A Very Novel Idea Concerning Vas- BE FAIR

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I do not believe the +200 Elo at all. Why? 200 Elo represents at least 3 doublings of speed, perhaps a bit more. 4 to 40 is 10x, or 3+ doublings. No way the cluster gets an optimal speedup.

As I said, _way_ more hype than fact.

They could show some 4 core and 40 core comparisons. But all we get is "the cluster is for playing chess, not running tests..." That says a lot, because if the numbers were impressive, they would be shown...

Going from 4 shared memory nodes, to 40 cluster nodes, I would be quite happy to see a +50 Elo gain. that is worth something. And possibly reachable.

But Lucas said it, then it must be true, since Lukas is a right hand of the God Vas...

Some ppl posts are really nothing but an insult for the intelligence...

+200 Elo,eh
And that is coming from Mr.honest himself....hmmmm....
Dr.D

[Romy]

50% of the blame lies directly with Vas. No responses to any of the issues raised

Absurd, silence imply guilt in pre-lynching?

Mr Rajlich's silence shows his dignity and his awareness of the nature of Simia hamadryas... No more.

[Terry McCracken]

50% of the blame lies directly with Vas. No responses to any of the issues raised

Absurd, silence imply guilt in pre-lynching?

Mr Rajlich's silence shows his dignity and his awareness of the nature of Simia hamadryas... No more.

Evidently a species far above you. Vas can speak for himself.

[bob]

50% of the blame lies directly with Vas. No responses to any of the issues raised

Absurd, silence imply guilt in pre-lynching?

Mr Rajlich's silence shows his dignity and his awareness of the nature of Simia hamadryas... No more.

I don't care whether he replies or not. We are collecting evidence, and preparing a report. If he elects to remain silent, it is his choice, and his alone. With all the evidence of copying, it is going to be hard for him to win by remaining silent. That is pretty certain. The evidence is mounting. With nada from the defense so far...

[Romy]

We are collecting evidence, and preparing a report. If he elects to remain silent, it is his choice, and his alone. With all the evidence of copying, it is going to be hard for him to win by remaining silent. That is pretty certain. The evidence is mounting. With nada from the defense so far...

For more reason than I have marginspace for, do not forfeits your day job in order to become lawyer.

[bob]

We are collecting evidence, and preparing a report. If he elects to remain silent, it is his choice, and his alone. With all the evidence of copying, it is going to be hard for him to win by remaining silent. That is pretty certain. The evidence is mounting. With nada from the defense so far...

For more reason than I have marginspace for, do not forfeits your day job in order to become lawyer.

I would suggest you spend more time buying bananas for that room full of monkeys you have doing your typing for you...

A good defense attorney will tell you that if (a) there is a solid mountain of evidence; (b) none of it can be discredited; then (c) the defendant has to offer up some sort of argument, mitigating circumstances, something. Else he ends up getting slammed in the pokey. Only someone afraid of responding would remain silent as all of this is prepared. I'd be willing to listen to anything. "silence" doesn't impress me a bit, however, and I suspect it won't impress the ICGA either, assuming he remains silent throughout the process...

[Romy]

A good defense attorney will tell you

if being candide, that I am a better prosecuting attorney than they are a defense attorney.

So?

What is happening against Mr Rajlich now approaches a Crime, and he is the victim.

I come not to bury Caesar, or praise Caesar, or defend Caesar, but to catch Gaius Cassius Longinus prior to actus rea.

Please maintain balances.

[Romy]

This is thread of FAIRNESS subject, so relevance establish.

I would suggest you

... either not be coward who delete my comment where I show that you made many mistake in http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38436 , or if you be innocent then immediately remonstrates with fellow moderator who delete my comment before locking.

You approvingly wrote quote that derivative of x^2 is 2xdx!

Go and check your own word. "Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:34 pm" was time you post that statement.

I correct your mistake (there is no "dx" in answer). Twice I correct, but you misread. Even I highlight bold the extra "dx".

Then in post of Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:20 am you write "Feel free to prove to me that the first derivative of x^2 is anything but 2x" so a reader can think I make such a child's mistake when you are infact the perpetrator.

I think simplest explanation is, innocent mistake by you, then you forgets what you write, misread what I writes and accuse me of making your mistake!

If you are a Southern Gentleman, who believe in FAIR, then apologise or acknowledge.

Else we can know what Lynch Mob await for Mr Rajlich, and prepare good warm welcome.

[bob]

A good defense attorney will tell you

if being candide, that I am a better prosecuting attorney than they are a defense attorney.

So?

What is happening against Mr Rajlich now approaches a Crime, and he is the victim.

I come not to bury Caesar, or praise Caesar, or defend Caesar, but to catch Gaius Cassius Longinus prior to actus rea.

Please maintain balances.

We are just providing evidence. The ICGA will be judge/jury in this case. How is it a crime to provide evidence? Actually, providing overwhelming evidence... Your definition of "crime" is as broken as your pidgin-English... But of course, you already know that.

BTW, IP and email anonymizers are as old as the hills. Just so you know that we know...

[bob]

This is thread of FAIRNESS subject, so relevance establish.

I would suggest you

... either not be coward who delete my comment where I show that you made many mistake in http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38436 , or if you be innocent then immediately remonstrates with fellow moderator who delete my comment before locking.

You approvingly wrote quote that derivative of x^2 is 2xdx!

Go and check your own word. "Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:34 pm" was time you post that statement.

I correct your mistake (there is no "dx" in answer). Twice I correct, but you misread. Even I highlight bold the extra "dx".

Say WHAT??? "dx" shows that this is a derivative with respect to x. One can differentiate with respect to _other_ variables and leave X unchanged... Again, I gave a single term to show a simple concept. So let's now switch the argument to something unrelated to the original discussion (asm and C semantic equivalence) since you have no hope of winning that, and lets now waste pages of arguments, and bury the important stuff under a mountain of nonsense.

Not moi...

Then in post of Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:20 am you write "Feel free to prove to me that the first derivative of x^2 is anything but 2x" so a reader can think I make such a child's mistake when you are infact the perpetrator.

I think simplest explanation is, innocent mistake by you, then you forgets what you write, misread what I writes and accuse me of making your mistake!

If you are a Southern Gentleman, who believe in FAIR, then apologise or acknowledge.

Else we can know what Lynch Mob await for Mr Rajlich, and prepare good warm welcome.

Prepare whatever welcome you feel you are man enough to prepare...