Sujet : Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?
De : ldo (at) *nospam* nz.invalid (Lawrence D'Oliveiro)
Groupes : comp.archDate : 01. Oct 2024, 09:34:55
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vdgc7e$2lk2d$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
User-Agent : Pan/0.160 (Toresk; )
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 03:48:53 +0000, MitchAlsup1 wrote:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 2:40:55 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Science is not a religion. Science, unlike religion, works whether you
believe in it or not.
Science, unlike religion, adjusts to the current set of facts--whatever
they may be.
There is this assumption that the facts of the behaviour of electricity
haven’t changed since yesterday -- that the way we calculate the voltages
and currents and resistances still work exactly as they did before, so
when you next reach for that power switch, it will activate the appliance
you expected it to activate, and won’t suddenly burst out of the wall and
kill you.
That’s what I mean by “betting your life on the correctness of science”.
Do you say a little incantation to the god(s) of your choice each time
before touching that switch? Pour out a libation? Sacrifice a goat? No --
you simply do it without thinking.