|
|
|
|
|
by tomc1985
3267 days ago
|
|
Unrelated, but I've always had this question about bloom filters... If testing for membership in the set is unreliable, but testing for non-membership in the set works every time, then why can't you simply invert the boolean for the non-membership test and call that a membership test? E.g., if it's not not in the group, then it's in the group... |
|
For example, consider a Bloom filter checking the availability of a username during sign up. If you want an inverse Bloom filter that checks if it is not not in the group, then you need to load it with all possible usernames.