On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Genes MailLists <li...@sapience.com> wrote:
> On 07/16/2010 08:07 PM, Robert Myers wrote: > > We ett that this stuff may not help your problem domain - don't > assume all problems look like the one(s) you are interested in. > > This stuff is useful - I have seen it as have many others ... it is > not a panacea ... stop harping please ... and try understand the useful > side as well as the limitations .. it has limitations - as do people. > If you wanted this discussion to end, why are you continuing it? Gordon Bell asked (about huge computers) in a presentation now 12 years old: "Is it worth it?" If you're not going to get new science out of a huge new computer, then why spend the money? I have one answer to where there is possibly new science, but we never get the computer to explore it. "My" problem domain (fluid mechanics) is a big driver behind the huge expenditures on "supercomputers," which as I have pointed out ad nauseum, are far from super in some really important ways. The GPU may be a very handy tool for certain kinds of computations, but it almost inherently replicates a design corner-cutting that that is endemic in supercomputing right now (low bytes per flop). If you want to say, "GPGPU's will help *my* problem, so I want one," I have no answer for that. If you propose that the GPU is an ideal tool for university level teaching and research that requires hefty computing, as the poster I responded to did, then I have some serious objections based on good science. I presented my position, I defended my reputation and my position against wild and ignorant slurs, and you have now joined a chorus that wants to comment on my personality, rather than on anything technical. Perhaps you are the one who should stop harping? Robert.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
