Youtube comments of Le YASEP (@leyasep5919).

  1. 248
  2. 218
  3. 161
  4. 121
  5. 91
  6. 87
  7. 86
  8. 83
  9. 46
  10. 42
  11. 38
  12. 33
  13. 31
  14. 30
  15. 26
  16. 26
  17. 24
  18. 22
  19. 21
  20. 21
  21. 19
  22. 17
  23. 17
  24. 17
  25. 14
  26. 14
  27. 14
  28. 14
  29. 13
  30. 13
  31. 13
  32. 13
  33. 13
  34. 12
  35. 11
  36. 11
  37. 10
  38. 10
  39. 10
  40. 10
  41. 10
  42. 10
  43. 9
  44. 9
  45. 9
  46. 9
  47. 9
  48. 9
  49. 8
  50. 8
  51. 8
  52. 8
  53. 7
  54. 7
  55. 7
  56. 7
  57. 7
  58. 7
  59. 7
  60. 7
  61. 6
  62. 6
  63. 6
  64. 6
  65. 6
  66. 6
  67. 6
  68. 5
  69. 5
  70. 5
  71. 5
  72. 5
  73. 5
  74. 5
  75. 5
  76. 5
  77. 5
  78. 5
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 5
  83. 5
  84. 5
  85. 5
  86. 5
  87. 5
  88. 5
  89. 5
  90. 5
  91. 5
  92. 4
  93. 4
  94. 4
  95. 4
  96. 4
  97. 4
  98. 4
  99. 4
  100. 4
  101. 4
  102. 4
  103. 4
  104. 4
  105. 4
  106. 4
  107. 4
  108. 4
  109. 4
  110. 4
  111. 4
  112. 4
  113. 4
  114. 4
  115. 4
  116. 4
  117. 3
  118. 3
  119. 3
  120. 3
  121. 3
  122. 3
  123. 3
  124. 3
  125. 3
  126. 3
  127. 3
  128. 3
  129. 3
  130. 3
  131. 3
  132. 3
  133. 3
  134. 3
  135. 3
  136. 3
  137. 3
  138. 3
  139. 3
  140. 3
  141. 3
  142. 3
  143. 3
  144. 3
  145. 3
  146. 3
  147. 3
  148. 3
  149. 3
  150.  @dand337  more replies 🙂 > Is riscv modern enough isa to be realistically considered? modernity is not a criterion for adoption, there are more practical issues to solve before : is the platform widely adopted ? This means : how many people do use it, developing tools and enhancing them ? Is there some support or dynamic ? RISC-V is modular and adds extensions here and there and wherever they like or fancy. So there will be adaptation, though also some fragmentation because few chips can have all the extensions, creating a want for more features or a race to the latest feature level... such a race is a dynamic that the industry loves and there is little risk for them. Now adoption depends on the specific needs of each project. RISC-V is quite good for microcontrollers and can displace several ARM offerings but I believe it is a bit less efficient or compact because RISC-V tries to "be good enough at everything" but it can't perfectly match everything. > I mean chinese are literally copying mips with loongarch so ISA doesn't seem to be a very important factor. Some Chinese have adapted RISC-V to support more flexible addressing modes that are sorely lacking, due to the mantra of minimalism that reduces the ILP. Ideally this should be backported into the main ISA but I have no idea what's going on there, and there might be some "not invented here" syndrome, and/or philosophical fundamentalism, who knows, but the Chinese can adapt whatever they care to copy... I'm more interested at what they could invent from the ground up, if they ever dare. I don't know if I answered all your questions but that's quite some food for thought.
    3
  151. 3
  152. 3
  153. 3
  154. 3
  155. 3
  156. 3
  157. 3
  158. 3
  159. 3
  160. 3
  161. 3
  162. 3
  163. 3
  164. 3
  165. 3
  166. 2
  167. 2
  168. 2
  169. 2
  170. 2
  171. 2
  172. 2
  173. 2
  174. 2
  175. 2
  176. 2
  177. 2
  178. 2
  179. 2
  180. 2
  181. 2
  182. 2
  183. 2
  184. 2
  185. 2
  186. 2
  187. 2
  188. 2
  189. 2
  190. 2
  191. 2
  192. 2
  193. 2
  194. 2
  195. 2
  196. 2
  197. 2
  198. 2
  199. 2
  200. 2
  201. 2
  202. 2
  203. 2
  204. 2
  205. 2
  206. 2
  207. 2
  208. 2
  209. 2
  210. 2
  211. 2
  212. 2
  213. 2
  214. 2
  215. 2
  216. 2
  217. 2
  218. 2
  219. 2
  220. 2
  221. 2
  222. 2
  223. 2
  224. 2
  225. 2
  226. 2
  227. 2
  228. 2
  229. 2
  230. 2
  231. 2
  232. 2
  233. 2
  234. 2
  235. 2
  236. 2
  237. 2
  238. 2
  239. 2
  240. 2
  241. 2
  242. 2
  243. 2
  244. 2
  245. 2
  246. 2
  247. 2
  248. 2
  249. 2
  250. 2
  251. 2
  252. 2
  253. 2
  254. 2
  255. 2
  256. 2
  257. 2
  258. Hi  @dand337  ! I'll try to reply objectively and usefully. > wasn't risc-v introduced to just drop this baggage? As far as I know, no. Look at the ISA closely then read the Patterson & Hennessy books : you'll find a very close match of the architecture.If you wanted to "drop baggage" you would diverge in a lot of details and structures. However RISC-V takes the best of MIPS, from their experience, and use all the capital of the existing architecutres to lower the bar of entry to the lowest possible, in order to let as many people in as possible. The original team did some research to circumvent or avoid patents, and there you go. > Do you think risc-v will be able tackle arm? Is risc-v better than arm? I think you all missed a little detail : no need to "tackle" ARM. First because ARM has already acknowledged the threat some years ago by creating a short-lived FUD website. But ARM is not the target and RISC-V has already killed its own father : MIPS is virtually no more. Patterson has "won" over the companies that have taken his baby away from him. ARM is quite different though. > What would you want to see in a new ISA then? More than the "bare minimum" of the base RISC-V ISA. RISC-V follows a loooong tradition of a certain way to design compilers and it's quite efficient, sure. But compilers have evolved since. But they retain the old structures of the old CPU architectures they try to serve... RISC-V is based on 40-years old paradigms that are so entrenched that there is no life possible outside of it. You can't compile C ? then you can't compile Linux, so you're dead before you start. And C has choked and undermined a LOT of the current SW industry. I believe that one specific trait of RISC-V/MIPS is the memory access mechanism. It's pretty good for single-issue microcontrollers (or R2000 or R3000 CPUs of the 80s) but it doesn't scale. Superscalar and out-of-order struggles with the load and store instructions.
    2
  259. 2
  260. 2
  261. 2
  262. 2
  263. 2
  264. 2
  265. 2
  266. 2
  267. 2
  268. 2
  269. 2
  270. 2
  271. 2
  272. 2
  273. 2
  274. 2
  275. 2
  276. 2
  277. 2
  278. 2
  279. 2
  280. 2
  281. 2
  282. 2
  283. 2
  284. 2
  285. 2
  286. 2
  287. 2
  288. 2
  289. 2
  290. 2
  291. 2
  292. 2
  293. 2
  294. 2
  295. 2
  296. 2
  297. 2
  298. 2
  299. 2
  300. 2
  301. 2
  302. 2
  303. 2
  304. 2
  305. 2
  306. 2
  307. 2
  308. 2
  309. 2
  310. 2
  311. 2
  312. 2
  313. 2
  314. 2
  315. 2
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354.  @99bits46  a belief ? why would you even care about what I believe ? Now, NOWHERE have I seen a scientist forcefully imposing his/her vision of the world under threat of death/retaliation/shame/whatever. On the contrary : I see in this video an open discussion, and there are even people who study two or more of the competing theories to draw bridges between them (Lee Smolin for example). Equating science to religion is one of the usual memes among the religious people, indeed... (thereby showing their misunderstanding of what science is and how it works because they only have one frame of reference they are taught to never question). Now for your "belief" tirade : whenever you work on a model (like, huh, in science ?) you make assumptions and use methods and axioms. Each of these tools have a well defined domain of validity (for example : Newton's law break down at high energies/velocities etc.) and you expect that your work and guesses are wrong. That's basic humility. " There's no data to prove those assumptions, so let us just believe in them and see where they take us." You fail as soon as you "believe". Scientists don't "believe". They put an amount of confidence on given assertions, but they are ready to retreat when proven wrong. Why ? Because their ego and "vision of what the truth must be" doesn't matter if it doesn't WORK. A scientist will take a wild guess as a "working assumption". If it doesn't work they try something else. If it works, they try to throw more guesses and determine a domain of validity, then throw "attacks" at it. Whenever a religion has been attacked (with counter-arguments, I mean), the results were pretty savage... Ask Galileo.
    1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. 1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403.  @TotoToto-jw7fx  hmmmmm ... il doit te manquer quelques informations, il me semble. Mais tu es libre d'aller t'engager dans la légion étrangère ukrainienne. Ou chez Poutine. Tu verras donc de toi-même la situation réelle, et pas juste les images qui filtrent au travers de la censure. > nous assistons à une guerre russo-americaine sur le sol ukrainien bon déjà on est d'accord que c'est une guerre. Ensuite, c'est les ukrainiens qui trinquent à cause de.... de quoi déjà ? Parce que les américains sont méchants ? Ou juste parce que Poutine se prend pour un grand Tsar et veut laisser une trace dans l'histoire ? C'est une guerre américaine parce que Vlad a obligé les ukrainiens à chercher de l'aide pour défendre leur nation souveraine, après que les US les aient forcés à se débarrasser de toutes leurs armes soviétiques et nucléaires "car on sait jamais". > la Russie ne peut se permettre de perdre cette guerre. Personne ne peut se permettre de perdre une guerre donc bon. En attendant c'est les ukrainiens qui se font raser villages après villages, villes après villes, systématiquement, pour détruire l'Ukraine. Si c'est ça qui te plaît, c'est ton problème. > On en reparle en fin d'année ben écoute, si ça tenait qu'à moi, ça serait déjà fini, mais Vlad s'accroche comme une teigne à son délire expansionniste et ses conneries, donc je ne parierai pas sur une quelconque échéance. Vlad est un sadique sociopathe qui veut voir le monde brûler et il accuse les autres de ce qu'il est... donc on a bien le temps de se fritter dans les commentaires avant que la Russie se retire.
    1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413. 1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1
  421. 1
  422. 1
  423. 1
  424. 1
  425. 1
  426. 1
  427. 1
  428. 1
  429. 1
  430. 1
  431. 1
  432. 1
  433. 1
  434. 1
  435. 1
  436. 1
  437. 1
  438. 1
  439. 1
  440. 1
  441. 1
  442. 1
  443. 1
  444. 1
  445. 1
  446. 1
  447. 1
  448. 1
  449. 1
  450. 1
  451. 1
  452. 1
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1
  459. 1
  460. 1
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. 1
  464. 1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. 1
  515. 1
  516. 1
  517. 1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1
  525. 1
  526. 1
  527. 1
  528. 1
  529. 1
  530. 1
  531. 1
  532. 1
  533. 1
  534. 1
  535. 1
  536. 1
  537. 1
  538. 1
  539. 1
  540. 1
  541. 1
  542. 1
  543. 1
  544. 1
  545. 1
  546. 1
  547. 1
  548. 1
  549. 1
  550. 1
  551. 1
  552. 1
  553. 1
  554. 1
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570. 1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1
  576. 1
  577. 1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. 1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. 1
  589. 1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1
  609. 1
  610. 1
  611. 1
  612. 1
  613. 1
  614. 1
  615. 1
  616.  @timseguine2  you started with "You are looking at things with the benefit of hindsight. " well, that's the (w)hole point ! Why SHOULD I ignore recent advances ? The wikipedia page has all the details and history, why should we limit ourselves to the Weil version ? Ignore the new data points and that's not science any more. Science forces us to constantly refine our understanding of the universe with each new measurement and experiment. The universe has been proved to exist only with 3 spatial dimensions so that closes the case for me: jumping from one 3D point to another 3D point without "traveling" the geodesic is impossible without a 4th dimension, which does not exist. QED. Wormholes are science fiction, not science. " understanding why some models seem to predict them ...." => maybe because these models are broken ? " Many, MANY scientific advancements were made by thinking about the consequences of our best theories that are incompatible with observation. " Sure ! but that does not and can not imply that any speculation is true. Oh and let's forget the scientific dead ends and hide them under the rug of history. Aether anyone ? "wormholes (...) are an artefact of GR" Black hole were and have been proved because reality allows them. Even Newton's theory predicted black holes. Now if you need to add crazy terms (like negative energy) to your equations to make them fit your desire, that's wishful thinking. It's not illegal but that will make waste your time. Of course there will be people who will play with the equations and some progress will happen (think: Alcubiere and such), but what irks me is : this contest presents wormholes as a scientific fact, when it's only a speculation. This is a misleading message to send to the audience. Kyle is sending good wills on a dead end.
    1
  617. 1
  618. 1
  619. 1
  620. 1
  621. 1
  622. 1
  623. 1
  624. 1
  625. 1
  626. 1
  627. 1
  628. 1
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636. 1
  637. 1
  638. 1
  639. 1
  640. 1
  641. 1
  642. 1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650. 1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. 1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677. 1
  678. 1
  679. 1
  680. 1
  681. 1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. 1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1
  701. 1
  702. 1
  703. 1
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706. 1
  707. 1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712. 1
  713. 1
  714. 1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. 1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. 1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. 1
  847. 1
  848. 1
  849. 1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. 1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. 1
  866. 1
  867. 1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. 1
  874. 1
  875. 1
  876. 1
  877. 1
  878. 1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. 1
  882. 1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1
  889. 1
  890. 1
  891. 1
  892. 1
  893. 1
  894. 1
  895. 1
  896. 1
  897. 1
  898. 1
  899. 1
  900. 1
  901. 1
  902. 1
  903. 1
  904. 1
  905. 1
  906. 1
  907. 1
  908. 1
  909. 1
  910. 1
  911. 1
  912. 1
  913. 1
  914. 1
  915. 1
  916. 1
  917. 1
  918. 1
  919. 1
  920. 1
  921. 1
  922. 1
  923. 1
  924. 1
  925. 1
  926. 1
  927. 1
  928. 1