Needless to say i’m talking about the oversimplified and misleading version of the Schrödinger’s cat paradigm, where he is both dead and alive until you watch it.

I don’t have a job but i follow theater courses at an academy. And my improvisation is both funny and awful until i show it to others.

  • Jimmycrackcrack
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Is it actually non-deterministic or just too many variables and too much sensitivity to initial conditions influencing the scheduler’s decisions for the programmer to reasonably be able to predict?

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 minutes ago

      When you account for not knowing what else is going on the system I’d say it’s actually non deterministic. But not in a magical “truly random” sort of way, just that other things you don’t personally have control over are going on. If this topic interests you then you may want to look into real time computing which is an area where you do have deterministic systems where you can more accurately guarantee how long something will take. This is important in dangerous activities. Think things like nuclear reactors where a process taking too long might mean not alerting another part of a system that something bad has happened. Like the part of the system that tells you if something is too hot not responding so you keep adding fuel. Compare this to your phone. If your phone is slow then, well, it’s just annoying really.

    • MrPoopbutt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It is deterministic, it is just determined elsewhere.

      If thread 1 is working on a task and needs the output of thread 2, it doesn’t know what the output is. Of you move the tasks from thread 2 back into thread 1, then you have eliminated the point of multi threading.