Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : AMD:News, Press Releases and Information Only! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (6413)	5/31/1998 12:25:00 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

Elmer, <1 failure in 20,00 years was their claim.> You certainly do not understand. Let me try to explain again. If you have a single floating point number, say 0.8374620937846e002, or whatever, what is the probability that you will hit exactly this number in your application? Negligibly small, right, and Intel based their denial on this grounds. Now, what if this number is 3.00000000 or it multiples? From the theoretical point of view, the probability (as a measure of this number relative to ALL OTHER NUMBERS within the proper range) is the same, or again about zero. However, this "uniform distribution" assumption is incorrect. Almost ANY application have something to be divided by 3, with probability about 1. Of course, if your knowledge of probability is based on basics taught at 6-grade level, I should not expect you to follow my example and comprehend the HUGE difference between the two cases. Have a nice weekend...