# Glass for a wood rdisplay

Page 2 of 4
• posted on December 16, 2006, 3:46 am

Part of the point of the discussion is that your series is incorrect, in that it arbitrarily includes a datapoint that shouldn't be there -- and without that datapoint, your claim of a supposed imbalance in rounding methods falls apart.
I could just as easily pick a different, but equally arbitrary, series to "prove" that an *opposite* imbalance exists, but that "proof" would be no more, or less, valid than yours.

ROTFLMAO -- in other words, don't bring in anything that would demonstrate your errors!
I'm still waiting for you to cite a source for your claims about the Cray XP.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 5:44 am
On Dec 15, 10:46 pm, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote: more nonsense.
Rounding. And I cite: With all rounding schemes there are two possible outcomes: increasing the rounding digit by one or leaving it alone. With traditional rounding, if the number has a value less than the half-way mark between the possible outcomes, it is rounded down; if the number has a value exactly half-way or greater than half-way between the possible outcomes, it is rounded up. The round-to-even method is the same except that numbers exactly half-way between the possible outcomes are sometimes rounded up-sometimes down. Although it is customary to round the number 4.5 up to 5, in fact 4.5 is no nearer to 5 than it is to 4 (it is 0.5 away from either). When dealing with large sets of scientific or statistical data, where trends are important, traditional rounding on average biases the data upwards slightly. Over a large set of data, or when many subsequent rounding operations are performed as in digital signal processing, the round-to-even rule tends to reduce the total rounding error, with (on average) an equal portion of numbers rounding up as rounding down. This generally reduces the upwards skewing of the result. Round-to-even is used rather than round-to-odd as the latter rule would prevent rounding to a result of zero. Examples: 3.016 rounded to hundredths is 3.02 (because the next digit (6) is 6 or more) 3.013 rounded to hundredths is 3.01 (because the next digit (3) is 4 or less) 3.015 rounded to hundredths is 3.02 (because the next digit is 5, and the hundredths digit (1) is odd) 3.045 rounded to hundredths is 3.04 (because the next digit is 5, and the hundredths digit (4) is even) 3.04501 rounded to hundredths is 3.05 (because the next digit is 5, but it is followed by non-zero digits)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 10:44 am

What are you "citing"? I don't see a source for this.

This is false -- so it appears that your source for this isn't credible.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 2:26 pm
I keep seeing you reply to yourself and had to look. As I suspected, you may as being talking to a mirror. Doug is relentless and does not know how to loose gracefully. He is one of those type people that cannot pass up a good argument regardless on which side he is on. You are wasting your time trying to explain any thing to him if he has set his mind to ignore facts.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 4:21 pm
message

Rob: Here, I have a 12" oak stick. Doug: Your stick should be 11.5" Rob, Don't change the argument. Doug: Cite where you say your stick is oak. It is pine. Rob: (after a couple of tries of trying to bring Doug back to reality, that this stick, in fact MY stick, *I* made it, *IS* both 12" and made from oak.) realizes Doug is a troll. Doug: (Realizing he doesn't have a leg to stand on) ": It is not a stick, it is a baton, cite where your stick isn't a baton.) Rob: Wants to toss the stick one more time, but Doug has decided to chase an 11.5" pine stick instead, so Rob won't play any more.
Another parallel:
Rob: I have a qt of stain and it is enough for this table. Doug: When painting ocean liners, a qt won't be enough and stain won't work.
The man is a troll.
r
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 5:31 pm

You're the one changing the argument here, Rob.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 6:48 pm

Been there, heard that.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 5:30 pm

Robatoy is the one ignoring facts here, Leon. Did you have anything of value to contribute, or do you just like to criticize?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 15, 2006, 7:06 pm

What he described is knowns as "banker's" rounding. That is not proof that bankers actually use it though. The naming might just be a coincidence ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding
MItch
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 1:50 am

I know what it's called. I'd like to see a cite showing that the Cray XP, or any other modern electronic digital computer, for that matter, actually performs rounding in the way he claims.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 2:35 am
snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) writes:

Dunno what he claimed, but all the gory details are here: <http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/754/
Note that there are decimal floating point values that cannot be represented in IEEE 754 floating point (which is implemented by pretty much every processor in existence today).
Note that bankers generally do _NOT_ use binary floating point for financial calculations, but rather use fixed-point arithmetic (or even integer arithmetic denominated in pennies, hundreths of a penny, or mils).
Many of the early mainframes used BCD arithmetic for this.
scott
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 2:41 am
On Dec 15, 8:50 pm, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

If you knew what it was called, why didn't you tell us, Doug?

Are you trying to tell me that it wouldn't be able to? No programmer could make a Cray round in any way? No way? In financial or scientific models, there couldn't be any rounding? Sir?
BTW, a bank if 1100 G5 Macintosh computers blew away a Cray a few years ago. (THIS time, go look it up before shooting your mouth off again.)
I rest my case. Another strawman up in flames.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 3:41 am

Because what it's called is not relevant.

You asserted that id *did*, i.e. that it was constructed that way. Cite, please?

Could, yes. Would, no -- because it would be incorrect. Standard rounding is that anything between .00 and .499999.... gets rounded down, .50 to .99999... gets rounded up. That's the way software rounding works -- and hardware rounding, too, in the machines that have it.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 2:53 pm
Doug Miller (in wVJgh.13775\$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net) said:
| Could, yes. Would, no -- because it would be incorrect.
|| I rest my case. Another strawman up in flames.
Seems to me that both of you are missing the point. Rounding is nothing more than a convenience for dealing with _errors_ - and it's ocurred to me that an argument over the /correctness/ of an error is almost guaranteed to produce a lot more heat than light.
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 15, 2006, 10:41 pm

That would be 20% more often than the rounding down procedure. ;~)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 4:09 pm
message

Indeed. Good one, Leon.
r
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 7:10 am

First off, your "sequence" should stop at 10.9, on 11.0 it begins a new sequence, just at your example started at 10.0
Second, Crays are not used for routine financial transactions like interest calculations, they would be done on run-of-the-mill mainframes or AS400 type systems.
Third, maybe you're just joking?
--
When the game is over, the pawn and the king are returned to the same box.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - snipped-for-privacy@charm.net
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 10:54 am
snipped-for-privacy@fellspt.charm.net () wrote:

Hey, Robatoy, you gonna flame him, too, for pointing out *exactly* the same flaw in your "reasoning" that I did?

Hey, Robatoy, you gonna flame him, too, for pointing out *exactly* the same flaw in your "reasoning" that I did?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 2:00 pm
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 01:10:16 -0600, lwasserm wrote:

Fourth, a Cray XP was a lot of machine 20 years ago. Now any laptop walks all over it. I suspect that my Palm Pilot comes close.
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
• posted on December 16, 2006, 5:06 pm
On Dec 16, 2:10 am, snipped-for-privacy@fellspt.charm.net () wrote:

LOL.. I know, Larry. 12 wickets, 11 spaces in between.
That would have been a different sequence than I presented. The sequence I presented (which could have ended in 10.9999999999999999999, I suppose) does illustrate, and magnifies greatly the errors made in rounding. That's all it is supposed to do. It cracks me up that a simple illustration which says that there are many ways to deal with rounding errors, which the attendant at the gas-bar (I think in Mr. Magan's post) may have applied (humourous in its unlikelyness) has evolved, thanks to Mr. Miller, into a flap about very little. I guess I'm guilty of 'working' Mr. Miller a little, but he needs to stop drinking coffee.

Okay, let me re-phrase. When shoving a lot of really big calculations through a really big computer, rounding errors count for something, and not all rounding methods end up with the same results. Would an AS400 as an example of a big computer been as recognizable as a Cray? All Miller did, was to jump all over one word, out of a whole topic, in the faint hopes that he could demonstrate his vast intellect so that people would not become hip to his small penis.

I never joke.
okay... maybe almost ( 96.334 % oops, make that 96.4 %) of the time.
I often joke around, but Miller just isn't funny. There are a couple of people in here who have no sense of humour. Now they're both in the bin.

I like that line. Both black and white chess pieces also end up in the same box.
r