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
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Not to incite a language war but apparently the Corona lockdown
 was based on 13 year old undocumented C-Code
Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 22:20:53 +0300
Organization: Tidorum Ltd
Message-ID: <hidh4mFa137U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <N6huG.179867$2U3.174684@fx04.iad>
 <hib7tiFpsmfU1@mid.individual.net>
 <3baf4a73-aae7-4f99-9786-ba5153118c81@googlegroups.com>
 <hid49gF7c18U1@mid.individual.net>
 <1ab5756b-81d8-4b2f-80ff-feeca5270903@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net p/5P42qkk0au6tW6ZcySLwpkTcUkh9c7UHSo9q/65QUw2Y6YCV
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4ayl5MhQKtechZMMZIyU3s+3Sow=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0
In-Reply-To: <1ab5756b-81d8-4b2f-80ff-feeca5270903@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:58717
Date: 2020-05-17T22:20:53+03:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2020-05-17 20:38, Optikos wrote:

    ...

> Despite your best efforts to side track the issue, we are trying to
> discuss topics that would be applicable to Anatoly's new Ada model,
> so that his doesn't have the same defects as Ferguson's.

    ...

> We don't need to discuss never-ending wispy cloud formations of
> what-if Ada code in our imaginations anymore.  We have Anatoly's
> extant source code to review and suggest improvements upon.
Fine, I'm not preventing you from doing that. But Anatoly's program is 
based on very different modelling principles and computational methods, 
so any comparison to Ferguson's code will hardly illuminate the C-vs-Ada 
aspects any more than comparing any chosen C code to any chosen Ada 
code, solving different problems.

>> 3. Whether the epidemiological models and assumptions of Ferguson's
>> group are correct
> 
> You keep basing so many of your pronouncements on a one-size-fits-all
> monolithic definition of correctness (and that Ferguson is definitely
> in possession of that One True And Only CorrectnessⓇ).
That is a false claim. I have never claimed to know anything about the 
correctness of Ferguson's models.

To avoid being pulled into further pointless argumentation, I will 
kill-file you. Bye.

-- 
Niklas Holsti

niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .