Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 03:46:07 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <vdd6tv$23gqs$1@dont-email.me>
References: <memo.20240913205156.19028s@jgd.cix.co.uk>
	<vcd3ds$3o6ae$2@dont-email.me>
	<2935676af968e40e7cad204d40cafdcf@www.novabbs.org>
	<2024Sep18.074007@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vcds4i$3vato$1@dont-email.me>
	<2024Sep18.220953@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vcfopr$8glq$3@dont-email.me>
	<ll232oFs6asU1@mid.individual.net> <vcgo74$gkr1$3@dont-email.me>
	<ll2n1hFu4lmU1@mid.individual.net> <vchu2q$mfu5$1@dont-email.me>
	<vchu67$mgk1$1@dont-email.me> <vcieqn$p8fv$1@dont-email.me>
	<AAfHO.23138$5837.19479@fx35.iad> <86jzf4829c.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<vcpojl$2ads5$1@dont-email.me> <vct3av$2tic0$17@dont-email.me>
	<vctb0s$32gol$1@dont-email.me> <vctbo2$32cko$3@dont-email.me>
	<vcv711$3b4hf$1@dont-email.me> <vcvji5$3co45$7@dont-email.me>
	<20240925104320.00007791@yahoo.com> <vdaakm$1facd$4@dont-email.me>
	<vdacqq$1jf40$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 05:46:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a1a02b051aaecb67c07f3c0a04f3a680";
	logging-data="2212700"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19m5LpyIf9ss8M6Pq86qC+7"
User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YzvtkIpRBw3Ls+f/gsKbCueKQ+o=
Bytes: 2334

On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 02:08:26 -0000 (UTC), Brett wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Remember, this isn’t all just hand-waving: they have formulas, derived
>> from theory, into which they can plug in numbers, and the numbers agree
>> with actual measurements.
> 
> Theories are a dime a dozen, it is easy to back fit data to fit any
> number of models.

Predicting results that haven’t been measured yet, and measuring them and 
showing they are correct, is the true mark of science.

Does your “alternative model” measure up to that? No it does not.