On Mar 20, 2007, at 08:59 , David Harvey wrote:
> > > On Mar 20, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Jaap Spies wrote: > >> >> David Joyner wrote: >>> Hello all: >>> >>> FYI, SAGE was mentioned in a BBC article recently: >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6466129.stm >> >> See also in Scientific America: >> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=6C66165B- >> E7F2-99DF-3D86B476FFD18F17&ref=rss > > Why does everyone keep calling sage.math a supercomputer!!!!????!!!! > It's just like a few commodity desktops plugged together, with a bit > more RAM than usual!!!!! I am guessing that this is a little like the game kids play, where one kid whispers something to the next in line, and gets passed back the line. Comparing what the first kid said to what the last heard is ... interesting. I'm sure comments were made about the power and size of the machine, which lead, after much repeating through ears that aren't hip to the terminology or technology, to what we're reading. Anyone know if it was just sage.math in use, or did they use SAGE in the computation? DSAGE? One of the lessons hidden in there is that, if you know something about the article you are reading in the news, you know how wrong it is. If you don't, it seems like The Truth. But this is way too much philosophy ahead of any caffeine. Justin -- Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large Institute for the Absorption of Federal Funds -------- If you're not confused, You're not paying attention -------- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-forum URLs: http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/ and http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
