Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 206 posts

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#91

Post by fencepost »

caf wrote: post #61
fencepost wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could likely run any of the BSD variants. Some form of commercial RTOS might also be viable. Even Minix might be an option (hire away some of those Intel folks!) though I'm not sure of its hardware support. That said, why bother? Linux is customizable enough to strip out almost everything extraneous for nodes and has the largest pool of experienced developers, and it's unlikely that any of the other options woul…

Why on earth would you want a RTOS for HPC? RT is all about privileging latency over throughput, whereas in HPC throughput is everything.

It's unlikely that you would, but once you make it through Linux, the BSDs (including macOS), Unix systems (legacy?), Windows and Minix there's just not that much else left that's modern. At least with a RTOS or something designed for embedded systems you have some hope that it's designed to be lightweight.

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#92

Post by derefr »

andr3w321 wrote: post #89
derefr wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FDA doesn't tell you what drugs you can and cannot take. (That's what the DEA does, and why I don't like them.) The FDA just tells companies what drugs they can and cannot sell in the US. If the DEA didn't exist, and you wanted an early-stage drug, you could just mail-order it from another country where they do sell such drugs, and nobody would stop you from taking it. Or you could get in on an informal "clinical…

Thanks - learned a bit here. You did contradict yourself though from your original reply to this one. "In your phrasing, you could say that government also "tells people what they can and can't" eat, in the form of the FDA." "The FDA doesn't tell you what drugs you can and cannot take."

First one is an expression of your perspective; the second one is mine.

The FDA's actions do effectively stop you from having any source to buy a poisoned cucumber, or homeopathic ibuprofen, or whatever else, where said source is a US corporation. But only because it's going after those corporations. It doesn't care what you do.

(In a world where the FDA did care about such things, we'd probably have "drug tourism" laws the way we have "sex tourism" laws, where you could be prosecuted for drugs you used while abroad.)

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#93

Post by jldugger »

whataretensors wrote: post #28
zanny wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think its so much a shame that Linus isn't a billionaire than it is we have billionaires at all. There is limited rational or ethical reason for one human being to accumulate so much centralized wealth. There is being rewarded for hard work / skill / innovation and there is exploiting people to become rich, and the line between those is very hard to distinguish when talking about individuals making more than…

Blame the SEC for this one. Their accredited investor regulation gave the future to the rich. Seed round, series A, B, C, etc should be a vehicle for class mobility. Instead it's a way for the rich and powerful to accumulate more wealth. With YC and other incubators acting as a filter for where investors should put money, it matters more which zipcode you were born into than your overall intelligence and creativity.…

There's plenty of means within the existing legal framework to allow investors access to VC investment options. Blackstone IPO'd ten years ago, and Intel, Google and GE all have VC subsidaries. My pension with Oregon has a variety of investments in VC private equity funds that have done quite well.

There's really no reason to agitate for people to invest their savings directly into a single series A round. Capital pooling and diversification is a key function that VC provides investors.

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#94

Post by dTal »

caf wrote: post #61
fencepost wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could likely run any of the BSD variants. Some form of commercial RTOS might also be viable. Even Minix might be an option (hire away some of those Intel folks!) though I'm not sure of its hardware support. That said, why bother? Linux is customizable enough to strip out almost everything extraneous for nodes and has the largest pool of experienced developers, and it's unlikely that any of the other options woul…

Why on earth would you want a RTOS for HPC? RT is all about privileging latency over throughput, whereas in HPC throughput is everything.

Perhaps because a lot of tasks are not embarassingly parallel, which means moving data around, which means network interconnects, which means latency matters. Every millisecond delay in forwarding a packet is thousands of instructions stalled.

I'm not saying this is actually a sensible tradeoff for any extant HPC architecture, but it could be. You certainly want the 'OS' that runs the pipeline on your CPU to be real time!

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#95

Post by dingo_bat »

b_emery wrote: post #4

A win for open source. I was just thinking the other day that it's a shame that Linus is not a billionaire. Seems he's doing just fine however: "Finnish-American software engineer and hacker Linus Torvalds has as estimated net worth of $150 million and an estimated annual salary of $10 million. He earned his net worth as the principal force behind the development of the Linux kernel." Source: https://www.therichest.c…

To me $150 million is not much different from $1 billion. Maybe that just indicates I'm poor :)

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#96

Post by skyfold »

dmoy wrote: post #48
jrs95 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about poor people. A huge number of middle class people aren't accredited investors. But they could easily put a small sum into a high risk investment and potentially benefit greatly from it. Bitcoin is a decent example of this. There aren't any accredited investors regulations, and I highly doubt there's hardly anyone who bought so much of it that they'd go bankrupt if it became worth $0

I would be absolutely shocked if Bitcoin hit $0 and nobody came out of the woodwork sheepishly admitting that their investment strategy was "put 110% in Bitcoin". People go bankrupt on much sillier schemes than Bitcoin on a routine basis...

I already cashed out enough to pay for school, a new house, and a new car. My parents are farmers. Even if Bitcoin went to $0, the number of people who became wealthy vs broke would be skewed towards individuals becoming wealthy because the late money is primarily institutional.

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#98

Post by dingo_bat »

godelski wrote: post #69
b_emery wrote: post #4

A win for open source. I was just thinking the other day that it's a shame that Linus is not a billionaire. Seems he's doing just fine however: "Finnish-American software engineer and hacker Linus Torvalds has as estimated net worth of $150 million and an estimated annual salary of $10 million. He earned his net worth as the principal force behind the development of the Linux kernel." Source: https://www.therichest.c…

> it's a shame that Linus is not a billionaire I mean $150m is a LOT of money. $10m/yr is a lot too. Just to put that into perspective, you could put that in a very safe ETF and make over $1m/yr. You could easily make $10m/yr just off interest. That's A LOT of money. And a lot of people would be perfectly content with that, let alone know what to do with it. I mean if you can rent the entire country of Lichtenstein f…

Your whole comment is insightful and makes sense, but what about the last sentence? It is an unrelated statement tacked on without any support or connection to the rest of the paragraph.

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#99

Post by skyfold »

lucozade wrote: post #54
dgut wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely believe ICOs are the future of funding. We are at a premature stage, but as the ecosystem matures we'll see a lot of great things come out of it unless the SEC and whatnot decide to nuke it. For instance, until now ICOs have been able to raise money without a prototype in hand, this I believe will change.

That’s an interesting position. What you’re effectively saying is, if you’re stupid enough to invest in a scam then you should be allowed to. The establishment shouldn’t put barriers in your way if you want to give your money to a hoax. There’s something to be said for that. If you’re not capable of managing your own money then maybe the con artist will do better? Personally, I’d prefer to give to a charity with a de…

Gambling is legal, smoking is legal, and yet risky early stage investments aren't? And the reason these investment opportunities aren't available to us is because they are risky and dangerous? Hmm....

Point being the government deciding how to "protect us" is based on arbitrary criteria at best.

Re: All 500 of the world's top 500 supercomputers are running Linux

#100

Post by Sevii »

derefr wrote: post #34
whataretensors wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blame the SEC for this one. Their accredited investor regulation gave the future to the rich. Seed round, series A, B, C, etc should be a vehicle for class mobility. Instead it's a way for the rich and powerful to accumulate more wealth. With YC and other incubators acting as a filter for where investors should put money, it matters more which zipcode you were born into than your overall intelligence and creativity.…

Investor accreditation makes sense (for now.) Giving poor people free access to untested-investment-vehicle-X is basically the same as giving them over-the-counter access to scheduled drugs. Mistakes will be made, and the people making them—lacking resources as they do—won't be able to recover from them. Right now, we're spending a lot of money trying to figure out how to get people out of these ruts. (Free housing s…

Poor people are allowed to legally gamble away their money in situations where its 100% known that they will lose it all.
Post reply on HN