4 ms·
Your response is a no true scotsman fallacy while also moving the goalposts, though what you've described is either a single-user single-task operating system,
by Maursault 4y ago
Your response is a no true scotsman fallacy while also moving the goalposts, though what you've described is either a single-user single-task operating system, or you are conflating the limitations of current conventional single computer technology, which has already been solved with conventional clusters as well as quantum computing, and probably also with modern GPUs. Parallel computing has existed at least since the mid-1960s.
- adrianN 4y agoYou apparently didn't even skim the paper I linked.
- Maursault 4y agoYour comment here and suggestion before, and that entire comment, is ad hominem: "ur dum! Go read a book! LOL! Stop disagreeing with me, I don't know logic!"
- adrianN 4y agoNot everything that disagrees with you is ad hominem and not knowing something is not a shame. But it does not make for good discussion if you're not engaging with the arguments.
- Maursault 4y agoFallacy doesn't require response, yet I have entertained them as much as I have ignored them, such as this straw man. The other comments mentioned in my GP were ad hominem, though they didn't have to be phrased in a way that made them so, but instead asserted against my argument and cited rather than focusing on what I should do. One must speak to the argument, not to the man, "your facts are in error and your argument flawed because x, y, z," rather than "you are wrong and don't know what you're talking about, and I know this because I am an expert." Fallacy is not too difficult to avoid, but also easy enough to be trapped by,
- adrianN 4y agohttps://existentialcomics.com/comic/9 https://existentialcomics.com/comic/9