Can extra processing threads help in this case?
in [MFC]
|
From: Hector Santos on 26 Mar 2010 00:04 Hence +the problem with the Patent System - even morons can get one. It wouldn't be all a slap in the face if we knew that you were some great inventor and programmer, someone to be admire. But you're not and worst, you have to hang around here not even trying to show you have some reasonable amount of intelligence. I mean, its like you know it but don't care. Really, you are so bad at this that everything seems new to you. The world was started just yesterday in your mind and just when you think you believe you got a "Ah Ha" a flash of genius, in your mind, you believe it must be novel hence patentable. The only reason I even bother to this extent was to show really just to much of a primitive application you have, to show how simple this all is, all trivial, all prior intelligence, in the hope you will gain some humility that you really aren't that smart. I really do not like people like you, not because you are what you are, there are plenty like you, but you have no ethics and come into these forums trolling for ideas and threw it in our face like its nothing. The only sanity in all this is knowing you couldn't enforce anything you think you have generated from other people's work. You're not going to get anything done because you don't have the capacity to do so. You haven't yet in what 2-3 years? What makes you think you get anything in the next 11 years? Later Peter Olcott wrote: > "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message > news:eP3%2304IzKHA.5940(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> Of course, the real ultimate question is if you will >> finished by the time your patent expires. > > The latest improvements would likely qualify for another > patent, thus extending the term, plus there is a whole other > invention of using this technology to provide an easy to use > universal graphical user interface scripting language. > -- HLS
From: Peter Olcott on 26 Mar 2010 00:42 "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:u2uv2lJzKHA.5940(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Hence +the problem with the Patent System - even morons > can get one. > > It wouldn't be all a slap in the face if we knew that you > were some great inventor and programmer, someone to be > admire. But you're not and worst, you have to hang around > here not even trying to show you have some reasonable > amount of intelligence. I mean, its like you know it but > don't care. Really, you are so bad at this that > everything seems new to you. The world was started just > yesterday in your mind and just when you think you believe > you got a "Ah Ha" a flash of genius, in your mind, you > believe it must be novel hence patentable. > > The only reason I even bother to this extent was to show > really just to much of a primitive application you have, > to show how simple this all is, all trivial, all prior > intelligence, in the hope you will gain some humility that > you really aren't that smart. I was number one in several of my classes of fifty students even beating three students that were instructors of other classes and taking this advanced operating systems class on their way to a PhD. I graduated in the top 15% of my class. My IQ is borderline genius, the same IQ as the average MD. Any perception that you have to the contrary is a misperception. Ah but, then you already know that. > > I really do not like people like you, not because you are > what you are, there are plenty like you, but you have no > ethics and come into these forums trolling for ideas and > threw it in our face like its nothing. I don't see it as throwing it in your face when I ask you (or Joe) to prove your point. I diligently seek the truth. perhaps most people that are not convinced by free advice simply drop it and move on. Since I am a diligent seeker of the truth I wanted to press on and find it. You and Joe did give me some excellent help, and I really appreciate that. The idea to base my web application on HTTP was the best. I do not appreciate the rudeness, and denigration. > > The only sanity in all this is knowing you couldn't > enforce anything you think you have generated from other > people's work. You're not going to get anything done > because you don't have the capacity to do so. You haven't > yet in what 2-3 years? What makes you think you get > anything in the next 11 years? It is not very easy for me to base anything on anyone else's work when my work is unique in the world. Although there are many stochastic OCR processes, this technology being old hat, there are very few deterministic ones, and none of these have the consistent accuracy across so many different kinds of machine generated character glyphs. I also doubt that any can achieve the 90,000 characters per second recognition rate. In any case the purpose of commercializing this as a web server is to use trade secret IP protection for the latest technological advances, at least until the next patent issues. > > Later > > Peter Olcott wrote: > >> "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in >> message news:eP3%2304IzKHA.5940(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> Of course, the real ultimate question is if you will >>> finished by the time your patent expires. >> >> The latest improvements would likely qualify for another >> patent, thus extending the term, plus there is a whole >> other invention of using this technology to provide an >> easy to use universal graphical user interface scripting >> language. >> > > > > -- > HLS
From: Pete Delgado on 26 Mar 2010 01:46 "Liviu" <lab2k1(a)gmail.c0m> wrote in message news:eUt13uGzKHA.5332(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > "Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> wrote... >> >> I believe that your interpretation of "fault tolerance" is that a >> catastrophic event could happen to your system and you application >> would not lose *any* data. Is this the definition that you are using? > > Absent any catastrophic events, a system might still be called > "fault tolerant" if it managed at least one successful run under > controlled conditions on developer's machine, despite all faults > with its design and implementation ;-) Given his level of understanding, I sincerely doubt that his system can possibly overcome all of the faults that you mention! ;-) -Pete
From: Pete Delgado on 26 Mar 2010 01:56 "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message news:9ZSdnc_zBLvdfzbWnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > But I have said many times now that I will not scale by processes I will > scale by threads, and these threads all share that same data so the > benefit that you keep pushing about memory mapped files continues to be > moot. I may actually scale by servers instead of processes or threads, > because five single core servers cost half as much as one quad core > server. The laughable part of all this is that you are completely serious! So, given your obvious naivete about development you now suggest that you can implement your system using multiple servers all the while meeting or exceeding your design and performance goals? All I can say is good luck... -Pete
From: Hector Santos on 26 Mar 2010 02:14
Pete Delgado wrote: >> But I have said many times now that I will not scale by processes I will >> scale by threads, and these threads all share that same data so the >> benefit that you keep pushing about memory mapped files continues to be >> moot. I may actually scale by servers instead of processes or threads, >> because five single core servers cost half as much as one quad core >> server. > > The laughable part of all this is that you are completely serious! That pretty much best describe it. > So, given > your obvious naivete about development you now suggest that you can > implement your system using multiple servers all the while meeting or > exceeding your design and performance goals? Its patent pending! <g> -- HLS |