raddevus wrote: I am still very curious if a 64 bit app can eat all of the memory on a large server (64GB RAM or something larger). I'm guessing that it cannot since 1. I believe that any app cannot allocate RAM beyond its address space. If you by 'address space' refer to the entire 2**64 bytes space that a 64 bit process can cover by its addresses, 16 exbi bytes (more than 16 million gigabytes), your assumption is right: A process cannot allocate that much space. And we will never see a computer with 16 exbi bytes of RAM. Never ever. In no general machine (excluding e.g. embedded processors) of the last 30-40 years has the address indicated by the program code been used directly as the physical RAM address. The virtual address in the program is translated to a different physical address in RAM through a set of hardware translation tables, managed by the OS, called the Memory Management System (MMS). Each process has its own set of MMS tables. The OS sets up the MMS tables for a tiny slice of the virtual address space. If the program presents a virtual address within this slice, the range covered by the MMS tables for that process, it is translated to a physical RAM address. If the virtual address is outside the range covered by the MMS tables, an interrupt is generated, and the OS will terminate the process. (Well, it might offer a mechanism for reporting the interrupt e.g. to a debugger that can inspect the process state before it is cleaned out.) If you by 'its address space' refer to just that slice of the total 64 bit virtual address space for which the OS has set up translation tables, then you are essentially right. The size of this slice can be a few hundred kiB, a few GiB, or many GiB - but the OS will not give you more than it is capable of handling. When an app allocates RAM, the allocated space is, at the outset, within the address space translated by its MMS tables. If the malloc/new/... maps down to an OS request, the OS may say: 'There isn't enough unused space in the already mapped virtual address space, so I have to add another entry to the mapping tables, expanding the address space available to that process'. Before the OS does that, it will check that the process does not already control an excessive amount of address space. The limit is set by the OS to any value that it can handle. In many systems, malloc/new/... starts out as a call to a runtime library in the process address space. As long

I have to disagree here. In every online page navigation UI I've ever seen, "next" takes you to the "next page", not the "next set of page numbers". And I imagine that going from page 1 to page 2 is far more common than wanting to jump from page 1 directly to page 11. As for the "redundancy": yes, you could find the specific page you're on, find the link to the next page number, and click on that. But that takes more effort than just clicking on the "next" link. :) "These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

Oh, don't worry. I'm left wanting in several topics. :) Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

I was playing with XNA a long time ago and was doing a space thing where multiple transparent images of stars would be stacked to do parallax. The images were screen sized. They would wrap the screen so if the focal point (player) went a pixel left, the far right column of pixels would wrap to the left. This gets more complicated on diagonals. I had to grab a ruler and mark up a physical sheet of paper to work out the code for how to cut the rectangles and glue them back together in real time so that one image could be infinitely scrolled any direction.

Quote: Researchers question Microsoft Copilot and ChatGPT smarts as AI champs do well with "memorization rather than true reasoning abilities" If they stopped using the "intelligence" term... maybe there wouldn't be such "SURPRISE!!!" (a.k.a. DO'H) moments. M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

I had a surreal snow driving experience one time. Driving on probably 20cm of packed snow on a four lane highway. It felt like driving in an open field. The highway was fine. The exits/sorties were the scary part; you had to interpolate between support columns. People were driving at a glacial speed. Even the locals all stayed home for that, it was just the crazy tourists on the roads. Not sure how an automated car would proceed.

Dawn/dusk - Autonomous vehicles need sunglasses and clean sensors. These are the two biggest problems when the sun is low in the sky. I suspect Tesla's FSD, which is the only non-geofenced system on the road today, would pass the driving test in most jurisdictions.

I've definitely interacted with an LLM driven helper chat bot, maybe a few of them, just in the last month or two. Amongst other stuff... I've had to talk to Amazon about subscriptions and refunds, ISPs about new service provision, and an insurer about benefits/coverage details and in/out of network providers. The biggest indicators for me were near-perfect spelling and grammar along with not being able to help without transferring me to a person. I don't think 80% of people would have noticed. In one instance I'm pretty sure the service provider was aiding the subterfuge by giving the chatbot an Indian name. I found that a little bit humorous. "No you are not talking to a robot! You're talking to a support agent in another country to whom we've outsourced our support staff." But all of them worked more or less flawlessly and were at most only 1/2 as frustrating as the phone systems where you have to repeatedly press buttons or keep saying agent, person, real person, live agent, etc to get a warm body.

Ah, so AI will actually be talking to intelligence (at least by it's definition).

Supposedly it's Steve Jobs' voice (hence the apple)... Telegraph marker posts ... nothing to do with IT Phasmid email discussion group ... also nothing to do with IT Beekeeping and honey site ... still nothing to do with IT

And so it begins...

That dates us!

Greg Utas wrote: because 80% of the calls to the help desk are from idiots. That might be low. My most memorable experience as someone trying to help ... Customer cussed me out after I explained he would need to turn on the computer with the switch on the side of the box. Not because he hadn't turned it on but rather because he thought it should not have an on/off button.

It's fairly typical for cities in Florida platted in the 60's to 70's. A lot of the lots were bought site unseen by 'northerners'. In contrast, coming to SWFL from front range Colorado prairie, our 12k lot here can turn into a mini-jungle in 6 months :)

Quote: So in the above with a self driving care no person can be at fault. Because they were not driving. I think this is maybe true, but still a big assumption and all of that just hasn't been sorted out yet (liabilities). There were autonomous "R/C" aircraft 25 years ago. Yeah really. The "R/C" is and is not a misnomer. Some of them, maybe even most, you could "take over" just like a Tesla/autopilot sort of works. Not so strange we'd nail it down in the air first. There's less pedestrians to hit up there. But liabilities? They always fell on the flier/owner. It didn't matter they didn't write or create the control software or if they'd built their whole setup from a single off-the-shelf kit or some kind of "kit bashing" or what. I hear where you seem to be going is that there's a sort of DDoS attack using liability lawsuits that suddenly inundates the creators with financial obligations. Just because you can sue, and probably would, if you lost someone close to you in an accident maybe? That definitely doesn't mean anyone is going to be found at fault and owing anything at all. "Stuff" does happen and people grok that. Also though, there's a flip side to this whole coin and that's how many of these such accidents do not even happen at all anymore because automated systems start kicking humans' butts at "paying attention" and "not being screwed up behind the wheel" or "trying to text". (They may be already... devil in the details sort of question) In short, self-driving is not going to die at all. We're already at a point with tech and affordability/accessibility that anyone can DIY this stuff "easily". Where "easily" is talking about the barrier to entry, especially if we concede that doing it on the scale of a little R/C car is really almost as relevant sensor/software/tech wise and bits of doing such a thing can near directly translate over to "real cars". So what I see is not really FOSS, per se, just the fact that tons of hobbyists can and will make contributions here in the form of "crowd sourced" ingenuity that finds its way back in the hands of "the big guys" (corps like Tesla). Now talking Tesla specifically in all this context? Maybe it does effectively "get killed" for them because Elon is just too reckless about many many things. But for the world/country? Nah.