Sujet : Re: Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux?
De : tnp (at) *nospam* invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacy comp.os.linux.miscDate : 06. Apr 2025, 12:58:03
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A little, after lunch
Message-ID : <vstq8b$ufsg$2@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
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 06/04/2025 05:48, c186282 wrote:
On 4/5/25 9:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/04/2025 23:34, c186282 wrote:
On 4/5/25 4:00 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 15:22:23 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>
>
Digital ... note that clock speeds haven't really risen in
a LONG time. They can, to a point, make them 'work smarter'
but how much more ? Not all tasks/problems lend themselves
to parallel processing methods either.
>
So, yea, we're pretty much there.
>
>
The supercomputer people would disagree.
>
Supercomputers, based on Linux, just keep on getting faster.
>
The metric is matrix multiplication, a classic problem in cache
management.
>
I don't know about the architecture of supercomputers but
the limit seems to be still quite open.
>
Matrix mult is a kind of parallelization ... and we
still have some room there. But not every problem is
easily, or at all, suited for spreading over 1000
processors.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law
>
Super-computers can use exotic tech, at a super price,
if they want - including superconductors and quantum
elements. NOT coming to a desktop near you anytime
soon alas ......
>
Well the main use of supercomputers is running vast mathematical models to make sketchy assumptions and crude parametrisations look much more betterer than they actually are..
Even 80s super-computers made it unnecessary to TEST
nuclear weapon designs - the entire physics could be
calculated, a 'virtual' bomb, and RELIED on. Even Iran
can do all that and more now.
Real racing car and aircraft design uses wind tunnels. CFD can't do the job.
Um, yea ... really COULD be entirely virtualized.
ACCESS to such calx capabilities still isn't there
or affordable to ALL however. Do you think that
AirBus/Boeing/Lockheed build a zillion wind-tunnel
models these days ? Likely NONE. The airflows, the
structural components ... all SIMS.
You are completely wrong
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PabZAx-4Yw WHAT can be done with "quantum" is not entirely
clear. Again it's not best suited for EVERYTHING.
The #1 issue is still the ERROR rates. As per QM,
where things can randomly change Just Because,
these errors are gonna be HARD to get around.
STILL no great solutions. Got a design for a
"Heisenberg compensator" ??? If so, GET RICH !!!
You are degenerating to word salad...
There MAY be some pattern in the QM errors that
can be matched/negated by some parallel QM
process/equation. We shall see.
-- “I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.” ― Leo Tolstoy
Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux?
Re: Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux?