, greaves, shield facings (for those who had them), and corselets - all the big metal implements - were made of bronze. And this state of affairs would continue for centuries more.You also sometimes saw bronze chosen over iron for other characteristics, such as disposability or corrosion resistance. For instance, you didn’t necessarily see iron arrowheads. Some archers preferred them, but remember that each arrowhead had to be fashioned individually with hammer and anvil. Bronze arrowheads could be cast in lots from molten bronze and then just finished by hand, which is probably why you still saw bronze used for arrowheads sometimes. The buttspikes or butt caps of spears were also often made of bronze, because bronze is more corrosion resistant than iron. You could set a bronze-capped spear on or into the damp earth and it wouldn’t rust as easily.Long story short, people stopped using bronze for blades around 800 BC in Greece, but you would continue to see bronze in the battlefield for many centuries after that. I think that’s the source of this particular misconception.

1 week is all you need.Given your background, you might as well take less time. Head to this tutorial: Django Girls Tutorial (don’t go by the sexist name :P). This is an excellent tutorial on how to build a blog application using Django. From my experience, this is one of the best tutorials on how to learn Django.Once you have completed the above tutorial, you will easily be able to build better and more useful Django backed applications. For instance, I made this Quora like Q/A app: JEEAmblHaving completed 2 such decent projects in Django, I can bet that you will have a good market value and given your background, it would take you no time to get a job.All the best :)