Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ll-xn!ames!pioneer!eugene
From: eugene@pioneer.arpa (Eugene Miya N.)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: (Karp challenge) Can we move on?
Message-ID: <1955@ames.arpa>
Date: Fri, 26-Jun-87 16:33:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: ames.1955
Posted: Fri Jun 26 16:33:48 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jun-87 10:46:04 EDT
References: <8270@amdahl.amdahl.com> <359@rocky2.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ames.arpa
Reply-To: eugene@pioneer.UUCP (Eugene Miya N.)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 21

I do not appear to have positive effect.  In the interest of moving on and
making this a private discussion, and since I don't see us going anywhere,
If people are interested in reading the text of the Karp Challenge, send
mail (yet again I have to say this) mail to netlib@anl-mcs.arpa
Message body:
send karp-challenge from benchmark

Whether Brad or any person thinks Alan's criteria are unreasonable [e.g.,
MIMD to the exclusion of SIMD, or "embarassingly parallel"] or
unrealistic, that is between you and Alan.  Alan is the person offering
the money ($100) as a token jesture (just like the Hellman/Adleman
challenges in cryptography).  Alan set HIS rules.  I can only voice what
he says (No SIMD).  He will not award it for applications running on
existing SIMD designs (including the MPP and the DAP also).  If you
don't agree, offer your own $100 price and your rules [I would
offer to double Alan's bet [Karp conditions], but Alan would not accept],
but you cannot tell Alan to award HIS prize under your perception of his
rules (which are fairly simple rules).  Better to go out and build the
hardware and make a mint.

--eugene