Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #264478

Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ...

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 02:50:16PM +0100, Arno Lehmann wrote:
> On 09.12.23 at 10:13, Albretch Mueller wrote:
> >   As anyone could see you could even run a network of detached
> > computers without networking interfaces in a "touch of God" kind of
> > way,
> 
> At this point it becomes quite clear that we have a misunderstanding at a
> very low level. Sentences like "run a network of ... computers without
> networking interfaces" are something I can not really grasp with the
> facilities I have.

Is he simply talking about sneakernet?  A human administrator, whom I
imagine to be the "god" in this scenario, walks around and room and
types things on each computer as needed?

What I don't understand is what these computers would be *doing*.  Why
does he need them at all?  If he needs them, why does he need them to
be detached from each other and from the rest of the world?

The only things I can imagine are:

 * Calculating something that takes a long time to calculate.  Maybe the
   problem can be trivially parallelized, in such a way that he can
   type the necessary parameters for each piece of the calculation on
   each node.  Obviously it would be better if the nodes were networked
   to each other, instead of requiring manual collation of the results,
   but we've already established that the OP is insane.

 * Tools in the creation of some kind of work of art (visual, musical,
   etc.).  A computer runs whatever software is used in this creative
   endeavor.  At the end, a file is created, and this is copied onto
   removable media, which is then sent to a publisher.  I don't see
   why he would need multiple computers in this scenario, unless he's
   got many projects going on simultaneously, and he wants one computer
   dedicated to each project.

Whatever he's doing, I'm confident he won't tell us, or at least not in
a way I'll be able to understand.

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-06 23:30 +0100
  Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-07 02:30 +0100
    Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-07 08:20 +0100
      Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Arno Lehmann <al@its-lehmann.de> - 2023-12-07 10:50 +0100
        Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-09 10:20 +0100
          Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-09 12:30 +0100
          Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Arno Lehmann <al@its-lehmann.de> - 2023-12-09 15:00 +0100
            Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-12-09 15:20 +0100
              Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2023-12-09 15:30 +0100
                Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-09 20:10 +0100
                Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-09 23:40 +0100
            Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2023-12-09 15:30 +0100
      Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-07 17:00 +0100
  Re: ToG Linux (first draft of a RFC) ... Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> - 2023-12-08 01:00 +0100

csiph-web