How to develop a random number generation device

[krw]

I think Bill Gates's dream was of a world where everybody's friendly,
there's no aggression or hostility, sort of like a Disneyland of computing,
where everybody shares all of their data with everyone, anyone can execute
anything on anybody's computer anywhere - sort of like the Garden of Eden
with interconnected computers.

As long as those computers have paid their Gates' tax it's his dream
world. He's done everything in his power to make his dream come true
too.

Reality seems to have not turned out that way

Windows is close to his Disneyland.

- there really are bad people out there! =:-O

Particularly Gates.

 

[krw]

On Sep 15, 11:09 am, John Larkin


I think that the number of virtual cores will grow faster than the
number fo real cores. With extra register banks and a bit of clever
design, a single ALU can look like two slightly slower ones.

Not register banks, just a couple of bits in the rename register
files.

I expect to see multicore machines with less actual floating point
ALUs than actual integer ALUs.

I would think that would be more of a mess than the small amount of
extra hardware for an FPU for each CPU. Asymetries can get messy
fast.

 

[krw]

Yes, the OS is part of the problem/solution, but it needs hardware help.

But the hardware is there. It's software that sucks eggs.

Actually, hardware/software combinations have existed at least since
the late '70's. One I'm personally familiar with is the Motorola MC6809
(what a sweet chip!) running Microware's OS-9.

The 6809 had a software interrupt that could be programmed (as could all
the other interrupts) to switch memory maps. A non-privileged user
running under OS-9 had no access at all to the system space; the user
could do any stupid thing imaginable and affect only himself. To get to
system resources he had to load a register with a code and issue a SWI.

The same is true of any modern processor. Priveleged ops can't be
executed from user space. However, this causes some performance
problems so holes are drilled in the firewall (and Windows leaks
out).

I believe a few other microprocessors had similar features (didn't the
68K?) -- I'd be very surprised if they didn't have corresponding OS's.

PowerPC has a very distinct protect mode. Some of the later ones
also have a hypervisor mode to further assist in vitalization. the
/360 was completely self-virtualizable (and has been done several
levels deep).

And, notwithstanding the empty-headed MS worshiper who keeps calling
more knowledgeable people idiots, Microsoft still doesn't make use of
even what Intel provides.

Why should they?

---


But, John, we already have it. Linux is running right now on hundreds
of processors -- I don't remember offhand how many cores per chip, but
it's one of the later PowerPC processors. I think it's at Livermore.

...Yes, here it is. The whole list at livermore, with operating systems
and hardware summaries.

http://www.llnl.gov/computing/tutorials/lc_resources/

It? Which "it"?

 

[ChairmanOfTheBored]

Patch Tuesday is Microsoft's practice of accumulating a bunch of
patches and releasing them on the 2nd Tuesday of each month.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_Tuesday


I certainly don't update that often. I like to let the patches mellow
for a month or so, because Microsoft's patches are so stupid they
often break more than they fix.

"The second problem affected large deployments of Windows, such as can
be found at large companies. Such large deployments found it
increasingly difficult to make sure all systems across the company
were all up to date. The problem was made worse by the fact that,
occasionally, a patch issued by Microsoft would break existing
functionality, and would have to be uninstalled."

Damn, you actually *don't* know much about this stuff.

**** you. I have administered networks before.

The company I currently work for has several thousand computers and
several hundred laptops, and that doesn't even count the lab use
machines.

We do not experience the horseshit you allow yourself to succumb to.

Perhaps the hardware you choose is shit, therefore the results you get
are shit, shithead.

Our shit works. It would appear that it is YOU that knows very little
about it, asswipe.

 

[ChairmanOfTheBored]

I'd be happy to waste a little silicon if I could have an OS that
doesn't crash and that doesn't go to sleep for seconds at a time for
no obvious reason.

Wireless mouse and keyboard? Idiot. That isn't the OS, that's the
drivers for the shit hardware.

 

[TheKraken]

As long as those computers have paid their Gates' tax it's his dream
world. He's done everything in his power to make his dream come true
too.


Windows is close to his Disneyland.


Particularly Gates.

You're an example of a bad one, KeithTard!

 

[TheKraken]

Not register banks, just a couple of bits in the rename register
files.


I would think that would be more of a mess than the small amount of
extra hardware for an FPU for each CPU. Asymetries can get messy
fast.

Yeah... just look how ugly your retarded ass turned out to be!

 

[John Larkin]

**** you. I have administered networks before.

The company I currently work for has several thousand computers and
several hundred laptops, and that doesn't even count the lab use
machines.

We do not experience the horseshit you allow yourself to succumb to.

You don't install OS patches? How do you manage that?

It's interesting that you didn't know about Patch Tuesday.

Perhaps the hardware you choose is shit, therefore the results you get
are shit, shithead.

I just bought a dozen HP ML350 "server" boxes; ECC memory, redundant
power supplies, redundant BIOS, redundant fans, hot-plug RAID drives.
The layout, packaging, and cabling are superb. How's that?

John

 

[John Larkin]

Wireless mouse and keyboard? Idiot. That isn't the OS, that's the
drivers for the shit hardware.

I have neither. And XP sometimes does mysterious things for seconds at
a time. After all, there's only one CPU.

Still AlwaysWrong.

John

 

[ChairmanOfTheBored]

But the hardware is there. It's software that sucks eggs.


The same is true of any modern processor. Priveleged ops can't be
executed from user space. However, this causes some performance
problems so holes are drilled in the firewall (and Windows leaks
out).


PowerPC has a very distinct protect mode. Some of the later ones
also have a hypervisor mode to further assist in vitalization. the
/360 was completely self-virtualizable (and has been done several
levels deep).


Why should they?


It? Which "it"?

"Systems Summary" Idiot.

 

[ChairmanOfTheBored]

You don't install OS patches? How do you manage that?

It's interesting that you didn't know about Patch Tuesday.

What is interesting is that you actually think that is how it is done.

I just bought a dozen HP ML350 "server" boxes; ECC memory, redundant
power supplies, redundant BIOS, redundant fans, hot-plug RAID drives.
The layout, packaging, and cabling are superb. How's that?

Overkill. You likely won't manage those worth a shit... either.

 

[krw]

You're an example of a bad one, KeithTard!

I see you've been in mommy's hamper again, Dimbulb.

 

[krw]

**** you. I have administered networks before.

The only thing you've administered, Dimbulb, is an enema. ...to
yourself.

The company I currently work for has several thousand computers and
several hundred laptops, and that doesn't even count the lab use
machines.

We do not experience the horseshit you allow yourself to succumb to.

Perhaps the hardware you choose is shit, therefore the results you get
are shit, shithead.

Shit's what happens when you let loose of the enema bag, Dimmie.

Our shit works.

It has to.

It would appear that it is YOU that knows very little
about it, asswipe.

I though mommy did that for you, after.

 

[krw]

I have neither. And XP sometimes does mysterious things for seconds at
a time. After all, there's only one CPU.

XP sometimes daydreams for a few seconds, but nothing like Vista.
....on dual cores, even. *LOTS* of memory helps.

Still AlwaysWrong.

Surprise?

 

[krw]

On Sep 15, 11:09 am, John Larkin
[....]
architecture. In a few years we'll have, say, 1024 processors on a
chip, and something new will be required to manage them. It will be a
thousand times simpler and more reliable than Windows.

I think that the number of virtual cores will grow faster than the
number fo real cores. With extra register banks and a bit of clever
design, a single ALU can look like two slightly slower ones.

Not register banks, just a couple of bits in the rename register
files.

I expect to see multicore machines with less actual floating point
ALUs than actual integer ALUs.

I would think that would be more of a mess than the small amount of
extra hardware for an FPU for each CPU. Asymetries can get messy
fast.

Yeah... just look how ugly your retarded ass turned out to be!

Speaking of asymmetries, how's mom's laundry doing?

 

[krw]

"Systems Summary" Idiot.

^
|
+--- Exactly, the question, Dimbulb.

 

[John Larkin]

XP sometimes daydreams for a few seconds, but nothing like Vista.
...on dual cores, even. *LOTS* of memory helps.

Is Vista worse? All that kluged DRM stuff must involve a lot of
overhead.

Surprise?

After all these years? Certainly not. I'd be surprised if he ever got
anything right!

John

 

[MooseFET]

XP sometimes daydreams for a few seconds,

XP goes for longish periods (ms) with the interrupts off too.

 

[MooseFET]

Not register banks, just a couple of bits in the rename register
files.

I think you mistook my point. You would have as many set of registers
as there are virtual CPUs, perhaps plus some. When a task hits a
point where it needs to wait, its ALU section starts doing the work
for the lower priority task. This could be all hardware so no context
switching time other than perhaps a clock cycle would be needed.

I would think that would be more of a mess than the small amount of
extra hardware for an FPU for each CPU. Asymetries can get messy
fast.

I figure they would form some kind of repeating pattern along the
chip. This way the problems have to be solved only once. The amount
of hardware in a FPU is more than is in the integer ALU and floating
point operations are less common so I think it would work out.

On the later X86 machines there is a second ALU just for doing
addressing. We already have sort of more ALUs than FPUs in the current
machines.

On operations like 1/sqrt(X), doubling the number of transistors can
more than double the speed. You can make the initial guess very good
and loop much less.

 

[krw]

Is Vista worse? All that kluged DRM stuff must involve a lot of
overhead.

Absolute crap and takes at least twice the memory to do it in. I
have two dual-core ThinkPad T60s, one Vista (may even be a Core-2
Duo) and one XP. The performance of the Vista system was absolute
crap until I installed the second GB. It's a good thing memory is
cheap, but 3GB is all she wrote on 32bit x86 and Windows. I don't
like being that close to the wall.

After all these years? Certainly not. I'd be surprised if he ever got
anything right!

One day perhaps we'll both be Dim-struck. Nah!