2.4) 	2) I get 115001, which i expect is an index error and that i will survive without the precision.
		real    0m15.719s
		user    0m0.015s
		sys     0m0.000s
	3)
		class Memoizer2
		count: 615646

		real    0m20.986s
		user    0m0.000s
		sys     0m0.000s
		We get such a high count since there is a very high chance of duplicate work, since the result is only
		put in the cache after we have computed the result. In this case, it's much slower than synchronized actually,
		but almost all of the threads does the expensive computation, which the synchronization method is relieved off, so that is why its slower.


	4)	class Memoizer3
		count: 132918

		real    0m17.939s
		user    0m0.015s
		sys     0m0.000s

		In this case we have much better results, reducing the need to call f by a factor of 10. However,
		unlucky timing will still result in that some threads will do the same work twice. For this solution
		to work, we need atomicity.
	5)

		class Memoizer4
		115001

		real    0m17.586s
		user    0m0.015s
		sys     0m0.000s

		With Memoizer 4, i would have expected that we got under the synchronized method, and i'm not sure why it is not the case.
		However, what we see from the number of counts, is that we are now eliminating double computations, such that the computation will only be done once.
		This is with the use of atomicity that we lacked in Memoizer 3. It is still now rarely possible for two futures to be created wastefully, but
		the computation is the expensive part, not the memory.