The Nineteenth Byte

mınxomaτ

23:03

I have released a thing: turbo.github.io

flawr

Is a human turing complete?

TuxCopter

@flawr Most likely

mınxomaτ

@flawr Some humans might not pass a Turing test though

TuxCopter

LOL

DrMcMoylex

@flawr No. Given infinite time and memory, most humans die.

TuxCopter

23:05

2

Q: How is the computational power of a human brain comparing to a turing machine?

This seems related to these questions at a glance: What are some problems which are easily solved by human brain but which would take more time computers? What would show a human mind is/is not reducible to a Turing machine? But not quite, I am not asking about "time", but power. Also, I am no...

flawr

@DrMcMoylex There are more than 7 billion examples where this is yet to be determined.

PhiNotPi

> Ah snap! There was no error compiling the test kernel or running it, but the numbers don't check out. Please report your browser (+ version) and hardware configuration to us, so we can try to fix this. Deviation was 2953580.6643.

flawr

@mınxomaτ is that how it is supposed to be?

TuxCopter

I think no :P

mınxomaτ

What's your hardware?

flawr

23:07

@mınxomaτ Let me see

DrMcMoylex

@flawr That's still a majority.

TuxCopter

I guess my GPU is good

undergroundmonorail

hell yeah sonnn

mınxomaτ

@PhiNotPi Are you on linux?

flawr

@mınxomaτ Intel i5 and AMD Radeon R9 380

TuxCopter

23:10

@undergroundmonorail crap

That's a big speedup

PhiNotPi

@mınxomaτ yes

mınxomaτ

@flawr That's weird. Currently your browser doesn't seem to use your GPU at all. Can you open this site and tell me if the animation is smooth: glslsandbox.com/e#36424.0 ?

@PhiNotPi I couldn't get it to work on linux either. The numbers returned from the GPU (without any error btw) are total nonsense-

@PhiNotPi What's your GPU?

flawr

@mınxomaτ wow that's cool, yes it does show up smooth

undergroundmonorail

@mınxomaτ i tried opening that link on my browser and chrome immediately shat the bed

like the whole browser just died

mınxomaτ

@undergroundmonorail It should freeze for a few seconds and then recover.

undergroundmonorail

23:14

it did not recover :P i will try it again

mınxomaτ

@flawr Very weird....

Dennis

undergroundmonorail

oh there we go

Dennis

Wonder what would happen if I had a video card.

flawr

@mınxomaτ Ok it seems to be a browser issue: In Firefox I get 1.3/0.6 and in Chrome i get 1.3/10

quartata

23:15

@Dennis You don't have a video card?

TuxCopter

@mınxomaτ Why in the second example in the README you allocate a 5e6 length array but only fill the first 1e6?

mınxomaτ

@Dennis You always have a video card.

@TuxCopter Woops, typo

Dennis

@quartata No, just an integrated GPU.

quartata

I didn't even know HTML5 video or Flash worked without at least 2D hardware acceleration these days

@Dennis Oh, OK.

TuxCopter

@Dennis wat

mınxomaτ

23:16

@Dennis That's a video card in my book.

TuxCopter

You have stupid performances with an integrated GPU

PhiNotPi

@mınxomaτ Intel Corporation Haswell-ULT Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 0b) nothing fancy

Dennis

@mınxomaτ It's not a card, so by extension, it's not a video card. :P

mınxomaτ

@flawr So everything is fine. There's nothing I can do about the difference between browsers really

TuxCopter

wat I get better performances in Chrome than in Firefox

@Firefox y u do dis

Dennis

23:19

Tried Firefox to compare, got 1.43/10.0.

ETHproductions

@Downgoat If you're still here, can we talk about the doc problem in the Crayon chatroom?

mınxomaτ

That's really odd.

TuxCopter

GPU performances are better with Chrome and native JS is better with Firefox

mınxomaτ

10.0 would indicate an error, on an integrated GPU. But the measurement wouldn't be displayed at all if JS and GPU didn't arrive at the same numbers.

@Dennis Did you look in your console for errors?

Dennis

I didn't. Let me check.

Alex A.

23:23

You are permitted to check

Dennis

There's a TypeError: Cannot read property 'getElementsByTagName' of null(…) every time I click somewhere, but I doubt that's related.

flawr

@AlexA. Did he hand in the check permit request form?

Alex A.

He faxed it to me

mınxomaτ

@Dennis Well that should not occur. What browser are you using?

flawr

I'm always amazed how many businesses still use fax to this day.

Alex A.

23:25

I think Dennis uses Chrom(e|ium)

Dennis

Chromium 52.0.2743.116 (Developer Build) (64-bit)

mınxomaτ

Then this shouldn't happen. I don't get this error in Chrome, Chromium or Canary.

Downgoat

@mınxomaτ :( font is not loading for me

mınxomaτ

Which file throws the error?

@Downgoat Get a better browser :D

Downgoat

[Error] Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found) (droidsans-webfont.woff, line 0)
[Error] Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found) (opensans-light-webfont.woff, line 0)
[Error] Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found) (droidsans-bold-webfont.woff, line 0)
[Error] Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found) (opensans-regular-webfont.woff, line 0)
[Error] Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found) (opensans-sem…

quartata

23:27

I'm getting:

> Ah snap! There was no error compiling the test kernel or running it, but the numbers don't check out. Please report your browser (+ version) and hardware configuration to us, so we can try to fix this. Deviation was 0.0243.

Linux

Dennis

@mınxomaτ onloadwff.js:1573

quartata

No errors in console

Undo

Dear whoever is offended by error logs: wut?

quartata

Seriously?

mınxomaτ

@Dennis That doesn't exist

TuxCopter

23:28

Someone flagged an error log??

DrMcMoylex

Here comes the brigade...

mınxomaτ

@Dennis That seems to be one of your extensions.

Dennis

@mınxomaτ Oh, must be an extension then... Sorry.

trichoplax

I'd delete it if chat were flooded with them, but I can't see the harm in an occasional log

Alex A.

This ^

Downgoat

23:29

@Undo i think it might of been from accidentally hit wrong button

quartata

Plus it was relevant to the discussion

Undo

Probably.

mınxomaτ

Let's move discussion here: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12876892

quartata

Your plugs are not very subtle by the way

;)

mınxomaτ

:P

DrMcMoylex

23:30

At least they're interesting

mınxomaτ

@Dennis I have no idea why that happens. You can take a look the the check in the code here: turbo.github.io/js/benchmark.js (the stuff with .sanity etc.).

Lemme push some diagnostics code.

Dennis

You mean the 10.0 speed?

mınxomaτ

Yep

Dennis

No clue. It's consistently fast in Chrome and Firefox.

For reference, it's HD Graphics 4000 in a i7-4770K CPU.

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@Downgoat Safari is very lightweight, don't know how. Much more so than chrome or ff

Hi, @Undo. TNB is one of the most active chatrooms on SE. We mostly talk about non-site related stuff. Sometimes it's not even related to programming.

Dennis

23:36

What's your point?

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@Dennis introducing TNB?

Dennis

For better or worse, Undo is already familiar with TNB.

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

Oh.

Undo

yeah, I tend to get around :)

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

Haven't seen you here before.

Luis Mendo

23:41

CMC: average number of repetitions of unique chars in a string. Ex.: abcdededc -> 1.8

mınxomaτ

@Downgoat Try again now. I've pushes the old font formats for Safari.

ETHproductions

@LuisMendo Jelly, 5 bytes: QL÷@L

Downgoat

@mınxomaτ ok yup, looks good now

Luis Mendo

@ETHproductions Nice! My solution (MATL) had 5 bytes too

ETHproductions

I think it might be possible without the @, but I don't know enough Jelly to know that

(@ just swaps the operands)

TuxCopter

23:47

Wait, I don't understand the algorithm to calculate this

And I don't understand Jelly too

Dmitry Kudriavtsev

jelly is like trying to read hieroglyphics for all I know

ETHproductions

@TuxCopter length(s)/length(unique(s))

TuxCopter

Ohk

->s{i=s.chars;i.length/i.uniq.length.to_f} Ruby .___.

mınxomaτ

@Dennis Pushes some diagnostic code. Can you run again and give me the output of the console?

TuxCopter

Totally unrelated: The first chat message ever

Transcript for