[OT] The Return of Star Wars (Graphics Cards)

[Quadibloc]

As this refers to Jerry Pournelle, a science-fiction author, it is
slightly on-topic...

Yes, _that_ Star Wars: the Strategic Defense Initiative.

Making Russia's (and China's) nuclear arsenals "impotent and
obsolete" would be all very well if we could do it. It would be helpful
to Ukraine and Taiwan.

And, unlike other things Joe Biden might want to spend money on,
this would be something the Republicans would approve of, at least
given their track record.

However, nothing came of the Strategic Defense Initiative. At the
time, one major criticism of it was that computers weren't even close
to being able to perform the artificial intelligence functions required
to distinguish a missile launch from many other things.

However, that was then, and now is... now! Now, a computer can
beat Magnus Carlsen at chess, for example. But that, in itself,
while it's shown that one AI-related programming area has progressed,
is hardly enough to even suggest that SDI, once impossible, is now
possible.

But there are _other_ things that show that there has been *big* and
*obvious* progress on the AI front.

Thus, for example, if you buy a recent Nvidia graphics card - the 3000
series, not necessarily the current 4000 series, of which only the
most expensive models are currently available, will do - you can use
software available from Nvidia free for it, called Nvidia Broadcast,
which can let you sit in front of your living room instead of a green screen,
and yet it will figure out what is the background, and let you replace
it with, say, your computer's screen.

In fact, there are quite a few AI-related things that are based on
low-precision matrix multiplication with modern graphics card
chips.

John Savard

[pete...@gmail.com]

Huh? A standard laptop, no special cards, can do that just fine in Skype,
Zoom, or Microsoft Teams. I do it every workday. I rotate my fake
backgrounds, but prefer landscapes.

Pt

[Kevrob]

On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 4:21:00 PM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:

Influence of SDI on the fate of the USSR?

[quote]

{headline}

The Phantom Menace

How an unproven, widely mocked technology scared the Soviets into ending the Cold War.

By KEN ADELMAN | May 11, 2014

{/headline}

....author of _Reagan at Reykjavik: Forty-Eight Hours that Ended the Cold War_
 by Broadside Books, an imprint of HarperCollins, was U.S. arms control director
during the October 1986 summit in Iceland and a U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations before then.

For decades, Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI)—an ambitious ground-
and space-based “shield” to protect the United States from nuclear ballistic missiles—
has been mocked and criticized. First proposed by the president in 1983, it was immediately
dubbed “Star Wars” by the mainstream media and dismissed as unscientific, infeasible
and even counter-productive. The Union of Concerned Scientists, 100,000 members strong,
was fierce in its opposition. The Arms Control Association declared that SDI would end
arms control, while some Soviets felt SDI would end the world. Domestic critics became
furious, and the Kremlin went ballistic.

But while Reagan’s critics might not have taken his pet technology seriously, the Russians
certainly did. Even though SDI was decades away from being implemented, if not beyond
the reach of technology altogether, the threat the shield presented—along with Reagan’s
dogged commitment to it—was enough to scare Soviet leader Mikhael Gorbachev into
reforms that would eventually bring down the Soviet Union. In short: “Star Wars” never
worked as Reagan wished. It worked even better. And I should know, because I saw it happen.

[/quote]

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/the-phantom-menace-106551/

That's one take.

I used to joke that pundits had finally updated their anti-SF sneers,
from "that Buck Rogers stuff."


--
Kevin R
a.a #2310

[Quadibloc]

On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 12:48:41 AM UTC-7, Kevrob quoted, in part:

> But while Reagan’s critics might not have taken his pet technology seriously, the Russians
> certainly did. Even though SDI was decades away from being implemented, if not beyond
> the reach of technology altogether, the threat the shield presented—along with Reagan’s
> dogged commitment to it—was enough to scare Soviet leader Mikhael Gorbachev into
> reforms that would eventually bring down the Soviet Union. In short: “Star Wars” never
> worked as Reagan wished. It worked even better. And I should know, because I saw it happen.

Well, I'm sure that it would not be possible to fool the Russians twice with
the same trick. So it's only if advances in computers really _have_ made it
possible for it to actually work now that the revival of SDI would have merit.

John Savard

[WolfFan]

On Nov 22, 2022, Quadibloc wrote
(in article<3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>):

> Thus, for example, if you buy a recent Nvidia graphics card - the 3000
> series, not necessarily the current 4000 series, of which only the
> most expensive models are currently available, will do - you can use
> software available from Nvidia free for it, called Nvidia Broadcast,
> which can let you sit in front of your living room instead of a green screen,
> and yet it will figure out what is the background, and let you replace
> it with, say, your computer's screen.

I’d be real careful with Nvidia 4000 series cards.

> https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/18/nvidia_flawsuit_4090/

[Ninapenda Jibini]

WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote in
news:0001HW.29329EE700...@news.supernews.com:

Mostly, apparently, be real careful to plug them in correctly.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration


"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[WolfFan]

On Nov 26, 2022, Ninapenda Jibini wrote
(in article<XnsAF5B807255980...@85.12.62.245>):

> WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote in
> news:0001HW.29329EE700...@news.supernews.com:
>
> > On Nov 22, 2022, Quadibloc wrote
> > (in
> > article<3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>):
> >
> > > Thus, for example, if you buy a recent Nvidia graphics card -
> > > the 3000 series, not necessarily the current 4000 series, of
> > > which only the most expensive models are currently available,
> > > will do - you can use software available from Nvidia free for
> > > it, called Nvidia Broadcast, which can let you sit in front of
> > > your living room instead of a green screen, and yet it will
> > > figure out what is the background, and let you replace it with,
> > > say, your computer's screen.
> >
> > I’d be real careful with Nvidia 4000 series cards.
> >
> > > https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/18/nvidia_flawsuit_4090/
> Mostly, apparently, be real careful to plug them in correctly.

Apparently they have problems with the number of times that they can be
plugged into power, _and_ they have poorly placed power sockets so that the
power plugs work loose _and_ they have thin gauge power cable. It’s the
combination that’s the problem. If they had thicker cable, the cables
wouldn’t overheat and melt. If the plugs didn’t work loose, they
wouldn’t have to be reinserted. If the power sockets were placed better,
the plugs wouldn’t work loose. If the number of insert/remove cycles was
higher, there wouldn’t be so many failures.

Of course, if idiots wouldn’t pay $1500 for a video card, none of this
would matter. The video card in my main Windows box cost $150. The entire box
that I’m typing this on right now cost $1200, including upgrading the RAM,
and Apple stuff is supposed to be expensive. There is no way that I’d spend
$1500 on a video card. Ain’t happening... unless it’s a _pro_ video card,
to do actual work which makes actual money. Note that crypto Ponzi crap
ain’t real money. The company has a few machines with expensive video cards
to make actual products which make actual money. The company paid for those
cards. If a power cable melted, there would be trouble. If it was due to user
error, someone’s fired. If it’s due to design or other vendor faults,
Legal would be involved. Quickly.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote in
news:0001HW.2933BA1100...@news.supernews.com:

The precise details are still being investigated by all sides. But
from Nvidiea's own account, it certainly looks like a design flaw
to me.

>
> Of course, if idiots wouldn’t pay $1500 for a video card, none
> of this would matter. The video card in my main Windows box cost
> $150. The entire box that I’m typing this on right now cost
> $1200, including upgrading the RAM, and Apple stuff is supposed
> to be expensive. There is no way that I’d spend $1500 on a
> video card. Ain’t happening... unless it’s a _pro_ video
> card, to do actual work which makes actual money. Note that
> crypto Ponzi crap ain’t real money. The company has a few
> machines with expensive video cards to make actual products
> which make actual money. The company paid for those cards. If a
> power cable melted, there would be trouble. If it was due to
> user error, someone’s fired. If it’s due to design or other
> vendor faults, Legal would be involved. Quickly.
>

Legal *is* involved. At least one lawsuit has been filed, and is
seeking class action status. Which is seems likely to get. And once
it does, Nvidia will likely settle pretty quickly.

[Quadibloc]

On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 12:22:23 PM UTC-7, WolfFan wrote:

> I’d be real careful with Nvidia 4000 series cards.

I'm aware of the issues with the 4090. Presumably, if there was _nothing_
wrong with the card itself, then there would only be fires due to people
not putting the plug in right at the same frequency as with *any other*
video card.
So, _even if_ it is true, as claimed, that if the card is plugged in properly,
there should be no problem, it's clear the design is skating too close to
the edge, with an inadequate safety margin. (I haven't researched the
issue deeply enough to have any opinion on whether or not that is true.)
But, _since_ the root is the power consumption of the 4090, that would
seem to imply there's no reason to worry (too much) about the 4080.
The AMD offering is generally considered to be the better bargain, if
one isn't seeking the advanced features of the Nvidia cards, however.

John Savard

[Ninapenda Jibini]

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
news:4e369656-6b39-4d07...@googlegroups.com:

AMD has had its adventures too, with Tesla recalling 130,000 cars
because of overheating by Tyzen processers in the entertainment
systems. (Though the details on that suggest it's Tesla's design flaw
in the cooling system rather than the CPU itself.)

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>,

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>As this refers to Jerry Pournelle, a science-fiction author, it is
>slightly on-topic...
>
>Yes, _that_ Star Wars: the Strategic Defense Initiative.
>
>Making Russia's (and China's) nuclear arsenals "impotent and
>obsolete" would be all very well if we could do it. It would be helpful
>to Ukraine and Taiwan.

(Hal Heydt)
There's a report floating around that the Russians are replacing
the warheads in some of their nuclear armed missiles with inert
weights (to keep the flight dynamics stable) and using them as
decoys in hopes of getting other missiles through Ukraine's air
defenses.

Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
will to the Ukraine army.

[Scott Lurndal]

The Russians have been loath to commit their elite troops
to the theater[*], for whatever reasons. They're instead sending
untrained or poorly-trained conscripts and "volunteer units"
and mercenaries. The mercenaries are recruiting from prisons,
and many of those recruits fade across the lines and surrender.

They've also been running short on uniforms, vests, food,
medicines, field hospitals etc.

[*] The one elite battalion that had been sent is basically
combat ineffective with greater than 50% casualties.

[Paul S Person]

On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 21:44:24 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>,
>Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>As this refers to Jerry Pournelle, a science-fiction author, it is
>>slightly on-topic...
>>
>>Yes, _that_ Star Wars: the Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>
>>Making Russia's (and China's) nuclear arsenals "impotent and
>>obsolete" would be all very well if we could do it. It would be helpful
>>to Ukraine and Taiwan.
>
>(Hal Heydt)
>There's a report floating around that the Russians are replacing
>the warheads in some of their nuclear armed missiles with inert
>weights (to keep the flight dynamics stable) and using them as
>decoys in hopes of getting other missiles through Ukraine's air
>defenses.

That's in keeping with a report suggesting that this means they are
running out of missiles.

And every missile used as a decoy is a missile that will /not/ be
useable to deliver a nuke. This is a good thing, BTW.

>Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>will to the Ukraine army.

I wonder if that can be treated as a Russian war crime. And those
responsible who survive long enough to be prosecuted for it. What the
Russians pretend is an "Army" is nothing of the sort.

Historically, disease has always been the major killer in war.

Just as the pursuit after the enemy breaks and runs has always killed
more of them than the actually battle.

I hope Putin's replacement has enough sense to pull back into Russia
(not the various land-grabs, but Russia as defined internationally)
and sue for terms.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

[Paul S Person]

On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:14:41 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

That tends to happen when the people responsible are more interesting
in using the money for Swiss bank accounts and super-yachts than for
such boring things as the items you mention or even on weapons and
ammunition. Or the factories to produce them, I suspect.

Ukraine might want to consider erecting a bunch of GP Huge tents with
heaters and putting "Russian soldiers welcome" signs outside. Of
course, the resulting influx of POWs would have to be handled
properly.

>[*] The one elite battalion that had been sent is basically
>combat ineffective with greater than 50% casualties.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:c6s9ohpplp7ka6oe6...@4ax.com:

> internationally) and sue for terms.

Or *beg* for terms.

--
Terry Austin

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in

news:ajs9ohlnoule17ims...@4ax.com:

I'm reminded of the US invastion of Iraq, when entire units would
surrender simply because as POWs they'd be given food an water.
They would disarmed, and pointed down a road - without escort - and
told "go x miles and you'll be fed." (And one unit that surrended
to a journalist.)

[Quadibloc]

On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:

> Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
> Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
> will to the Ukraine army.

That isn't a horror. That's good news.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 10:39:51 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person wrote:

> I hope Putin's replacement has enough sense to pull back into Russia
> (not the various land-grabs, but Russia as defined internationally)
> and sue for terms.

I hope so too. However, some of the news I've been reading suggests that
the likeliest successors to Putin, if patience is lost with his handling of the
conflict, are going to be hard-liners worse than him. Of course, this may be
the only pose they can take now, consistent with survival, and when Putin is
out of the way, they may change their tune.

If not, given the rhetoric from the more hard-line element in Russia, the
question of a successor to Putin's hardline successor may not arise. For
the same reason as the 2024 Presidential Election may not be held.
Radioactive wastelands do not require governance.

Obviously, of course, this is something that we wish to avoid, but not at
the price of letting Russia get away with aggression. Why not? Surely
letting the Ukrainians suffer under oppression as the price of avoiding
World War III is no worse than letting the Vietnamese or the North Koreans
do so for the same reason?

The answer, of course, is that the pattern in Putin's behavior means that
the next dominoes are Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland... and Germany
and France. (How Russia is supposed to roll over these countries after its
troop losses in Ukraine, of course, is a real question.)

John Savard

[rksh...@rosettacondot.com]

WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2022, Ninapenda Jibini wrote
> (in article<XnsAF5B807255980...@85.12.62.245>):
>
>> WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote in
>> news:0001HW.29329EE700...@news.supernews.com:
>>
>> > On Nov 22, 2022, Quadibloc wrote
>> > (in
>> > article<3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>):
>> >
>> > > Thus, for example, if you buy a recent Nvidia graphics card -
>> > > the 3000 series, not necessarily the current 4000 series, of
>> > > which only the most expensive models are currently available,
>> > > will do - you can use software available from Nvidia free for
>> > > it, called Nvidia Broadcast, which can let you sit in front of
>> > > your living room instead of a green screen, and yet it will
>> > > figure out what is the background, and let you replace it with,
>> > > say, your computer's screen.
>> >
>> > I’d be real careful with Nvidia 4000 series cards.
>> >
>> > > https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/18/nvidia_flawsuit_4090/
>> Mostly, apparently, be real careful to plug them in correctly.
>

> Of course, if idiots wouldn’t pay $1500 for a video card, none of this
> would matter. The video card in my main Windows box cost $150. The entire box
> that I’m typing this on right now cost $1200, including upgrading the RAM,
> and Apple stuff is supposed to be expensive. There is no way that I’d spend
> $1500 on a video card. Ain’t happening... unless it’s a _pro_ video card,
> to do actual work which makes actual money. Note that crypto Ponzi crap

I'm guessing you're not a gamer. I lost my previous video card at the height
of the crypto craze and ended up having to pay $769 for a comparable
replacement. While I personally wouldn't sink $1500 into a card I can easily
see serious gamers doing it (the really serious ones would probably go dual).
I'm still running on dual 1080p monitors, so I'm definitely not in the
"serious gamer" category.
In a lot of ways it's like audio. My audiophile friends sink more into
individual speakers than I have invested in all of my A/V equipment combined.

Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com

[Paul S Person]

Not really. They are as much victims of Putin as Ukraine is.

But that is a problem for the Russians to resolve. They voted for
Putin, they liked Putin, the question is -- what do they do now?

[Quadibloc]

On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 10:16:17 AM UTC-7, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:50:56 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:
> >
> >> Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
> >> Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
> >> will to the Ukraine army.

> >That isn't a horror. That's good news.

> Not really. They are as much victims of Putin as Ukraine is.

That is true. But until a Russian soldier in Ukraine throws down
his weapons, and surrenders to Ukraine, he is a danger to the lives
of the Ukrainian people, and the sooner that danger is ended
the better.

So if the cold causes more Russian soldiers to die sooner, that will
save Ukrainian lives, which is what makes it good news. There is a
war on. And it is Ukrainian lives that matter, not enemy lives.

John Savard

[WolfFan]

On Nov 29, 2022, rksh...@rosettacondot.com wrote
(in article<tm57mg$het8$2...@memoryalpha.rosettacon.com>):

Not a gamer, unless Civilization V and VI, and Bejeweled, and FreeCell count.
And I mostly play those on my iPad.

[Chris Buckley]

On 2022-11-30, WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2022, rksh...@rosettacondot.com wrote

>> I'm guessing you're not a gamer. I lost my previous video card at the height
>> of the crypto craze and ended up having to pay $769 for a comparable
>> replacement. While I personally wouldn't sink $1500 into a card I can easily
>> see serious gamers doing it (the really serious ones would probably go dual).
>> I'm still running on dual 1080p monitors, so I'm definitely not in the
>> "serious gamer" category.
>> In a lot of ways it's like audio. My audiophile friends sink more into
>> individual speakers than I have invested in all of my A/V equipment combined.
>>
>> Robert
>
> Not a gamer, unless Civilization V and VI, and Bejeweled, and FreeCell count.
> And I mostly play those on my iPad.

What? Civ V and VI plus Freecell but no Spider Solitaire?

I've played many thousands of Spider games over the years. It's a very
well-balanced optimization game - I enjoy it for the same reasons that
I enjoyed the Civ games. It may take a while before you win your first
game (especially if you don't allow takebacks), but you can push the
optimizations to the point where you are winning over a third of
your games (with no takebacks).

Watch out for poor implementations - those floating around based on the
Windows 7 free version have a remarkably poor RNG. I use SolSuite which
I like a lot, but it's Windows only.

Chris

[Paul S Person]

A properly-implemented Spider was the reason I bought SolSuite a long
time ago.

I had to search because the first version I tried would not allow deep
enough stacks to actually play the game. This was the result of trying
to fit /every/ solitaire card game included into the same interface.

[Titus G]

On 1/12/22 04:34, Chris Buckley wrote:
> On 2022-11-30, WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote:

snip

> I've played many thousands of Spider games over the years. It's a
> very well-balanced optimization game - I enjoy it for the same
> reasons that I enjoyed the Civ games. It may take a while before you
> win your first game (especially if you don't allow takebacks), but
> you can push the optimizations to the point where you are winning
> over a third of your games (with no takebacks).
>
> Watch out for poor implementations - those floating around based on
> the Windows 7 free version have a remarkably poor RNG. I use
> SolSuite which I like a lot, but it's Windows only.

I don't understand how there can be somewhat predictable, (or
"remarkably poor"), random numbers as I had always assumed that
unpredicability was a subset of randomness and that all random number
sequences were random. I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a
few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without takebacks.
As an afterthought. That number of games played sharpened the speed and
appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed into a
routine. So in theory, does that mean that the sequence of cards in a
shuffled pack after many, many, iterations would become close to
predictable?
I use Linux and see that Spider is in the AisleRiot package. How would I
determine which Spider software had a better RNG? Thank you.

[Quadibloc]

On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 10:12:15 PM UTC-7, Titus G wrote:

> I don't understand how there can be somewhat predictable, (or
> "remarkably poor"), random numbers as I had always assumed that
> unpredicability was a subset of randomness and that all random number
> sequences were random.

Until very recently, in order to make public-key ciphers secure, computers
didn't have access to any means of producing actually random numbers
at all. And these still aren't used for things like playing Solitaire.

Instead, the "random number" function seen in BASIC is an example of what
_will_ be used.

This is 100% predictable; it's only designed to *look* random, so that it will
usually be adequate, for example, in proposing how to take a "random" sample
of, say, the plants growing in a field for an experiment.

For a solitaire game, the starting "seed" number used for the (pseudo-)random number
generator would be generated from the exact second (gained from the computer's
real-time clock) the game was started... so that it's possible to play a new game
every time.

John Savard

[Robert Carnegie]

A sequence of "random numbers" from a
pseudo-random-number formula ought to be
unpredictable by examining the output, even when
you know what the formula is, and a good one is
unpredictable. However, if the starting condition
or "seed" is known, then the output is always the
same. Randomness is achieved by using a random
"seed".

I had a "home computer", Sinclair ZX Spectrum
I think is where I did this, with the BASIC language
and 65535 random decimal fraction numbers,
since those were the possible values of the seed.
I used random numbers to plot points on the screen,
x coordinate and y coordinate, and I got neat stripes
slightly angled from vertical. So that wasn't as "random"
as it could have been.

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 4:41:06 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:

> A sequence of "random numbers" from a
> pseudo-random-number formula ought to be
> unpredictable by examining the output, even when
> you know what the formula is, and a good one is
> unpredictable.

In that case, "good" pseudorandom number generators
are hardly _ever_ used.

> However, if the starting condition
> or "seed" is known, then the output is always the
> same. Randomness is achieved by using a random
> "seed".

> I had a "home computer", Sinclair ZX Spectrum
> I think is where I did this, with the BASIC language
> and 65535 random decimal fraction numbers,
> since those were the possible values of the seed.
> I used random numbers to plot points on the screen,
> x coordinate and y coordinate, and I got neat stripes
> slightly angled from vertical. So that wasn't as "random"
> as it could have been.

Except for having only 65,535 possible seed values,
instead of, say, 4,294,967,296 possible seed values,
that is the sort of thing that is normal and standard for
pseudorandom number generators; typically, linear
congruential RNGs are used, not _even_ MacLaren -
Marsaglia, never mind anything actually cryptosecure,
which is what it would take for a sequence to be
unpredictable by examining the output when the
algorithm is known.

John Savard

[Jack Bohn]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 12:12:15 AM UTC-5, Titus G wrote:

>I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a
> few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without takebacks.
> As an afterthought. That number of games played sharpened the speed and
> appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed into a
> routine. So in theory, does that mean that the sequence of cards in a
> shuffled pack after many, many, iterations would become close to
> predictable?

As Marting Gardner would say paradoxically in his Mathematical Games columns, shuffling is a skill that depends on the clumsiness of the shuffler.

It can be shown that a perfect rifle shuffle -- divide the deck exactly in half, alternate one card from each half -- will return the deck to its original or "seed" configuration after 14 repetitions.

The other shuffle, "overhand," where you hold the deck in one hand and shake the top card into the other repeatedly, would, if perfect, return to the original state if done twice. On first learning that "14 times" thing above, and the subsequent warning that something close to seven shuffles would be best to assure "randomness," I did rifle shuffles of a deck one card at a time and examined the deck's randomness after each. I also came up with a psuedorandom repeatable "realistic" clumsy overhand shuffle: 1. take the top card from the deck, note the number on it, place it at the bottom of the new deck. 2. take off that number of cards from the top, note the number of the bottom card, place them on the new deck. 3. repeat #2 until you can't. This mimics my clumsy shuffle with six or seven shakes of different clumps of cards, but takes quite a lot of repetitions to get the deck away from its original state. As suits don't enter into it, you can divide the deck into red and black with the cards otherwise random and watch how slowly it happens.

--
-Jack

[pete...@gmail.com]

John and others in this thread would do well to read the
Wikipedia articles on "Random Number Generation" and
"Hardware random number generator". Otherwise this is the
ignorant talking to the ignorant.

Donald Knuth famously said "Anyone who considers arithmetical methods
of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin."

Making cryptographically secure random numbers
on a computer is hard. Physical sources of
randomness must be used. This includes stuff like
mouse movements, disk seek times, fun stuff like
lavarand. (Lavarand.com is actually insecure,
since the same bitstream is broadcast to everyone, and
one may assume some people have been recording it since
day one).

There are also electronic methods that produce random data
based on quantum principles, described in the Wiki articles
I listed. You'd think that would solve the problem.

The problem is that physical methods tend to be slow. Data must
be gathered, preferably from multiple sources, mixed together
and whitened to produce an unbiased bit stream.

Since 2011, Intel has included a RDRAND instruction in its processors. This
claims to use a quantum electronic method to produce random numbers.
It is still slow compared to pseudo random number generators.

The question is "Do you trust Intel?". If I was a non-US State actor,
I'd be pretty suspicious. There's reason to believe the USG has messed
with random number generators in software libraries in the past.

pt

[Chris Buckley]

Any modern (<20 years?) implementation from scratch on 32 bit machines
is likely to be fine. It's easier to use the system RNG than roll
your own and those are fine nowadays, assuming the implementation
handles RNG seeds fine, does a reasonable approach to shuffling, and
doesn't do ridiculous things with multi-deck solitaires like shuffle
the decks separately.

The main problem is that some solitaire implementations have been
around for a long time and date back to 16-bit or even 8-bit days.
Code space was a major concern and they had their own RNGs, which were
often poor, yielding obvious patterns in the results which can be
deadly in Spider. In addition, just adapting those implementations for
32 or 64 bit machines or new operating systems may introduce new bugs
or misfeatures. This ranges from reasonably innocuous problems such
as Microsoft Freecell which until very recently (Windows 11?) only had
32K distinct games, because the RNG seed only had 15 bits, to more
serious problems.

In particular with Spider, if you download the Windows 7 version of
Spider to play on a Windows 10 machine (well-known compatibility
packages exist) as I did, you may eventually notice that you're
playing the same deal more than once. There was one particular deal
that I eventually realized was showing up about once every 30 games in
one time period! The problem seemed to come and go but was quite
annoying.

I would expect AisleRiot to be fine. Enough people have looked at
its open-source code over the years.

Chris

[Scott Lurndal]

Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> writes:
>On 1/12/22 04:34, Chris Buckley wrote:
>> On 2022-11-30, WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote:
>snip
>
>> I've played many thousands of Spider games over the years. It's a
>> very well-balanced optimization game - I enjoy it for the same
>> reasons that I enjoyed the Civ games. It may take a while before you
>> win your first game (especially if you don't allow takebacks), but
>> you can push the optimizations to the point where you are winning
>> over a third of your games (with no takebacks).
>>
>> Watch out for poor implementations - those floating around based on
>> the Windows 7 free version have a remarkably poor RNG. I use
>> SolSuite which I like a lot, but it's Windows only.
>
>I don't understand how there can be somewhat predictable, (or
>"remarkably poor"), random numbers as I had always assumed that
>unpredicability was a subset of randomness and that all random number
>sequences were random.

Generating a truely random number is rather difficult. Most random
number generators are "Pseudo Random Number Generators" (PRNG) which
have repeatable sequences, given the same starting point. So
a lot of care goes into selecting a random starting point (seed), which
is very very hard.

There was a paper back in the mid 90's from an SGI engineer where
they used a video camera on a Indy to periodcally snap an image
of a working lava-lamp and generated the seed from that image.

Today, modern processors have a "true" random number generator
that builds an entropy pool from which random seed number can
be selected. But it takes a long time to generate sufficient
entropy to generate a large number of random values, so they
use the true number as a seed to a PRNG such as:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_Twister

[Scott Lurndal]

I liked the pre-computer method with a pencil, closed eyes,
and the random number tables in the CRC math handbook :-)

<snip>

>There are also electronic methods that produce random data
>based on quantum principles, described in the Wiki articles
>I listed. You'd think that would solve the problem.
>
>The problem is that physical methods tend to be slow. Data must
>be gathered, preferably from multiple sources, mixed together
>and whitened to produce an unbiased bit stream.
>
>Since 2011, Intel has included a RDRAND instruction in its processors. This
>claims to use a quantum electronic method to produce random numbers.
>It is still slow compared to pseudo random number generators.

ARM has relatively recently added similar instructions to the
ARMv8 architecture, however they delegate the actual generation
to the SoC vendor who includes the ARMv8 IP in their implementation,
and while I am familiar with how our implementation generates entropy,
I can't make that claim for other vendors using ARM IP.

[pete...@gmail.com]

There's a huge difference between 'Good enough for a Spider solitaire game',
and 'Good enough for secure communications'.

pt

[Scott Lurndal]

Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> writes:
>On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 12:12:15 AM UTC-5, Titus G wrote:
>

>>I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a=20
>> few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without takebacks.=20
>> As an afterthought. That number of games played sharpened the speed and=
>=20
>> appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed into a=20
>> routine. So in theory, does that mean that the sequence of cards in a=20
>> shuffled pack after many, many, iterations would become close to=20
>> predictable?=20
>
>As Marting Gardner would say paradoxically in his Mathematical Games column=

>s, shuffling is a skill that depends on the clumsiness of the shuffler.
>

>It can be shown that a perfect rifle shuffle -- divide the deck exactly in =
>half, alternate one card from each half -- will return the deck to its orig=

>inal or "seed" configuration after 14 repetitions.

I believe that is AKA the "Faro Shuffle" which is used by magicians
to move a specific card to a specific location in the deck with log2
shuffles (carefully selecting which card ends up on top when starting
the shuffle).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faro_shuffle

[Don]

So, in a sense it seems an underhanded overhand plausibly enables a two
timer to trump opponents with ace in the hole. ROTFL.

Danke,

--
Don.......My cat's )\._.,--....,'``. https://crcomp.net/reviews.php
telltale tall tail /, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,. Walk humbly with thy God.
tells tall tales.. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' Make 1984 fiction again.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
news:sW3iL.2762$lzK9...@fx35.iad:

The number of magicians who can do that is very, very small. The
number who can simulate it with slight of hand is much, much
larger.

[Paul S Person]

The wargame /War in Europe/ has had two Computer versions. This is
relevant, by the way.

The first was a DOS version. One of the flaws the second (Windows)
version corrected was that the first saved the last random value from
the previous turn and used it as the seed for the next. This may not
sound too bad, but it meant that /every single result/ was the same if
the turn were replayed.

This was certainly considered a defect in the RNG -- not the generator
itself, but in how it was used.

This made it possible for a player to play it enough to memorize the
results and then vary the order in which the rolls were applied to
optimize his results, leading to "local rules" that actions requiring
a random number would be taken in a defined order. For example, on the
Eastern Front, all combats might have to be resolved in order from
North to South. No shifting the good rolls to one point in the line
and busting it open.

This had its advantages for research: I used this in a solitaire game
to actually /capture Moscow/ and then explore what a game without
Russia would look like. I ended up with two opposing lines of units
stretching from Morocco to Algeria, and going nowhere. IOW, a draw.

[Paul S Person]

I ran into something similar when trying to have my Squeezebox select
the next album randomly. I finally conceptualized it this way:

1) It was using a bucket sort.
2) It was selecting each bucket using a simple RNG that started at the
same bucket each time and then, of course, continued on in the same
order. It disguised this by keeping track of which albums in that
bucket had already been played and playing the first that had not.
3) Every 80 or 90 albums, it stopped working because, despite not
running Windows or DOS and not running on segmented hardware, it still
leaked memory.
4) When it re-started, it restarted at the same bucket and, since the
list of what had already been played was gone, at the same album. So
80-90 of my 726 Albums played every time and the rest were never
heard.

Note: for a while, I randomized the list myself (that is, I used the
ODS randomize function on a copy of the list), each time a made a new
copy after working through the old copy. But, eventually, I realized
that I really wanted a fixed list so I did the work necessary to
produce one that I could live with. It isn't random but the various
musical Genres (Humor, Rock, Harpsichord ... the list goes on) were
mixed together to produce variety.

>I would expect AisleRiot to be fine. Enough people have looked at
>its open-source code over the years.

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Almost no computer random number generators are random -- when people
are speaking more carefully, they call them "pseudorandom". From a
given "seed", a random number generator produces, completely
deterministically, a result and a new seed (in some very early RNGs, the
result was also the new seed).

The original UNIX RNG was notorious for generating alternate even and
odd numbers -- as many, many people discovered when trying to write
trivial coin-flipping games. It was *terrible*.

I would expect Spider under Linux to use the C library RNG, which is just
fine for nearly any purpose -- generating random numbers for games or
simulations, for instance. On the other hand, it isn't nearly good
enough to generate the keys used for secure communications.

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 8:00:13 AM UTC-7, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> Donald Knuth famously said "Anyone who considers arithmetical methods
> of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin."

If he did say that, he was quoting John von Neumann.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 8:00:13 AM UTC-7, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> John and others in this thread would do well to read the
> Wikipedia articles on "Random Number Generation" and
> "Hardware random number generator". Otherwise this is the
> ignorant talking to the ignorant.

I read "Random Number Generators" by Birger Jansson. Does that count?

Of course, that book was written long before the Pentium III came out. It
had a picture of a hardware random number generator on the cover, though.

A set of three icosahedral dice, with the digits 0 through 9 repeated twice
on them, of three different colors.

They were made by the Japanese Bureau of Standards... *since not only
was this book written before the Pentium III came out, it was written before
Dungeons and Dragons was invented*.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

The section "Random number generation" by Jack Moshman
from Volume 2 of Mathematical Methods for Digital
Computers provides a bit more of the quote:

"anyone who consideres arithmetical methods of producing
random digits is, of course, in a state of sin. For, as been
pointed out several times, there is no such thing as a random
number - there are only methods to produce random numbers,
and a strict arithmetic procedure of course is not such a
method."

John Savard

[Titus G]

On 2/12/22 05:12, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
> news:sW3iL.2762$lzK9...@fx35.iad:
>
>> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 12:12:15 AM UTC-5, Titus G
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a=20
>>>> few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without
>>>> takebacks.=20 As an afterthought. That number of games played
>>>> sharpened the speed and=
>>> =20
>>>> appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed
>>>> into a=20 routine. So in theory, does that mean that the
>>>> sequence of cards in a=20 shuffled pack after many, many,
>>>> iterations would become close to=20 predictable?=20

I am guessing that the insertion of the "=20" is a different software
interpretation of a system character perhaps where I have reworded
something or corrected spelling?

>>>
>>> As Marting Gardner would say paradoxically in his Mathematical
>>> Games column= s, shuffling is a skill that depends on the
>>> clumsiness of the shuffler.
>>>
>>> It can be shown that a perfect rifle shuffle -- divide the deck
>>> exactly in = half, alternate one card from each half -- will
>>> return the deck to its orig= inal or "seed" configuration after
>>> 14 repetitions.
>>
>> I believe that is AKA the "Faro Shuffle" which is used by
>> magicians to move a specific card to a specific location in the
>> deck with log2 shuffles (carefully selecting which card ends up
>> on top when starting the shuffle).
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faro_shuffle
>
> The number of magicians who can do that is very, very small. The
> number who can simulate it with slight of hand is much, much
> larger.

The fact that it is possible without slight of hand is fascinating to
me. I doubt whether I could have even split a deck exactly in half!

[Titus G]

On 2/12/22 04:28, Chris Buckley wrote:
> On 2022-12-01, Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

snip

>> I use Linux and see that Spider is in the AisleRiot package. How would I
>> determine which Spider software had a better RNG? Thank you.

snip

Thank you for that interesting detail.

> I would expect AisleRiot to be fine. Enough people have looked at
> its open-source code over the years.
>
> Chris

If I become addicted again, is there a Spider's Anonymous?

[Titus G]

On 2/12/22 04:40, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
snip

Regarding random number generation.

> There's a huge difference between 'Good enough for a Spider solitaire game',
> and 'Good enough for secure communications'.
>

My computing 'career' was ended whilst inter-computer communications
were physical (and I still have arduinos connected to Windows XP :-)) so
that explains my ignorance with regard to standards of RNGs which I have
encountered occasionally but little understood. The only games I have
written were simple class exercises in Pascal using an unknown to me
RNG. This thread has been interesting, thank you and others.

[Titus G]

I was enjoying your post until I followed the link. I was interested to
read its use by Linux and Free Pascal but then volunteered for a full
frontal lobotomy to ease my tired brain.

[Gary R. Schmidt]

[SNIP]
Amusingly, way back when such things were common, it was shown - using
this method - that Unicorns are most active at 4:00AM. :-)

Cheers,
Gary B-)

[Paul S Person]

On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 16:21:25 +1300, Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 2/12/22 05:12, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>> news:sW3iL.2762$lzK9...@fx35.iad:
>>
>>> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 12:12:15 AM UTC-5, Titus G
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a=20
>>>>> few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without
>>>>> takebacks.=20 As an afterthought. That number of games played
>>>>> sharpened the speed and=
>>>> =20
>>>>> appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed
>>>>> into a=20 routine. So in theory, does that mean that the
>>>>> sequence of cards in a=20 shuffled pack after many, many,
>>>>> iterations would become close to=20 predictable?=20
>
>I am guessing that the insertion of the "=20" is a different software
>interpretation of a system character perhaps where I have reworded
>something or corrected spelling?

Bing has problems finding it.

[https://ascii.cl/] suggests that, it the 20 is decimal and ASCII, it
is "DC4". If it is hex and ASCII it is, of course, a space.

However, it is probably something else altogether.

<snippo>

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> writes:

> On 2/12/22 05:12, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>> news:sW3iL.2762$lzK9...@fx35.iad:
>>
>>> Jack Bohn <jack....@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 12:12:15 AM UTC-5, Titus G
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a=20
>>>>> few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without
>>>>> takebacks.=20 As an afterthought. That number of games played
>>>>> sharpened the speed and=
>>>> =20
>>>>> appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed
>>>>> into a=20 routine. So in theory, does that mean that the
>>>>> sequence of cards in a=20 shuffled pack after many, many,
>>>>> iterations would become close to=20 predictable?=20
>
> I am guessing that the insertion of the "=20" is a different software
> interpretation of a system character perhaps where I have reworded
> something or corrected spelling?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quoted-printable

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:tmbqvm$30n3o$1...@dont-email.me:

It's a pretty rare skill - and that it exists at all is at the word
of those who claim to be able to, all of whom are professional
deceivers.

[Titus G]

Thank you.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <c6s9ohpplp7ka6oe6...@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 21:44:24 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>Heydt) wrote:
>
>>In article <3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>,
>>Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>As this refers to Jerry Pournelle, a science-fiction author, it is
>>>slightly on-topic...
>>>
>>>Yes, _that_ Star Wars: the Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>>
>>>Making Russia's (and China's) nuclear arsenals "impotent and
>>>obsolete" would be all very well if we could do it. It would be helpful
>>>to Ukraine and Taiwan.
>>
>>(Hal Heydt)
>>There's a report floating around that the Russians are replacing
>>the warheads in some of their nuclear armed missiles with inert
>>weights (to keep the flight dynamics stable) and using them as
>>decoys in hopes of getting other missiles through Ukraine's air
>>defenses.
>
>That's in keeping with a report suggesting that this means they are
>running out of missiles.
>
>And every missile used as a decoy is a missile that will /not/ be
>useable to deliver a nuke. This is a good thing, BTW.
>
>>Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>>Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>>will to the Ukraine army.
>
>I wonder if that can be treated as a Russian war crime. And those
>responsible who survive long enough to be prosecuted for it. What the
>Russians pretend is an "Army" is nothing of the sort.
>
>Historically, disease has always been the major killer in war.
>
>Just as the pursuit after the enemy breaks and runs has always killed
>more of them than the actually battle.
>
>I hope Putin's replacement has enough sense to pull back into Russia
>(not the various land-grabs, but Russia as defined internationally)
>and sue for terms.

(Hal Heydt)
If some successor to Putin were to pull *all* Russian forces out
of *all* of Ukraine (and--moderately likely--Transnistria, too).
The only other thing they'd really need to agree to would be to
help rebuild the damage they did and open up their records about
who ordered what so that war crimnes trials could be held. The
main thing, tough, is pulling back the the recognized borders.

It is unrealistic to consider having Russia give back either
Karelia or the shift west that was done to Ukraine and Poland.
Not to mention the East Prussia land grab.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <ajs9ohlnoule17ims...@4ax.com>,

Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:14:41 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:

>
>>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>>>In article <3623f41d-9881-49ec...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>As this refers to Jerry Pournelle, a science-fiction author, it is
>>>>slightly on-topic...
>>>>
>>>>Yes, _that_ Star Wars: the Strategic Defense Initiative.
>>>>
>>>>Making Russia's (and China's) nuclear arsenals "impotent and
>>>>obsolete" would be all very well if we could do it. It would be helpful
>>>>to Ukraine and Taiwan.
>>>
>>>(Hal Heydt)
>>>There's a report floating around that the Russians are replacing
>>>the warheads in some of their nuclear armed missiles with inert
>>>weights (to keep the flight dynamics stable) and using them as
>>>decoys in hopes of getting other missiles through Ukraine's air
>>>defenses.
>>>

>>>Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>>>Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>>>will to the Ukraine army.
>>

>>The Russians have been loath to commit their elite troops
>>to the theater[*], for whatever reasons. They're instead sending
>>untrained or poorly-trained conscripts and "volunteer units"
>>and mercenaries. The mercenaries are recruiting from prisons,
>>and many of those recruits fade across the lines and surrender.
>>
>>They've also been running short on uniforms, vests, food,
>>medicines, field hospitals etc.
>
>That tends to happen when the people responsible are more interesting
>in using the money for Swiss bank accounts and super-yachts than for
>such boring things as the items you mention or even on weapons and
>ammunition. Or the factories to produce them, I suspect.
>
>Ukraine might want to consider erecting a bunch of GP Huge tents with
>heaters and putting "Russian soldiers welcome" signs outside. Of
>course, the resulting influx of POWs would have to be handled
>properly.

(Hal Heydt)
Ukraine has set up an "I want to live" hotline for Russian troops
wanting to surrender instead of being fed through the meat
grinder. The major promise that goes with the line is that the
Ukraine is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions and surrendering
Russians will be fed, housed, get medical treatment, and generally
be held in humane conditions.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lgfcohpog6tj373qt...@4ax.com>,

Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:50:56 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
><jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>
>>On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:
>>
>>> Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>>> Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>>> will to the Ukraine army.
>>

>>That isn't a horror. That's good news.
>
>Not really. They are as much victims of Putin as Ukraine is.
>
>But that is a problem for the Russians to resolve. They voted for
>Putin, they liked Putin, the question is -- what do they do now?

(Hal Heydt)
There are now reports that it's the *Russians* that are looking
at suffering from winter weather and a lack of home heating.
Seems they conscripted a lot of the people that were keeping
community heating systems and power distribution working and now
when things break down, there's no on to fix them.

[Robert Carnegie]

It's nice to think so in a way, but let's keep in mind
that the Russian government is not that stupid,
actually.

As for the "how to surrender" phone line, a call shown here
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63782764>
has a not-yet-conscript in Russia saying "I want to become
a citizen of Ukraine." I thought: then you'd be called up
to fight for Ukraine.

[pete...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 11:33:41 AM UTC-5, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 01:22:49 UTC, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > In article <lgfcohpog6tj373qt...@4ax.com>,
> > Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> > >On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:50:56 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
> > ><jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >>On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
> > >>> Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
> > >>> will to the Ukraine army.
> > >>
> > >>That isn't a horror. That's good news.
> > >
> > >Not really. They are as much victims of Putin as Ukraine is.
> > >
> > >But that is a problem for the Russians to resolve. They voted for
> > >Putin, they liked Putin, the question is -- what do they do now?
> >
> > (Hal Heydt)
> > There are now reports that it's the *Russians* that are looking
> > at suffering from winter weather and a lack of home heating.
> > Seems they conscripted a lot of the people that were keeping
> > community heating systems and power distribution working and now
> > when things break down, there's no on to fix them.
> It's nice to think so in a way, but let's keep in mind
> that the Russian government is not that stupid,
> actually.

Here's a detailed assessment of the effects of winter on combat,
and the relative status of both sides in that regard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI3PpsM3NOI

The "Perun" channel has some of the best researched articles
on the war I've found on YT. Strongly recommended.

Pt

[Quadibloc]

On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 9:33:41 AM UTC-7, Robert Carnegie wrote:

> On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 01:22:49 UTC, Hal Heydt wrote:

> > There are now reports that it's the *Russians* that are looking
> > at suffering from winter weather and a lack of home heating.
> > Seems they conscripted a lot of the people that were keeping
> > community heating systems and power distribution working and now
> > when things break down, there's no on to fix them.

> It's nice to think so in a way, but let's keep in mind
> that the Russian government is not that stupid,
> actually.

I will agree that Russians are unlikely to be suffering from
damage to their residences due to having no electricity to
heat them with to the same extent as Ukrainians.

However, this is partly due to the fact that houses in
Russia are likely, like houses in Alberta, to be heated with
natural gas instead of electricity, and for much the same
reason. As well, rocket and missile attacks on utility
facilities are an order of magnitude more serious than
personnel shortages - Russia can find octogenarians who
used to work in power plants to fill in, for example.

I agree that the Russian government is not so stupid as
to fail to take care of... essentials. However, in *this* case,
I don't think that "not that stupid" applies, since as under
the Soviets, amenities for the civilian population are *not*
one of the priority items the government values. Therefore,
it _is_ "stupid" enough to let _them_ fall into desuetude.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 3:34:25 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 8:00:13 AM UTC-7, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> > John and others in this thread would do well to read the
> > Wikipedia articles on "Random Number Generation" and
> > "Hardware random number generator". Otherwise this is the
> > ignorant talking to the ignorant.

> I read "Random Number Generators" by Birger Jansson. Does that count?

As my AbeBooks order has now been confirmed, I am now
at liberty to disclose that I have this thread to thank for inspiring
me to look, once again, on AbeBooks, for a copy of Random Number
Generators by Birger Jansson, and this time, I found one, and have
ordered it, having considered it an excellent book which I would
very much like to have in my collection.

John Savard

[Paul S Person]

On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 08:33:39 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie
<rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 01:22:49 UTC, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <lgfcohpog6tj373qt...@4ax.com>,
>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> >On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:50:56 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
>> ><jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>> >>> Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>> >>> will to the Ukraine army.
>> >>
>> >>That isn't a horror. That's good news.
>> >
>> >Not really. They are as much victims of Putin as Ukraine is.
>> >
>> >But that is a problem for the Russians to resolve. They voted for
>> >Putin, they liked Putin, the question is -- what do they do now?
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> There are now reports that it's the *Russians* that are looking
>> at suffering from winter weather and a lack of home heating.
>> Seems they conscripted a lot of the people that were keeping
>> community heating systems and power distribution working and now
>> when things break down, there's no on to fix them.
>
>It's nice to think so in a way, but let's keep in mind
>that the Russian government is not that stupid,
>actually.

If you say so.

I would say that keeping Putin in power is, at this point, pretty
stupid.

>As for the "how to surrender" phone line, a call shown here
><https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63782764>
>has a not-yet-conscript in Russia saying "I want to become
>a citizen of Ukraine." I thought: then you'd be called up
>to fight for Ukraine.

Which may be exactly what he wants.

[pete...@gmail.com]

There is a 'Freedom of Russia Legion' of Russians fighting
on the Ukrainian side.

Sometimes things get weird:

https://sofrep.com/news/meet-the-russian-fighters-from-the-freedom-of-russia-legion-fighting-for-ukraine/

pt

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <tm9d3b$2o7n5$1...@dont-email.me>, Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On 1/12/22 04:34, Chris Buckley wrote:
>> On 2022-11-30, WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote:
>snip
>
>> I've played many thousands of Spider games over the years. It's a
>> very well-balanced optimization game - I enjoy it for the same
>> reasons that I enjoyed the Civ games. It may take a while before you
>> win your first game (especially if you don't allow takebacks), but
>> you can push the optimizations to the point where you are winning
>> over a third of your games (with no takebacks).
>>
>> Watch out for poor implementations - those floating around based on
>> the Windows 7 free version have a remarkably poor RNG. I use
>> SolSuite which I like a lot, but it's Windows only.
>
>I don't understand how there can be somewhat predictable, (or
>"remarkably poor"), random numbers as I had always assumed that
>unpredicability was a subset of randomness and that all random number

>sequences were random. I am not a gamer but some decades ago wore out a

>few packs of plastic playing cards playing Spider without takebacks.

>As an afterthought. That number of games played sharpened the speed and

>appearance of my shuffling skills which probably developed into a

>routine. So in theory, does that mean that the sequence of cards in a

>shuffled pack after many, many, iterations would become close to

>predictable?

>I use Linux and see that Spider is in the AisleRiot package. How would I
>determine which Spider software had a better RNG? Thank you.

(Hal Heydt)
Without something to generate a truly random seed, computers only
generate "pseudorandom" numbers.

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 12/5/2022 9:15 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 08:33:39 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> It's nice to think so in a way, but let's keep in mind
>> that the Russian government is not that stupid,
>> actually.
>
> If you say so.
>
> I would say that keeping Putin in power is, at this point, pretty
> stupid.
>

Not for Putin and he IS the government.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 11:44:06 AM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:

> Without something to generate a truly random seed, computers only
> generate "pseudorandom" numbers.

If one generates multiple "random" numbers from one number that is
the seed, all those numbers are pseudo-random, even _if_ the seed is
truly random.

And, indeed, that's usually what happens; a tiny little bit of "true" randomness
is used for the seed, by, at the least, using the time of day to create it.

John Savard

[pete...@gmail.com]

Let's just say that some applications get a *lot* more serious about it.

Pt

[Quadibloc]

I'm well aware that applications with a _cryptographic_ purpose will make use
of a random number generator, if available, to ensure that every single bit
of a private key produced for public-key cryptography - _and_ the session key
sent as plaintext within it - will be truly random.

And, on much older computers, techniques like using the time of day in
milliseconds for each of a sequence of keystrokes might be used.

But typically, pseudo-random numbers are all there is, and that works for
statistical sampling or games.

And if one wants very high quality pseudo-random numbers, one can use
techiques which, although simpler and speedier, attempt to imitate some
aspects of cryptographic operations.

John Savard

[Paul S Person]

On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 02:40:48 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>

wrote:

>On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 9:51:56 PM UTC-7, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 8:42:08 PM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
>> > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 11:44:06 AM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:
>> >
>> > > Without something to generate a truly random seed, computers only
>> > > generate "pseudorandom" numbers.
>
>> > If one generates multiple "random" numbers from one number that is
>> > the seed, all those numbers are pseudo-random, even _if_ the seed is
>> > truly random.
>
>> > And, indeed, that's usually what happens; a tiny little bit of "true" randomness
>> > is used for the seed, by, at the least, using the time of day to create it.
>
>> Let's just say that some applications get a *lot* more serious about it.
>
>I'm well aware that applications with a _cryptographic_ purpose will make use
>of a random number generator, if available, to ensure that every single bit
>of a private key produced for public-key cryptography - _and_ the session key
>sent as plaintext within it - will be truly random.
>
>And, on much older computers, techniques like using the time of day in
>milliseconds for each of a sequence of keystrokes might be used.
>
>But typically, pseudo-random numbers are all there is, and that works for
>statistical sampling or games.

For games, what matters isn't so much that the numbers be /random/ as
that they be /unpredictable/ -- at least, unless you actually list all
of them in order and use the list to predict what's next.

This is both easy and difficult: easy if you happen to know what the
algorithm being used is, difficult if all you are are results because
(for most games) you have only 6 results (yes, some have 12 or 20) and
may have 64K "random" results. This is because many different "random"
results can produce the same game result.

Well, as long as the game doesn't do something stupid, like start each
turn each time it is replayed with the same seed.

>And if one wants very high quality pseudo-random numbers, one can use
>techiques which, although simpler and speedier, attempt to imitate some
>aspects of cryptographic operations.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <14e897cb-b4fd-45dd...@googlegroups.com>,

Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 01:22:49 UTC, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <lgfcohpog6tj373qt...@4ax.com>,
>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> >On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:50:56 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
>> ><jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Heydt wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>> >>> Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>> >>> will to the Ukraine army.
>> >>
>> >>That isn't a horror. That's good news.
>> >
>> >Not really. They are as much victims of Putin as Ukraine is.
>> >
>> >But that is a problem for the Russians to resolve. They voted for
>> >Putin, they liked Putin, the question is -- what do they do now?
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> There are now reports that it's the *Russians* that are looking
>> at suffering from winter weather and a lack of home heating.
>> Seems they conscripted a lot of the people that were keeping
>> community heating systems and power distribution working and now
>> when things break down, there's no on to fix them.
>
>It's nice to think so in a way, but let's keep in mind
>that the Russian government is not that stupid,
>actually.

(Hal Heydt)
You'd think so, wouldn't you? Given everything else going on in
the war, I'm not at all sure the local parts of the Russian
government would think that through.

[Paul S Person]

On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 04:47:56 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
wrote:

Or have the authority to do anything about it.

Or even any say at all in who was to be enslaved.

That's what these guys are, BTW: slaves.

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 3:25:13 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 8:00:13 AM UTC-7, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> > Donald Knuth famously said "Anyone who considers arithmetical methods
> > of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin."

> If he did say that, he was quoting John von Neumann.

I finally found a citation of the original source.

As it's a U.S. government publication, here it is:

https://www.google.ca/books/edition/Monte_Carlo_Method/9BuFsa0J9SIC

to read or download as a PDF. Page 36.

John Savard

[The Horny Goat]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 08:08:48 -0500, WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com>
wrote:

>> I'm guessing you're not a gamer. I lost my previous video card at the height
>> of the crypto craze and ended up having to pay $769 for a comparable
>> replacement. While I personally wouldn't sink $1500 into a card I can easily
>> see serious gamers doing it (the really serious ones would probably go dual).
>> I'm still running on dual 1080p monitors, so I'm definitely not in the
>> "serious gamer" category.

Not sure what you'd call me. Dual 27" 1080p monitors running on a
Geforce 2080ti video card - there's a third monitor port on this card
I'm not using. This machine mostly gets used for this, Youtube, email,
Civ 6 and a couple of video games (the multiplayer type)

Probably a niftier card than I need for that but when you get a gift
horse like the deal I got on that card you grab it with both hands.
Even for a 3 year old card it's pretty durned good

[The Horny Goat]

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:39:45 -0800, Paul S Person
<pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>>Or, if you want a real horror... There is an estimate that
>>Russia will lose more troops this winter to hypothermia than they
>>will to the Ukraine army.
>

>I wonder if that can be treated as a Russian war crime. And those
>responsible who survive long enough to be prosecuted for it. What the
>Russians pretend is an "Army" is nothing of the sort.

Why? In WW2 Russia took more losses than the Germans all the way from
June 1941 - Jan 1945. It was only in Feb 1945 (e.g. 3 months before
the Red Army took Berlin) that German losses were higher than the Red
Army's.

[The Horny Goat]

On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 20:49:21 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
wrote:

>It is unrealistic to consider having Russia give back either
>Karelia or the shift west that was done to Ukraine and Poland.
>Not to mention the East Prussia land grab.

What would Zelenski do with Karelia?

(Yes I do know where that is - or for that matter Russia's part of
East Prussia)

Trade them for substantial reparations perhaps.....

[Quadibloc]

On Saturday, December 24, 2022 at 11:37:32 PM UTC-7, The Horny Goat wrote:

> What would Zelenski do with Karelia?

Nothing at all. Giving back Karelia doesn't involve giving it to
Ukraine, because it was never taken from Ukraine. It would be
given back to Finland.

John Savard

[Paul S Person]

On Sat, 24 Dec 2022 22:35:40 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
wrote:

The Army /you/ cite had things this "Army" lacks:

It lacks training.

It lacks equipment.

It lacks discipline.

It lacks morale.

It lacks leadership. From Putin on down.

Without discipline, it is merely a mob. In this case, a mob that may
be armed but which was never trained to use those weapons.
("Equipment" above mostly refers to proper clothing for the
environment and not to personal weapons, although stocks of missiles
and other higher-level weapons appear to be being depleted and so are
lacking.)

Without morale, it will accomplish nothing. Except, perhaps,
surrender, if it can manage to do that while freezing to death.

There was an earlier pattern of entire units surrendering without
being forced to do so. This showed that unit cohesion, at least, was
present.

But whether the freezing untrained draftees have unit cohesion may be
another story.

[Hamish Laws]

On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 2:18:05 AM UTC+11, rksh...@rosettacondot.com wrote:
> WolfFan <akwo...@zoho.com> wrote:
> >
> > Of course, if idiots wouldn’t pay $1500 for a video card, none of this
> > would matter.

How much do you spend on books a year?
If people want a high-end graphics card because they enjoy playing games that's their business.

>> The video card in my main Windows box cost $150.

And that would go terribly playing modern games.

>>The entire box
> > that I’m typing this on right now cost $1200, including upgrading the RAM,
> > and Apple stuff is supposed to be expensive. There is no way that I’d spend
> > $1500 on a video card. Ain’t happening... unless it’s a _pro_ video card,
> > to do actual work which makes actual money.

Which is fine for you, it won't work for people who want to play games.

>> Note that crypto Ponzi crap

Learn what a ponzi scheme actually is.

> I'm guessing you're not a gamer. I lost my previous video card at the height
> of the crypto craze and ended up having to pay $769 for a comparable
> replacement. While I personally wouldn't sink $1500 into a card I can easily
> see serious gamers doing it (the really serious ones would probably go dual).

Nah, very few games support dual graphics cards anymore

> I'm still running on dual 1080p monitors, so I'm definitely not in the
> "serious gamer" category.

Most people are gaming at "2K" resolution now, 4K is generally not seen as worthwhile but the top end NVidia cards will do it impressively if people want to - with live raytracing

> In a lot of ways it's like audio. My audiophile friends sink more into
> individual speakers than I have invested in all of my A/V equipment combined.
>
So long as they aren't paying ludicrous amounts for some of the cabling

[Quadibloc]

On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 2:21:00 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:

> Making Russia's (and China's) nuclear arsenals "impotent and
> obsolete" would be all very well if we could do it. It would be helpful
> to Ukraine and Taiwan.

Apparently there may be an easier way to bring Vladimir Putin
to justice.

We just have to pray that someday he will forget to recycle his
pizza boxes.

(Andrew Tate and Greta Thunberg, in case you're wondering about
the reference.)

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, December 1, 2022 at 4:17:33 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:

> The section "Random number generation" by Jack Moshman
> from Volume 2 of Mathematical Methods for Digital
> Computers provides a bit more of the quote:

> "anyone who consideres arithmetical methods of producing
> random digits is, of course, in a state of sin. For, as has been
> pointed out several times, there is no such thing as a random
> number - there are only methods to produce random numbers,
> and a strict arithmetic procedure of course is not such a
> method."

And here

https://dilbert.com/strip/2001-10-25

is a Dilbert comic strip that addresses this profound philosophical
question!!!

John Savard