The FRIAM Lists seems to focus itself more and more
about local topics related to Santa Fe (i.e. food and Italian
restaurants, the city university of Santa Fe, ..).
Therefore I have created a new mailing list about
Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) and related topics:
agent-based models, complex
So a few of us are exploring new ways of constructing scalable
distributed agent systems and are playing around with architecting a
first instantiation in either Javascript or in Smalltalk. We are
interested in architecting a system that grow and evolve without
collapsing on the weight of
Steve,
Can you please define what you mean by scalable? Up to 10,000 agents?
100,000? 350,000,000? 6E^9?
How heavy are the agents to be?
than all of the above?
--Doug
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Stephen Guerin
stephen.gue...@redfish.comwrote:
So a few of us are exploring new ways
Can you please define what you mean by scalable? Up to 10,000
agents? 100,000? 350,000,000? 6E^9?
How heavy are the agents to be?
than all of the above?
Scalable eventually to on the order of a million agents per Internet-
connected device. An order of magnitude less for mobile phones
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote:
Interesting. Other issues that will come to play with an ABM of the
intended scales you describe are synchronization of the various asynchronous
distributed components, message passing latency, and message passing
Not to digress, but Dave kind of lost me one day at a FRIAM when he said
C++ is not object oriented. I didn't really know what he meant, because
I've been using C++ for about 20 years now to accomplish polymorphism via
object inheritance, containment, and method specialization (with and without
Stephen Guerin wrote:
Scalable eventually to on the order of a million agents per
Internet-connected device. An order of magnitude less for mobile
phones and a few more for beefy servers. So maybe, I don't know, 10^9
devices * 10^6 agents/device = 10^15 agents.
Hmm. Mobile phones will have
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 06:35:36PM -0600, Douglas Roberts wrote:
Not to digress, but Dave kind of lost me one day at a FRIAM when he said
C++ is not object oriented. I didn't really know what he meant, because
I've been using C++ for about 20 years now to accomplish polymorphism via
object
Interesting that you'd say OO C++ is hard to debug. With the proper tools,
I've found it as easy as, well, interpreted LISP. Now distributed message
passing code, on the other hand, is hard to debug. I don't care what
language it was written in. The proper tools, like TotalView help a lot,
but
What I mean by pure OO C++ is full blown patterns implemented using
dynamic polymorphism etc, etc. You go through about 3 or 4 layers of
indirection via abstract classes to go from caller to callee. You need
6-8 windows open on the screen just to understand what some bit of
code is doing. And yes,
When I wrote:
This would be more for authoring and deploying many smaller-scale
applications written with an agent-oriented perspective. What Dave
West talks about when he refers to how object-orientation was
originally conceived not how current object-oriented programming is
done. This is
Oregon just passed an assisted suicide law...
To better describe agent-oriented, I would like to extend an object to:
1)
2)
3) have control over its own execution
4)
5)
Do I still get to keep my OO Merit Badge?
--
Doug Roberts
drobe...@rti.org
d...@parrot-farm.net
505-455-7333 -
Douglas Roberts wrote:
Oregon just passed an assisted suicide law...
To better describe agent-oriented, I would like to extend an
object to:
1)
2)
3) have control over its own execution
4)
5)
Typically garbage collectors observe for objects that are
Jochen,
I would rather see myself publicly stoned for introducing such marginallly
off-list topics as the City University of Santa Fe and non-phoney
restaurants in Santa Fe than see you take your marbles elsewhere. But
personally, I think there is some use for the local conversation on FRIAM.
Stephen Guerin wrote:
3) have control over its own execution
Because resources are finite, an object can only seek resources, e.g.
through scheduling protocols for a resource or through growth and
reproduction. Agents don't have free will any more than we do. :-)
I'm curious what you are trying to model that requires 10^15 agents. I just
typed this number into WolframAlpha and got:
~~ 50 x the number of red blood cells in the human body (~~ 2x10^13)
... in other words the number of red blood cells in the FRIAM mailing list
(give or take).
Coincidence?
16 matches
Mail list logo
