A demo of GNU/Linux/FOSS superiority versus commercial software.

Prepare for a shock!

Astounding result!

Video location (30 days):
https://ufile.io/q72b6etu

Usenet location (forever):

alt.binaries.multimedia.transformation

Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> wrote:

>A demo of GNU/Linux/FOSS superiority versus commercial software.
>
>Prepare for a shock!
>
>Astounding result!
>
>Video location (30 days):
>
>https://ufile.io/q72b6etu
>
>Usenet location (forever):
>
>alt.binaries.multimedia.transformation

Not all parts have shown up on GN, yet. You can post PAR2s, or I can
see if the rest of the parts show up. I want to use
abm.transformation to download it, since that'd be elite and all,
since I have good Usenet access.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 11/28/24 12:48 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
> A demo of GNU/Linux/FOSS superiority versus commercial software.
>
> Prepare for a shock!
>
> Astounding result!
>
> Video location (30 days):
>
> https://ufile.io/q72b6etu
>
> Usenet location (forever):
>
> alt.binaries.multimedia.transformation
>

Amazing. Not _somewhat_ faster but Six times faster.

And the graph sure looks like the electron clouds of some atom. I hope
university students are aware of this free software.

I have a feeling it was a matter of default interval. Wolfram, by
default, may have used 6 times shorter intervals in computing the dots,
giving 6 times more dots to find.

You can test it and find if that's the case. Keep making the image
larger and larger until the grid shows, then compare the size of the
image between the two software when grids are more or less the same size
on the screen.

On 11/28/24 7:30 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 11/28/24 12:48 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
>> A demo of GNU/Linux/FOSS superiority versus commercial software.
>>
>> Prepare for a shock!
>>
>> Astounding result!
>>
>> Video location (30 days):
>> https://ufile.io/q72b6etu
>>
>> Usenet location (forever):
>>
>> alt.binaries.multimedia.transformation
>>
>
>
> Amazing. Not _somewhat_ faster but Six times faster.
>
> And the graph sure looks like the electron clouds of some atom. I hope
> university students are aware of this free software.
>
> I have a feeling it was a matter of default interval. Wolfram, by
> default, may have used  6 times shorter intervals in computing the dots,
> giving 6 times more dots to find.
>
> You can test it and find if that's the case. Keep making the image
> larger and larger until the grid shows, then compare the size of the
> image between the two software when grids are more or less the same size
> on the screen.
>
>
>
>

Of course when it is a 3-dim surface that in this case is being
computed, the ratio of the two intervals used won't be "6" since if you
halve the interval the work required will be 2^3 times more.

So:

x^3 = 6 => x ~ 1.82

Wolfram's codes used intervals 1.82 times smaller than the other software.

On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:30:59 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> I have a feeling it was a matter of default interval. Wolfram, by
> default, may have used 6 times shorter intervals in computing the dots,
> giving 6 times more dots to find.
>

I did not use default values.

The Mathematica code specifies "PlotPoints --> 50" which means to initially
use 50 sample points in each direction (x,y,z). However, the algorithm
may change this in a recursive manner.

With MathMod, I specified "Grid": ["500"] which I believe means 500 points
in each direction, but the MathMod documentation is not ideal (this is
expected of a single author FOSS project).

Also, the plotting algorithms may differ and they probably do.

Mathematica does not publish its algorithms and I would have to read the
MathMod source code to discover its algorithm.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 11/29/24 8:58 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:30:59 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a feeling it was a matter of default interval. Wolfram, by
>> default, may have used 6 times shorter intervals in computing the dots,
>> giving 6 times more dots to find.
>>
>
> I did not use default values.
>
> The Mathematica code specifies "PlotPoints --> 50" which means to initially
> use 50 sample points in each direction (x,y,z). However, the algorithm
> may change this in a recursive manner.
>
> With MathMod, I specified "Grid": ["500"] which I believe means 500 points
> in each direction, but the MathMod documentation is not ideal (this is
> expected of a single author FOSS project).
>
> Also, the plotting algorithms may differ and they probably do.
>
> Mathematica does not publish its algorithms and I would have to read the
> MathMod source code to discover its algorithm.
>
>
>
>
>

ٰIf you think the difference in speed was due to substantially different
algorithms then I'd still give it a probability that Wolfram's
intentionally did not use the symmetries which are known beforehand, to
cut down the computation time, and MathMod did. The latter may have just
solved a two-dimensional curve then revolved it around vertical axis to
form the image.

I think so because a 6 times computation time difference is just too
high. So I don't throw Wolfram's away just like that.

On 11/29/24 7:34 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 11/29/24 8:58 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:30:59 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have a feeling it was a matter of default interval. Wolfram, by
>>> default, may have used  6 times shorter intervals in computing the dots,
>>> giving 6 times more dots to find.
>>>
>>
>> I did not use default values.
>>
>> The Mathematica code specifies "PlotPoints --> 50" which means to
>> initially
>> use 50 sample points in each direction (x,y,z).  However, the algorithm
>> may change this in a recursive manner.
>>
>> With MathMod, I specified "Grid": ["500"] which I believe means 500
>> points
>> in each direction, but the MathMod documentation is not ideal (this is
>> expected of a single author FOSS project).
>>
>> Also, the plotting algorithms may differ and they probably do.
>>
>> Mathematica does not publish its algorithms and I would have to read the
>> MathMod source code to discover its algorithm.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ٰIf you think the difference in speed was due to substantially different
> algorithms then I'd still give it a probability that Wolfram's
> intentionally did not use the symmetries which are known beforehand, to
> cut down the computation time, and MathMod did. The latter may have just
> solved a two-dimensional curve then revolved it around vertical axis to
> form the image.
>
> I think so because a 6 times computation time difference is just too
> high. So I don't throw Wolfram's away just like that.
>
>
>
>

ٰI watched the clip one more time to see if I could detect Wolfram's
info, and as you said it used 50 points.

By the way, congratulations for your new job. I hope the drink that you
downed and banged the bottle or cup down was coffee, not wine :)

And doesn't that computed image look like something Relf uses to
masturbate? He's got devices like that which he used to describe every
now and then.

Le 28-11-2024, Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> a écrit :
> A demo of GNU/Linux/FOSS superiority versus commercial software.
>
> Prepare for a shock!
>
> Astounding result!
>
> Video location (30 days):
>
> https://ufile.io/q72b6etu
>
> Usenet location (forever):
>
> alt.binaries.multimedia.transformation

That's an other video in which you manage to contradict yourself, to
prove you are a liar and to prove you don't know what you do. In less
than a quarter of an hour: that's a great job (yes, I know your video is
longer than that but the last minutes are useless and I didn't look at
them).

So, first of all, thanks for the fun. Just, in case you could control
yourself, can you laugh a little bit quieter? Because your lunatic laugh
will make my neighbours think me as a retard if they don't know they
hear a video and not me. I'm stupid, I agree, but I'd like to keep it
under reasonable limits. And your moron laugh doesn't comply to the
limits I can handle.

For the most obvious lying part, I don't believe you own a private jet
and a private yacht. No way. That's the most obvious evidence of your
lies. I don't know if anyone here believe that, but I don't.

For the contradictory parts, you manage to contradict yourself in this
video alone and with other claims. So for this video, you start by
saying that $12000 (I really don't like the English/American spelling of
money) is nothing to you and at the end of your video, you say it's a
huge amount of money. So, you have to choose if that matters to you or
not and stick with it. At least, for the length of your video, which is
a short period. I can understand someone changing his mind as years pass
by, but between the beginning and the end of a very short video, it's
just impressive. It means you have no clue of what you are doing, but
I'll comme back later on that.

You can have spotted, I put a plural on "parts" at the beginning of the
previous paragraph. It's because in your previous messages you said you
were using mathematica (which I said I didn't believe and your video
aimed to prove me wrong, just proved me right: that's another way in
which your video is great). And, in the end of your video, you said
mathematica is garbage (of course, not a such evolved word in your
limited vocabulary, but the meaning is the same).

Less obvious than your yacht and your private jet, the way your are
showing (mind you: I'm not saying using for a reason) proves you are not
using it. You just managed to download something on Internet to display
it in mathematica. It's far from being able to use mathematica by
yourself.

And by comparing mathematica to mathmod you just proved you have no clue
about the purpose of mathematica. And in this video, you proved you
don't use mathimatica, as I said in another message. You can only launch
it and load something you found on Internet in it, which is very
different.

And to prove what I said previously, that you don't know what you are
doing, there is the last part. You realized the colors are different in
mathematica and in mathmod. You don't know why, you just realize it. And
it's the ultimate proof. You have no idea if the colours have a meaning
or not. You have no idea why your colours are different. You are only
able to acknowledge the difference without the least explanation and
have to say something like "I did the things differently" which is not
an explanation but an acknowledgment of your lack of understanding of
your doing.

So all that in less than fifteen minutes is impressive. Good job.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 11/28/2024 1:48 PM, Lameass Larry wrote:

> https://ufile.io/q72b6etu

Written in C++, which you said is for "degenerate sissies."

On 30 Nov 2024 14:19:42 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
> And to prove what I said previously, that you don't know what you are
> doing, there is the last part. You realized the colors are different in
> mathematica and in mathmod. You don't know why, you just realize it. And
> it's the ultimate proof. You have no idea if the colours have a meaning
> or not. You have no idea why your colours are different. You are only
> able to acknowledge the difference without the least explanation and
> have to say something like "I did the things differently" which is not
> an explanation but an acknowledgment of your lack of understanding of
> your doing.
>

Shut up, you infernal idiot.

MathMod has a problem, it seems, with coloration.

Check this recent bug report from a very astute and competent individual:

https://sourceforge.net/p/mathmod/tickets/114/

Le 30-11-2024, Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> a écrit :
> On 30 Nov 2024 14:19:42 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>> And to prove what I said previously, that you don't know what you are
>> doing, there is the last part. You realized the colors are different in
>> mathematica and in mathmod. You don't know why, you just realize it. And
>> it's the ultimate proof. You have no idea if the colours have a meaning
>> or not. You have no idea why your colours are different. You are only
>> able to acknowledge the difference without the least explanation and
>> have to say something like "I did the things differently" which is not
>> an explanation but an acknowledgment of your lack of understanding of
>> your doing.
>>
>
> Shut up,

Certainly not. You are to limited to bend me to your will. Your
imaginary jet won't help you. And your messages are to funny to avoid
answering.

> you infernal idiot.

You see? You are very limited. Even in your insults you are mediocre.
How do you hope to contribute in anything without any ability?

> MathMod has a problem,

You are the problem.

You created a video to show that MathMod can do the same as mathematica.
Just to discover at the end that it can't. To sell your point, you
should have found a better example.

You created a video to show that MathMod is faster than mathematica.
Just to discover at the end that the fastest result is wrong. To sell
your point, you should have found a better example (bis).

You created a video to show that MathMod is cheaper than mathematica.
Just to discover at the end that the cheapest tool is useless. To sell
your point, you should have found a better example (ter).

Don't you see the pattern? When you want to show something, you should
be able to know what you are speaking of. Like that, you can choose your
examples correctly. Each time you try to defend something you manage to
make it looks like shit. But it's not the fault of the tool if it's
defended by a braindead retard unable to handle modern technology.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 30 Nov 2024 19:14:03 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
>> MathMod has a problem,
>
> You are the problem.
>

Instead of always feebly criticizing the work of highly competent
people, like myself, why don't you show or demonstrate your own
work?

I can answer for you.

You have no work to show. You are a sham that cannot offer
anything constructive to demonstrate GNU/Linux superiority.

My recommendation:

Either demonstrate your own work or get the fuck out.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 11/30/2024 11:04 AM, Sad Larry Pietraskiewicz wrote:

> Check this recent bug report from a very astute and competent individual:
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/mathmod/tickets/114/

One of the worst programmers ever on cola - you - constantly lies and
brags about himself, but one of, if not the, best programmers - Branimir
- never said one boastful word about his prodigious talent.

On 11/30/24 10:04 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2024 14:19:42 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>> And to prove what I said previously, that you don't know what you are
>> doing, there is the last part. You realized the colors are different in
>> mathematica and in mathmod. You don't know why, you just realize it. And
>> it's the ultimate proof. You have no idea if the colours have a meaning
>> or not. You have no idea why your colours are different. You are only
>> able to acknowledge the difference without the least explanation and
>> have to say something like "I did the things differently" which is not
>> an explanation but an acknowledgment of your lack of understanding of
>> your doing.
>>
>
> Shut up, you infernal idiot.
>
> MathMod has a problem, it seems, with coloration.
>
> Check this recent bug report from a very astute and competent individual:
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/mathmod/tickets/114/
>

Your use of even a character like Carpentier is impressive. I kill file
individuals like that. They've got some degree of "Sartre Syndrome" in
them (part of their brains are formed around their anus). They seem to
be logical and persistent, but they're just idiots cause the sense in
what they do regardless of what it is they're doing, comes from that
particular part of the brain that's formed around anus :)

You know, anus has only one job, and it keeps doing it throughout life.
But Carpentiers of the world rabidly try and try to put it into other
uses as well that aren't meant for it. That particular brain part's
proximity to it explains that.

Lot's of Europeans are like that, and it is seen only among cro-magnons.
The genes responsible got evolved out by the time Modern Humans were
formed.

But since he keeps at it, I guess you've found it useful to make
yourself check the stuff you do. Like how one uses a timer so every ten
minutes or so check something despite being very busy doing other things.

That's one of the things about you that I cannot do without practice. I
just kick them out of my life.

DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote at 21:23 this Saturday (GMT):
> On 11/30/2024 11:04 AM, Sad Larry Pietraskiewicz wrote:
>
>
>> Check this recent bug report from a very astute and competent individual:
>>
>> https://sourceforge.net/p/mathmod/tickets/114/
>
>
> One of the worst programmers ever on cola - you - constantly lies and
> brags about himself, but one of, if not the, best programmers - Branimir
> - never said one boastful word about his prodigious talent.

I don't think I've seen bran here before. I could absolutely have missed
their post, though.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 12/1/2024 4:00 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote at 21:23 this Saturday (GMT):
>> On 11/30/2024 11:04 AM, Sad Larry Pietraskiewicz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Check this recent bug report from a very astute and competent individual:
>>>
>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/mathmod/tickets/114/
>>
>>
>> One of the worst programmers ever on cola - you - constantly lies and
>> brags about himself, but one of, if not the, best programmers - Branimir
>> - never said one boastful word about his prodigious talent.
>
>
> I don't think I've seen bran here before.

You know SMelzzzzz (Branimir Maksimovic)?

He was here off and on since early 2006, but switched to Macs and hasn't
been seen since Nov 2023. You might find him hanging around coffee
shops now.

He could rattle off programs in C, C++, Haskell, Rust, assembler and others.

> I could absolutely have missed their post, though.

his posts.

On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 16:11:22 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> Your use of even a character like Carpentier is impressive. I kill file
> individuals like that.
>

Carpentier is OK. He seems to be a staunch GNU/Linux advocate and I can
respect that.

He just does not recognize who is the Supreme Master and who is the Lackey
and he needs to work on that.

>
> Lot's of Europeans are like that, and it is seen only among cro-magnons.
> The genes responsible got evolved out by the time Modern Humans were
> formed.
>

Much of Europe is still steeped in the old world. They need to see the
progressive light or they will be vanquished.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote at 22:39 this Sunday (GMT):
> On 12/1/2024 4:00 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote at 21:23 this Saturday (GMT):
>>> On 11/30/2024 11:04 AM, Sad Larry Pietraskiewicz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Check this recent bug report from a very astute and competent individual:
>>>>
>>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/mathmod/tickets/114/
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the worst programmers ever on cola - you - constantly lies and
>>> brags about himself, but one of, if not the, best programmers - Branimir
>>> - never said one boastful word about his prodigious talent.
>>
>>
>> I don't think I've seen bran here before.
>
> You know SMelzzzzz (Branimir Maksimovic)?
>
> He was here off and on since early 2006, but switched to Macs and hasn't
> been seen since Nov 2023. You might find him hanging around coffee
> shops now.
>
> He could rattle off programs in C, C++, Haskell, Rust, assembler and others.
>
>
>
> > I could absolutely have missed their post, though.
>
> his posts.

Ah, that makes sense. I personally joined around September 2023.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote:

>Supreme Master

Stéphane would be a better candidate for that than you. So would DFS,
despite your fairly lame OS biases.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Farley Flud wrote:

>Carpentier is OK.

For a proven, shameless liar.

>He seems to be a staunch GNU/Linux advocate and I can
>respect that.

Too bad that he also will, inexplicably, attack someone with *lies* if
he doesn't approve of their behavior.

His response to this, if any, will be deleted, unread. Of course, I
could always repost the long explanation.

On Mon, 02 Dec 2024 06:46:39 -0600, chrisv wrote:

>
> Too bad that he also will, inexplicably, attack someone with *lies* if
> he doesn't approve of their behavior.
>

So what? Big deal.

The fact that he supports GNU/Linux in a competent manner, in contrast
to all the meaningless jabber on this NG, makes up for any deficiency.

I wish that there were more like him to drown out the ignoramus
assholes.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 11/28/24 7:30 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 11/28/24 12:48 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
>> A demo of GNU/Linux/FOSS superiority versus commercial software.
>>
>> Prepare for a shock!
>>
>> Astounding result!
>>
>> Video location (30 days):
>> https://ufile.io/q72b6etu
>>
>> Usenet location (forever):
>>
>> alt.binaries.multimedia.transformation
>>
>
>

He (the developer of MathMod) has a youtube channel too:

https://www.youtube.com/@abderrahmantaha7190/videos

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 23:00:11 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> He (the developer of MathMod) has a youtube channel too:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/@abderrahmantaha7190/videos
>

On none of his demos does he provide an example of coloring
a surface according to a coordinate or a parameter. Such
coloration can provide important information like how an
angle maps to a certain region of space. Instead he seems
interested in weird textures but most surfaces are monotone
in color and appear rather bland.

The only exception are the "Complex_Domain_Coloring" and
the Complex_3D_01" parametric examples.

He also has not responded to my ticket that reports an
issue with the coloration.

But it is a fantastic program nonetheless.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On 12/4/24 6:33 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> He also has not responded to my ticket that reports an
> issue with the coloration.

According to his youtube account he has not been active for more than
one year. He may've been killed by Israelis.

On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 13:04:11 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> On 12/4/24 6:33 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
>> He also has not responded to my ticket that reports an
>> issue with the coloration.
>
>
> According to his youtube account he has not been active for more than
> one year. He may've been killed by Israelis.
>

MathMod-12.0 was released on Sept 26, 2024, so he is still quite
active.

Also, by coincidence, another ticket which was made on the same day
as my ticket was answered.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.