From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:ac8:341c:: with SMTP id u28mr1163195qtb.0.1589403769041; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:3488:: with SMTP id b130mr880877oia.44.1589403768698; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweak.nl!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 14:02:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.215.60; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.215.60 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4f27a33f-ddae-4c2b-94f9-eff8565b78a3@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Not to incite a language war but apparently the Corona lockdown was based on 13 year old undocumented C-Code From: Optikos Injection-Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 21:02:49 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:58684 Date: 2020-05-13T14:02:48-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 3:29:13 PM UTC-5, Niklas Holsti wrote: > On 2020-05-13 21:58, Optikos wrote: > > On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 9:05:50 AM UTC-5, Niklas Holsti wrote: > >> On 2020-05-13 16:52, Optikos wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 4:36:15 AM UTC-5, Niklas Holsti wrote: > >>>> On 2020-05-13 1:39, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote: > >>>>> On 5/13/20 12:20 AM, Niklas Holsti wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I agree that it would be troubling. If you could find that stateme= nt, > >>>>>> it would interest me. > >>>>> > >>>>> In https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/ it = says, > >>>>> "the code produces critically different results, even for identical > >>>>> starting seeds and parameters." > >>>> > >>>> While the review claims that as a general flaw, it then "illustrates= " > >>>> the claim by discussing the two cases I detailed, in particular the > >>>> unexpected influence of the option controlling how the program "stor= es > >>>> data tables". This was eventually traced to a difference in the way = the > >>>> program used the RNG, depending on this option, which then led to > >>>> different PRN sequences, depending on this option. An error in the > >>>> program, of course, but not non-determinism. > >>>> > >>>> For programs that use RNGs to drive simulations, a single extra RNG > >>>> call, or a single omitted RNG call, will completely change the > >>>> subsequent PRN sequence. This has no effect on the statistical > >>>> properties of the results from many runs, but will of course change = the > >>>> results of the particular run in which the change occurs. > >>>> > >>>>> Initially it was claimed that this was > >>>>> only true for multiple cores, but later that was retracted: "But > >>>>> Edinburgh came back and reported that =E2=80=93 even in single-thre= aded mode =E2=80=93 > >>>>> they still see the problem." > >>>> > >>>> It seems that some users (Edinburgh) reported that the results varie= d, > >>>> and reported they were using multi-core mode. The authors of the pro= gram > >>>> (Imperial) replied that result variations are expected in multi-core > >>>> mode; this was of course a sloppy analysis of the problem, but not a= n > >>>> unnatural one. When the users reported that the problem occurs also = in > >>>> single-core mode, depending on the "data table storage" option, the > >>>> authors found and fixed the error. > >>> > >>> On which date did they fix the problem? Before or after governments > >>> acted on the miscalculations? > >> > >> There has been no demonstration that the early predictions from this > >> program, that prodded governments into action, were "miscalculations" = to > >> any significant degree, especially after the recommended practice of > >> performing several runs and considering the ensemble of results. > >=20 > > https://www.cato.org/blog/how-one-model-simulated-22-million-us-deaths-= covid-19 >=20 >=20 > In that article, the main objection to Ferguson's model seems to be that= =20 > the model predicts that as much as 81% of the population would be=20 > infected. But the proponents of quick herd immunity suggest something=20 > over 60% as desirable, so 81% does not seem outrageous. The article then= =20 > complains that Ferguson's model is unrealistic because it assumes that=20 > no precautions against infection are taken, neither by individuals nor=20 > by governments. As I understand it, this assumption was stated and not=20 > hidden by Ferguson, so complaining about it is not to the point.=20 > Ferguson's point was that precautions *should* be taken to avoid the 2.2= =20 > million deaths. >=20 > > https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/six-questions-that-neil-ferguson-sh= ould-be-asked/amp >=20 > By all means, ask Ferguson such questions, but also let him answer. >=20 > > 2.2 million deaths in the USA and a half million deaths in the UK > > due to Covid-19 [...] were not a miscalculation, but rather a > > perfectly accurate calculation. Okey dokey, then. >=20 > You seem to have misunderstood what we are discussing. The question is=20 > if Ferguson's results were influenced by errors (bugs) in Ferguson's=20 > code, not if Ferguson's assumptions or mathematical models are realistic= =20 > or correct for this pandemic. No, we are not discussing only your dictates and narrow reframings. We are discussing: from Rick Newbie on 11 May 2020: > There's a reason C is not used in safety critical applications. from Rick Newbie on 11 May 2020: > with C-Code we have a greater chance to have unmaintainable problems > that go unnoticed.=20 On Tuesday, May 12, 2020 at 7:25:42 PM UTC-5, Olivier Henley wrote: > Wow! https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/ >=20 > This is ugly, lol... and they give another go in C++. (facepalm) >=20 > For sure it would have fewer bugs or even no bugs in Ada. >=20 > 1. The modeling power (embedded clarity combined with capabilities/paradi= gms properly supported) of > Ada has no equivalent. >=20 > 2. Nothing hard about making clean multithreading. >=20 > 3. Using object-oriented techniques for handling complexity while retaini= ng flexibility and reusability is > Part 3 of John English, Ada 95: The craft of object-oriented programming = ... and any good undergrad > software book written since 1996. >=20 > Other languages are underspecified, lack features uniformity, are plagued= by idiom trends, and the > average Joes inevitably pile up their own party mess by arguing their rig= ht to express their style of > programming, more often than not, under the auspice of a god syndrome lac= king frugal taste.=20 >=20 > Ada just cuts the crap on all of these fronts while retaining all the cru= cial bits of something like C and > C++, performance and low level hand really. Is is that simple. >=20 > Governments should just force Ada on their workforce. The public pays and= therefore should be entitled > to quality stuff that compounds. If you do not want to learn it, ... like= you learned Python on Youtube, on > the job for the last 3 months, well you know where the door is. As witnessed by the non-Holsti quotations above, we are discussing whether = C is too cryptic & too ill-disciplined & insufficiently transparent for soc= iety to be making multi-ten-trillion-dollar reckless bets. We are discussi= ng whether having a competing model written in Ada would at least be less c= ryptic, better disciplined, and more transparent so that it doesn't require= severely botched results for foot-&-mouth, H1N1, H5N1, Mad Cow, and now th= e comparable-to-the-Great-Depression economic meltdown of Covid-19 for anyo= ne to care enough to even try to properly maintain the crappy C code the be= st that they can. Conversely, the rest of us along this thread are not unrelentingly shilling= in vigorous defense of Neil-Ferguson orthodoxy.