R
Robert Redelmeier
No, Keith is not wasting his time. I applaud his efforts
at disciplining unruly posters. Hearding cats is necessary.
-- Robert
No, Keith is not wasting his time. I applaud his efforts
at disciplining unruly posters. Hearding cats is necessary.
-- Robert
M
Michael A. Terrell
Robert said:
Thats why they invented the Cat-L-prod!
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
K
krw
No, it's sad that your pot is so black.
K
krw
Thats why they invented the Cat-L-prod!
LOL! You'd better trademark that and go into business:
http://www.cattoys.com/critterbug.html
T
The little lost angel
Ironically, this sub thread you started is a bigger waste of
everybody's time and bandwidth than Radium.
At least for the less knowledgeable folks like me, the replies to
Radium contained interesting information, made us think abit deeper
about things we might never had before and in several cases
entertaining funny comments.
K
kony
Disciplining?
So you really advocate someone continually reposting
arbitrary half-baked ideals, thrust forward without
approrpriate research then expecting others to argue against
that in order to educate the troll?
Maybe once or twice but this is a perpetual event with
Radium and has been ongoing for quite a while.
It is never unruly to suggest a person have a useful purpose
and support conductive conversations. If you can find any
fruitful outcome Radium has from this thread I will eat my
hat. There won't be one, nor was there last time it was
posted.
K
kony
I'm not the control freak here. You are trying to dissuade
someone from posting their opinion.
This started when I pointed out that Radium had no purpose.
Show me the purpose, any constructive outcome. I'll wait
for that.
I'd also pointed out that discussions were repeats of the
last time Radium posted them. Also true, but you got your
panties in an knot about one of these two statements.
That's a flaw on your part, thinking if you don't "like"
what I wrote, that I shouldn't have written it.
Grow up.
K
kony
I disagree. More people are aware of Radium's lack of
purpose and repetitive nature of the trolling.
If you don't mind that, it's ok by me. Maybe you knew
before I'd posted or maybe you didn't- but now you certainly
do.
There's nothing wrong with an educational conversation but
Radium has never been interested in that, takes it in a
counterproductive direction over and over again. On
purpose. That's my opinion. You are entitled to disagree
but if you do then I wonder if you had noticed Radium's
other posts over time?
If you wanted to talk about a topic, you're free to post on
that topic, no need to wait for a troll to do so in a fit of
lunacy, and think it's good because it merely covered some
things of interest to you. Same conversation but minus
Radium could have been much better.
R
Robert Redelmeier
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips kony said:
??? are you suggesting Keith is "reposting arbitrary
half-baked ideals"? I advocate for Keith's disciplining.
In csiphc we have seen trolls far worse than Radium could
hope to aspire to become. They have been sent off by
Keith and others doing _exactly_ as he has been. They
learn not to post rubbish, particularly not arrogantly.
I consider this a fruitful outcome. Chow down!
-- Robert
M
Michael A. Terrell
krw said:
i built the prototype in 1966. I didn't have a live cat to test it
on, so I used the neighborhood bully. He was 15, but he screamed like a
little girl and ran home to his mommy. All you had to do after that was
yell "BUZZZZZZ"!!! and he would run away.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
M
MooseFET
On May 16, 7:19 pm, [email protected] (The little
lost angel) wrote:
[....]
I disagree. More people are aware of Kony's lack of purpose and
repetitive nature of his trolling with the claim that Radium is a
troll.
Yes, Radium has lead to some interesting discussions.
Even the very knowledgable folks are likely to have learned a few
things along the way.
lost angel) wrote:
[....]
I disagree. More people are aware of Kony's lack of purpose and
repetitive nature of his trolling with the claim that Radium is a
troll.
Yes, Radium has lead to some interesting discussions.
Even the very knowledgable folks are likely to have learned a few
things along the way.
K
krw
Rather than being a troll, I think he's just "simple". If he is a
troll, at least he's a civil one.
Quite a few, actually.
Even by answering a question that is far more basic than where I
normally think, I learn something.
R
Rich Grise
That's because you're a girl, and we're all a bunch of horny, skanky
old geeks who have the hots for you. ;-)
Thanks!
Rich
T
The little lost angel
Erm, I might had been a girl when I started on Usenet but that's in
the last millenium =X the term woman might be a tad more appropriate
at this point
But then again, I'm not quite sure how your commentties in...? *confused by what is probably something very funny in the
US cultural context*
T
The little lost angel
I'm aware of the fact Radium posted this before, in fact, I asked
isn't it the same thing again.
It doesn't quite matter if Radium isn't quite interested (I'm more
leaning towards "stubborn") and such. He provides a catalyst for
discussions that are fruitful. Whereas your interjections simply
produce clash of subjective opinions that ultimately leads to nowhere,
no technical revelations and only a small probability of
self-discovery in which some people might rethink their stand on
certain subjective issues. Issues which any participant in an online
community would most likely had done within a few weeks of their
initiation to Internet communities.
Minus Radium, the whole conversation may never occur. Simply because
most of us wouldn't be interested in something like that and therefore
never lead to a discussion about the various underlying reasons why
such a thing wouldn't be feasible. Reasons which many experts here may
know intuitively from experience or prior studies but which many of us
never bother to question.
I had the thought once that if we could use a lot a lot of 386/486
chips connected together, we might be able to make a very very
powerful computer with much faster interconnect than say via
clustering individual PC. But it just quite stuck in my head, despite
probably being explained to me, that individual & interdependent
instruction latency would really kill performance.
After all, if we could clock those at some 200Mhz, although it's a 10x
difference what's 5us latency compared to 0.3us? Thus in my mind, such
a system would merely be impractical due to lack of appropriate
hardware, not that the system is lacking in anyway.
Radium's limit-testing case of billions of 1Hz CPU made it very very
clear why it's not going to be good for general purpose computing due
to the sheer extremeness of the latency. 1 sec is rather significant
even on a human scale whereas 4.7us is such a tiny number I dismissed
as insignificant.
R
Robert Redelmeier
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips The little lost angel said:
You are not wrong, but the ways in which you are right might
surprise you. 386s & 486s aren't very good for multiprocessing due
to a lack of cache and cache-coherency (MOESI) hardware. So it's
tough for them to share RAM. But they can of course be clustered.
These can make extremely powerful machines, but they are equally
hard to program. The problem has to be parallizeable, like brute
force searching crypto keyspace. Shared memory (first really
possible on the Pentium) improves things somewhat because a single
OS can manage processes. But not always since memory bandwidth
must be shared. Some problems solve faster on clusters.
Latency really becomes an important issue in essentially
single threaded problems. Which a surprising amount of
computing traditionally has been: do this, then do that.
When decision points are lacking, it can become: do this,
the other will do that. Some graphics fits.
For a simpler human scale: Can nine women make [gestate]
a baby in one month?
Even with zero communications/memory latency and perfect
interleaving, the giga-wide 1 Hz machine still takes time
to do instructions. The results of one aren't available to
others until it's up. Many real pgms are millions/billions
of instructions long in a single thread.
This is why we have clock-speed competition. Dual processors can
help personal computing (not usually as much as double clock!) but
it's a story of diminishing returns. People just aren't doing
that much simultaneously in parallel. Unlike servers.
I've been using dualies a my primary machine for 8 years. They seem
smoother, perhaps because one of the CPUs is usually idle and can
handle interrupts or background tasks. But I have to do special
things (make -j 2) to get a speed increase on compute intensive
tasks like a Linux kernel compile, and at best it reaches about 98%
of the speed possible on a single double-clock CPU. Still when CPUs
run of clock (heat/pwr budget), then parallel is the only way left.
-- Robert
M
MooseFET
[.... 386, 486 in multiprocessor ....]
It seems I can't respond into the alt.* from google.
Just a thought:
The x86 machines have a 64K I/O space. A chunk of that could be a
modest sized RAM that is shared. The information can be passed
between CPUs via that shared memory.
Some problems like working out the flow of water over a hull, are
naturally parallel in nature. There is nothing wrong with making a
machine that is slightly special purposed.
[....]
Two processors makes sense for personal. The second processor can
usually be found a task to do. At higher numbers, it gets harder and
harder to make good use of them. Right now, for example, I've got
some tunes playing and network minding going on while I'm typing.
[....]
Getting 98% is darn good.
R
Radium
Well, a more precise human analogy of this "parallel Hz" would be can
20 humans vocalizing a tone of 1 KHz end up making a 20 KHz tone by
vocalizing together?
A car analogy would be, can 20 revers of an engine produce an RPM of
20 if they all rev together at 1 RPM?
R
Rev. 11D Meow!
Radium said:
I hear that in Idaho, USoFA, Anything Can Happen.
E
Eugene Miya
Can newbies learn to cut down on followups?
It is better to have one seven foot jumper than any number of six foot jumpers.
--Frederick Terman
--