S.o.s!!

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

While we are on the topic of "non-challenges" from the computer science perspective, I think this article is definitely worth a look: Quantum chip rides on superconducting bus. I just can't help but wonder how much of an algorithmic non-challenge it's going to be to go from thinking in terms of "1 or 0" to also be thinking in terms of "1 and 0" when dealing with these qubits.

[karoaper]

Re: S.o.s!!

Sorry for the delay in my response.
I think there's a bit of a confusion about what is meant by an algorithm. I meant it not in terms of a software construction or program code, but in terms of providing solutions to complex (mostly) mathematical problems.

Certainly software construction has its own set of challenges, which I think are more in the domain of engineering, such as scalability, testing, cost, etc. The algorithms I was talking about deal with such challenges as reducing memory and time complexity, reducing computational errors due to scale issues, etc.

[Siamanto]

Re: S.o.s!!

now, we can consider the optimization problems that you have described. A couple of preliminary comments/questions:

1. From a CS/IT perspective, I see both problems as similar and whatever I say about one applies to both or any other constraints based optimization problem - regardless of the application domain

2. Considering the two most important phases of such an "optimization project" i.e.
2.1 Design of the Mathematical Model and all relevant heuristics
2.2 Implementation - i.e. coding - of the outcome of the design phase
Was the scope of your question the design phase, the implementation or both?

The following may not be polished enough but it's good enough for our purposes; in any case, is a good starting point.

Design Phase
There may be a different way of organizing the activities of the Design Phase; but, the following seems appropriate enough for our purposes:
1. Design of the Mathematical Model and all relevant heuristics, simplifications...
2. Design issues relevant to the implementation of the output of Task 1
(Of course, depending on the CS/IT culture and/or considering the relative simplicity of the system, some may either skip or include those activities as part of the Implementation Phase.)

The activities of Task1 can be ignored because they are of no relevance to CS/IT and are Mathematical in nature.

The relevant questions that Task2 should answer are
1. Based on the specifications, how configurable and reusable should be the solution - i.e. as reusable as a product or should it be highly customized to the specific application?
In our case, the answer to the above would influence the following
1.1 Should the system leverage a database to store the characteristics of the elements - i.e. boxes, transistors, area etc. - or a more basic solution should be considered?
1.2 Should the system be configurable enough and leverage a Rules Engine to implement - partially or not - the Mathematical model and Heuristics; or should it simply hard code them?

2. Considering that it should scale to millions or billions of elements
2.1 How the different computations should be parallelized i.e. more or less design a parallel version of the sequential steps using well known techniques such as pipelining, partitioning etc. At least the specify the principles and approach
2.2 What parallel/distributed computing platform should be used i.e. Grid, cluster...
2.3 What supporting technologies should be leverage/used i.e. messaging, Agents...

3. What existing components/technologies should be leveraged - when possible - or should in house development be prefered?


The answer to 1 depends - besides the CS/IT culture of the designers - on the budget, resources, the goals and Use Cases. Unless the goal is to create a reusable, configurable and extensible product - and I don't think it's the case here, because it's an application - the simplicity of the solution will probably be preferred and determine the answer i.e. no fancy data repository or Rules Engine.
In both cases, it is of no particular challenge from a CS/IT perspective as they are well known and understood activities.

The answer to 3 mainly depends on culture and my answer is "always??:" leverage existing components - Open Source or commercial.
Again, I don't see any challenge as
1. Product/tool/component evaluation has been simplified because of compliance to standards and, in each tool space or for each standard, their exist well known implementations. Also, their exists readily available evaluations either by analysts - i.e. The Gartner Group, Forrester Research etc. - or other specialists
2. The architecture of the system is quite simple in this case

The answer to 2 is mainly technical in nature, and if the answer to 3 is to leverage existing components, it would not be considered a CS/IT challenge.


Implementation Phase
Considering the simplicity of the system, the implementation/coding should be relatively straightforward and would not be considered a challenge, from a CS/IT perspective, when it leverages already existing components and libraries, Similar, computationally intensive but architecturally simple, parallel computing systems have been built for many decades; however, in the past, the necessary supporting technologies/components - or the "plumbing" - was not readily available and had to be developed in house.
The main difficulty, for the average developer, would be to troubleshoot a concurrent system.

Did I miss anything that would be a CS/IT challenge?

[Siamanto]

Re: S.o.s!!

It's pointless to keep on opening new subjects when already open ones remain unanswered... As I have promised, I'll address the new ones once the already open ones are closed.

You always wanted to be given the chance to prove yourself - i.e. your silly "contest" or whatever, so here's the opportunity. Instead of conveniently hiding, why don't you?
1- Functionally specify the problem
2- Describe a solution: architecture and technology
3- Show that the challenge is algorithmic in nature

Siamanto, I really don't think I am capable of answering your questions.

Thank you for being honest, honesty adds clarity, transparency and trust to the interaction and promotes respect; now, we can consider the optimization problems that you have described. A couple of preliminary comments/questions:

1. From a CS/IT perspective, I see both problems as similar and whatever I say about one applies to both or any other constraints based optimization problem - regardless of the application domain

2. Considering the two most important phases of such an "optimization project" i.e.
2.1 Design of the Mathematical Model and all relevant heuristics
2.2 Implementation - i.e. coding - of the outcome of the design phase
Was the scope of your question the design phase, the implementation or both?

Also, sorry about all the bad stuff I have said about you and I hope you will forgive me one day.

I have nothing to forgive to anybody - it's not how I function; if someone "pushes" me - or pushes it - than I push the person back; otherwise, I do my best to respect the person. In other words, it's up to you, not up to me.

When walking on a sidewalk, I stop to give a frightened pigeon, running away from a rushing passerby, the priority; however, I may confront a person who seems to be pushing or being dishonest with or taking advantage of or manipulate me or, in some cases, others - no matter how "powerful" the person seems. I'm very comfortable with myself.

In any case, to be honest, I ignore the details when your monologue is too irrelevant to my post, and my self-image does not depend on what some may perceive me or tell me.

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

Siamanto, I really don't think I am capable of answering your questions. Also, sorry about all the bad stuff I have said about you and I hope you will forgive me one day.

[Siamanto]

Re: S.o.s!!

as far as my "IT" profile, I have NEVER claimed to be an "IT" guy....


I am NOT an IT guy ... thus, I don't have to demonstrate my IT knowledge as I don't claim to have any real IT knowledge.

For the record: I have added the "IT" to simply indicate that it was about your technical/professional profile - not as a person - and, when it comes to profiles, "IT profile" or "CS profile" are not distinguished - though, unusually, some may.

In any case, you sound so funny considering that you, so confidently and arrogantly, made such pretentious statements about IT systems/problems such as search engines, mail spam filters etc.

You are the one that claims you are some sort of CS expert yet even the most basic CS concepts seem to be quite troubling to you.

Are you referring to conversations that you had within yourself? Otherwise, why don't you quote a text that shows that "even the most basic CS concepts seem to be quite troubling to" me?

Just being funny or another stupid and unfounded claim of yours...just like the one about search engines?

Siamanto, you seem to be REALLY confused about the differences of "CS" and "IT".

You should stop having conversations within yourself. Just curious, how did you come to that conclusion? Can you quote a text that shows it?

You're funny! We're done with IT, so, just curious, are you a CS specialist - or an "CS guy" as you say? Just curious, as you see it, what would be the difference between an "IT specialist" and a "CS specialist?"

I have answered your question. I have put forth a specific algorithmic question and you are again trying to avoid answering whether it is in fact a challenge or not ...

You're getting funnier! So, "putting forth a specific algorithmic question" that is totally unrelated to search engines, mail spam filters etc. is an "answer????" to my question that asked you to show how the challenges of those IT systems - i.e. search engines, mail spam filters etc. - are algorithmic in nature?

So jumping to another subject is answering a question?

You keep on amazing me and I really would like to see what happens in your mind????

either you don't know and don't want to admit it, or you know damn well you are wrong (as usual - how many times has it been now?) and don't want to admit it.

It's amazing how you repeatedly ask questions when they were already answered several times; I'll simply copy and paste, wondering after how many minutes I'll have to do the same?

It's pointless to keep on opening new subjects when already open ones remain unanswered; apparently, that's your way of conveniently running away and/or hiding. As I have promised, I'll address the new ones once the already open ones are closed.

You always wanted to be given the chance to prove yourself - i.e. your silly "contest" or whatever, so here's the opportunity. Instead of conveniently hiding, why don't you?
1- Functionally specify the problem
2- Describe a solution: architecture and technology
3- Show that the challenge is algorithmic in nature

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

Wow I see a nice edit job on the post above ... so maybe I should say your original rambling answered my question ... as far as my "IT" profile, I have NEVER claimed to be an "IT" guy. You are the one that claims you are some sort of CS expert yet even the most basic CS concepts seem to be quite troubling to you.

I am NOT an IT guy ... thus, I don't have to demonstrate my IT knowledge as I don't claim to have any real IT knowledge.

Siamanto, you seem to be REALLY confused about the differences of "CS" and "IT". I have answered your question. I have put forth a specific algorithmic question and you are again trying to avoid answering whether it is in fact a challenge or not ... either you don't know and don't want to admit it, or you know damn well you are wrong (as usual - how many times has it been now?) and don't want to admit it.

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

I guess that answered my question.

[Siamanto]

Re: S.o.s!!

I am starting to see where the problem is here. You don't seem to have even understood the question I have posed you above. I think the problem is you have severely misrepresented how much you actually know about algorithms and computer science in general. I apologize if my questions haven't made much sense to you but they were only posted at the level which you seemed to indicate you would understand. After all, you have been making fun of CS grad students and their capabilities so I took that as the base line of where you see yourself.

Would a more detailed spec of just the rectangle packing problem be something you might like to address? I realize the overall chip design algorithm might be a bit much

Now this is a serious question just so that I know at what level I should keep the discussions ... Siamanto, are you familiar with the concept of NP Completeness?

Still running away and hiding behind new subjects just because you don't have the courage to admit and/or realize that the IT challenge of a search engine is not of algorithmic nature, and lack the knowledge and skills to show that it is.
It's pointless to keep on opening new subjects when already open ones remain unanswered; apparently, that's your way of conveniently running away and/or hiding. As I have repeated many times, I'll address the new ones once the already open ones are closed.

You always wanted to be given the chance to prove yourself - i.e. your silly "contest" or whatever, so here's the opportunity. Instead of conveniently hiding, why don't you?
1- Functionally specify the problem
2- Describe a solution: architecture and technology
3- Show that the challenge is algorithmic in nature

Also, the absurd and ridiculous argument - or maybe, excuse - that it "can get quite confusing about where the 'enterprise infrastructure' stops and where the 'search algorithm' begins" can only mean one thing: you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about - that probably explains why you find it confusing.

Running away will not help you. All you have achieved - your examples, arguments etc. - simply confirms your IT profile, as I see it.

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

I am starting to see where the problem is here. You don't seem to have even understood the question I have posed you above. I think the problem is you have severely misrepresented how much you actually know about algorithms and computer science in general. I apologize if my questions haven't made much sense to you but they were only posted at the level which you seemed to indicate you would understand. After all, you have been making fun of CS grad students and their capabilities so I took that as the base line of where you see yourself.

Would a more detailed spec of just the rectangle packing problem be something you might like to address? I realize the overall chip design algorithm might be a bit much

Now this is a serious question just so that I know at what level I should keep the discussions ... Siamanto, are you familiar with the concept of NP Completeness?