simple explanation : Consider 3 spoons ( S1, S2, S3 )and 4 people ( A1, A2, A3, A4). Now all four people want to eat with spoon, problem is there is one less spoon. If all 4 people try to get spoon at same time, they will fight for spoon ( in computer, processes trying to get computer resource), this will lead to no one having food and no process will be completed. This above situation is called dead-lock. solution to above problem: 1. Give priority : let's say we set priority like A1 > A2. Now if there is only one spoon and 2 person, since A1 is having higher priority he will use spoon, meanwhile A2 will wait for process to finish and then will use it, this way there will be no fighting for spoons. 2.first come, first serve: this is generally avoided in larger programs
This is 1000% the solution to the ai memory/degradation problem. The third party to choose when and how the "sticks are picked up" Caspian chooses at the end is David. Some third party needs to choose the hierarchy of memories to keep and which to "store/delete". Memories would have to be structured like this and kind of already are, but especially need a coding solution like this in an immortal ai situation.
Why did Caspian have to be abused or witness it? Are kids that experience trauma more accustomed to asking complex questions and problem solving? I know it's to track Holstrom's exact childhood... but why do geniuses have to come from broken homes even with 2 parent households? Holstrom is modeled after Steve Jobs who had loving Catholic parents but couldn't figure out why he was adopted away.
@@suzygirl1843 There are many ways to create a genius if you repeat the exact genome in with the exact epigenetic differences and vital events in their life. The story isn't saying that geniuses come from broken homes, it's just saying that Holstrom came from a broken home. Holstrom is the only genius at his level that they have the specific genome and record of vital life events. It's also essentially a cult about his legacy, they're obsessed with him alone. They don't have Einsteins DNA and verifiable record of every key moment in his childhood
@@suzygirl1843honestly- I'm not convinced Caspian DID need to be abused/witness abuse in order to give Holstrom's weird little cult the result they were expecting. I don't think they had any proof beyond the world's least competent shrink saying 'This should work!' that re-doing Holstrom's whole childhood was more likely to turn out a child genius. Their lone motivation was 'Well, it worked the first time...'
Oh also, ya know how the mom gives her answer, and the husband says that's an allegory for Heaven/Hell - I think I found the reference. It's a zen parable. It states that Heaven and Hell are exactly the same, both with a long dining hall and a super tasty hot pot. However, the chopsticks are a meter long, and the rule is that they have to hold onto the ends. In Hell, no matter how hard they try, people can't get the food into their mouths, so they starve. However, in Heaven, each person feeds the person sitting opposite from them at the table!
This is known as the "Dining Philosophers" problem. My explanation: The premise is that there are five philosophers at a table. In between each philosopher is a chopstick; thus there are five chopsticks. The philosophers alternate between thinking and eating. If they want to eat, they have to pick up the chopsticks one at a time (first right then left), and need BOTH chopsticks before they eat. A guess at a solution may be : "okay, each philosopher picks up the chopstick on their right, and then picks up the one on their left, and then they eat food!". Well that doesn't work... If each philosopher picks up the stick on the right at the same time, then there will be no chopsticks left for a philosopher to pick up on their left. Remember, there are 5 philosophers and 5 chopsticks. They wait forever for a chopstick on their right to show up. Bad. This is called a -deadlock-. The dad seeks to avoid this in his solution: assign an order, 1-5, to the chopsticks. The new rule is that each philosopher, one at a time, has to pick up the lowest order chopstick in front of them first. For example, philosopher 1 picks up chopstick 1 from his two choices (1 and 2). This works great for the first four philosophers. However, the fifth philosopher is going to have two chopsticks in front of them (1 and 5). They need to pick up the lowest chopstick, but the first philosopher already picked up 1. Thus the fifth philosopher doesn't pick up anything. This means chopstick 5 is open!! Yay, now one philosopher can start eating with 4 and 5, and when he is done and put down his chopsticks, others can eat. This avoids a deadlock. But.. this is not efficient for computers with large databases, as Caspian said. Caspian's explanation involves having a waiter. Basically, the philosophers just ask if they can pick up a chopstick, and the waiter checks to see if doing so would involve a deadlock before letting them. The waiter would also make sure to let people who haven't eaten longer to have priority, so no one starves. "Mutex" is just a fancy CS term used for the waiter. Oh, and the reason he mentions parallelism, cuz is "a type of computation in which many calculations or processes are carried out simultaneously". A waiter reduces this. BTW I'm no expert, so apologies for any mistakes.
simple explanation : Consider 3 spoons ( S1, S2, S3 )and 4 people ( A1, A2, A3, A4). Now all four people want to eat with spoon, problem is there is one less spoon. If all 4 people try to get spoon at same time, they will fight for spoon ( in computer, processes trying to get computer resource), this will lead to no one having food and no process will be completed. This above situation is called dead-lock. solution to above problem: 1. Give priority : let's say we set priority like A1 > A2. Now if there is only one spoon and 2 person, since A1 is having higher priority he will use spoon, meanwhile A2 will wait for process to finish and then will use it, this way there will be no fighting for spoons. 2. first come, first serve: this is generally avoided in larger programs
3rd; Overlord protocol. 1 spoon isn't picked up till given permission. Once permission given to X person, X person picks it up and eats. This is a redirection of resources while throttling how much data's input/output stream is. Issue about this protocol is that one entity given priority according to the Overlord's priority. So A1, A2, A3, and A4 have the same level of priority as the next one, just the time limit is superimposed. Unless, priority protocols have been issued by one of the people to be granted additional time. This setup would require additional limits to insure X person isn't granted Y amount of time. It's an AI problem, and a very dangerous one.
What Caspian presents is a third option that is now coming into a technological zeitgeist through AI. An AI could act as a third party and determine which process need to be completely when to determine the most efficient order. Essentially, a dynamic priority system that takes many factors into account.
Thanks for the Operating Systems reminder, honestly I'd read about this in process synchronization in college but the way they where frazing it in the show, I didn't get it, but now I do, jhus basic process synchronization
I think most tangible non computer science example of this problem is an intersection for cars. A small intersection with low traffic might be able to get away with a stop sign, and basic rules about which car gets priority but on high traffic intersections with multiple lanes that would descend into chaos causing accidents and dead lock. The 3rd party solution would be a traffic light, or traffic officer that would stay at the intersection directing which lanes and cars can go. Another real world example could be how airports operate. At a busy airport pilots need to call the airport to get permission to land or take off. The Airport traffic controllers take on the role of the “waiter” and can dynamically adjust priority based on emergencies, remaining fuel, weather etc.
no, i mean that does work. split the resources equally between systems and have them all run proceses at the same time, though slightly less efficient and more power requirement due to "smaller chopsticks"
Basically if the program has an assigned hierarchy, it’ll work if you have only one database. If you introduce more than one database it stalls and crashes, to solve the issue introduce a third party, essentially a mediator who grants permission to allocate resources so the program runs smoothly Edit: I hoped that helped. If not tell me and I’ll try to explain better, I’m not good at it but that’s why I try. Practice makes better
Because for the inflection points in his life must be achieved, the trauma and experience with his father would have to shape him into becoming holstrom, this is an expensive experiment with a lot of people pulling the strings, and Caspian has a purpose, he wasn't born to run in the dark bumbling for meaning.
@@suzygirl1843 No, this was just Steven Holstroms development. Every person has a different brain, that reacts different to certain stimuli. Holstrom in particular became the way he did because of his abusive dad and fighting back. So a clone of Holstrom would react the same way, provided everything else was in order. However, if they just raised a random baby like this, it might react differently, like becoming more violent/aggressive or even killing himself.
I respect how smart the people who made this show are, if only I was smart enough to understand some of this.
Basically to save the program one must be denied every time. At least that’s how I got
simple explanation : Consider 3 spoons ( S1, S2, S3 )and 4 people ( A1, A2, A3, A4). Now all four people want to eat with spoon, problem is there is one less spoon. If all 4 people try to get spoon at same time, they will fight for spoon ( in computer, processes trying to get computer resource), this will lead to no one having food and no process will be completed. This above situation is called dead-lock.
solution to above problem:
1. Give priority : let's say we set priority like A1 > A2. Now if there is only one spoon and 2 person, since A1 is having higher priority he will use spoon, meanwhile A2 will wait for process to finish and then will use it, this way there will be no fighting for spoons.
2.first come, first serve: this is generally avoided in larger programs
@@aakashsinha9641 Wow thats amazing
word
I went "wow honey"
This is 1000% the solution to the ai memory/degradation problem. The third party to choose when and how the "sticks are picked up" Caspian chooses at the end is David. Some third party needs to choose the hierarchy of memories to keep and which to "store/delete". Memories would have to be structured like this and kind of already are, but especially need a coding solution like this in an immortal ai situation.
Why did Caspian have to be abused or witness it? Are kids that experience trauma more accustomed to asking complex questions and problem solving? I know it's to track Holstrom's exact childhood... but why do geniuses have to come from broken homes even with 2 parent households? Holstrom is modeled after Steve Jobs who had loving Catholic parents but couldn't figure out why he was adopted away.
@@suzygirl1843 There are many ways to create a genius if you repeat the exact genome in with the exact epigenetic differences and vital events in their life. The story isn't saying that geniuses come from broken homes, it's just saying that Holstrom came from a broken home. Holstrom is the only genius at his level that they have the specific genome and record of vital life events. It's also essentially a cult about his legacy, they're obsessed with him alone. They don't have Einsteins DNA and verifiable record of every key moment in his childhood
@@suzygirl1843 but that's Steve Jobs. Not Steven Holstrom
i never noticed this but if this is intentional the foreshadowing is insane
@@suzygirl1843honestly- I'm not convinced Caspian DID need to be abused/witness abuse in order to give Holstrom's weird little cult the result they were expecting. I don't think they had any proof beyond the world's least competent shrink saying 'This should work!' that re-doing Holstrom's whole childhood was more likely to turn out a child genius. Their lone motivation was 'Well, it worked the first time...'
Oh also, ya know how the mom gives her answer, and the husband says that's an allegory for Heaven/Hell - I think I found the reference. It's a zen parable. It states that Heaven and Hell are exactly the same, both with a long dining hall and a super tasty hot pot. However, the chopsticks are a meter long, and the rule is that they have to hold onto the ends. In Hell, no matter how hard they try, people can't get the food into their mouths, so they starve. However, in Heaven, each person feeds the person sitting opposite from them at the table!
This is known as the "Dining Philosophers" problem. My explanation:
The premise is that there are five philosophers at a table. In between each philosopher is a chopstick; thus there are five chopsticks. The philosophers alternate between thinking and eating. If they want to eat, they have to pick up the chopsticks one at a time (first right then left), and need BOTH chopsticks before they eat.
A guess at a solution may be : "okay, each philosopher picks up the chopstick on their right, and then picks up the one on their left, and then they eat food!". Well that doesn't work... If each philosopher picks up the stick on the right at the same time, then there will be no chopsticks left for a philosopher to pick up on their left. Remember, there are 5 philosophers and 5 chopsticks. They wait forever for a chopstick on their right to show up. Bad. This is called a -deadlock-.
The dad seeks to avoid this in his solution: assign an order, 1-5, to the chopsticks. The new rule is that each philosopher, one at a time, has to pick up the lowest order chopstick in front of them first. For example, philosopher 1 picks up chopstick 1 from his two choices (1 and 2). This works great for the first four philosophers. However, the fifth philosopher is going to have two chopsticks in front of them (1 and 5). They need to pick up the lowest chopstick, but the first philosopher already picked up 1. Thus the fifth philosopher doesn't pick up anything. This means chopstick 5 is open!! Yay, now one philosopher can start eating with 4 and 5, and when he is done and put down his chopsticks, others can eat. This avoids a deadlock.
But.. this is not efficient for computers with large databases, as Caspian said.
Caspian's explanation involves having a waiter. Basically, the philosophers just ask if they can pick up a chopstick, and the waiter checks to see if doing so would involve a deadlock before letting them. The waiter would also make sure to let people who haven't eaten longer to have priority, so no one starves. "Mutex" is just a fancy CS term used for the waiter. Oh, and the reason he mentions parallelism, cuz is "a type of computation in which many calculations or processes are carried out simultaneously". A waiter reduces this. BTW I'm no expert, so apologies for any mistakes.
That’s cool
I am not an expert? bro i am a cs student and you made it as simple as possible. Respect!!!
@@selamnew8302thank you!!! I’m a CS student too 😊
Teach your ways, master.
Teach me your ways, master.
simple explanation : Consider 3 spoons ( S1, S2, S3 )and 4 people ( A1, A2, A3, A4). Now all four people want to eat with spoon, problem is there is one less spoon. If all 4 people try to get spoon at same time, they will fight for spoon ( in computer, processes trying to get computer resource), this will lead to no one having food and no process will be completed. This above situation is called dead-lock.
solution to above problem:
1. Give priority : let's say we set priority like A1 > A2. Now if there is only one spoon and 2 person, since A1 is having higher priority he will use spoon, meanwhile A2 will wait for process to finish and then will use it, this way there will be no fighting for spoons.
2. first come, first serve: this is generally avoided in larger programs
3rd; Overlord protocol. 1 spoon isn't picked up till given permission. Once permission given to X person, X person picks it up and eats.
This is a redirection of resources while throttling how much data's input/output stream is.
Issue about this protocol is that one entity given priority according to the Overlord's priority. So A1, A2, A3, and A4 have the same level of priority as the next one, just the time limit is superimposed. Unless, priority protocols have been issued by one of the people to be granted additional time.
This setup would require additional limits to insure X person isn't granted Y amount of time.
It's an AI problem, and a very dangerous one.
Basically there’s always one left out no matter what
that sounds too simple and I'm left searching for answers.
What Caspian presents is a third option that is now coming into a technological zeitgeist through AI. An AI could act as a third party and determine which process need to be completely when to determine the most efficient order. Essentially, a dynamic priority system that takes many factors into account.
Thanks for the Operating Systems reminder, honestly I'd read about this in process synchronization in college but the way they where frazing it in the show, I didn't get it, but now I do, jhus basic process synchronization
God this show is extremely underrated..
I think most tangible non computer science example of this problem is an intersection for cars. A small intersection with low traffic might be able to get away with a stop sign, and basic rules about which car gets priority but on high traffic intersections with multiple lanes that would descend into chaos causing accidents and dead lock. The 3rd party solution would be a traffic light, or traffic officer that would stay at the intersection directing which lanes and cars can go.
Another real world example could be how airports operate. At a busy airport pilots need to call the airport to get permission to land or take off. The Airport traffic controllers take on the role of the “waiter” and can dynamically adjust priority based on emergencies, remaining fuel, weather etc.
This will definitely not become a future plot point in the series
Hahahahah
Lols dinner exposition
You mean one must be sacrificed in the end
Yeah sorry bro the show got cancelled
@@albozru1eYeah, I was shocked when I heard it happen
So much potential down the drain...
I love this show
Pantheon is such an underrated anime
It's not an anime 😂😂 and yes it's very underrated.
@@ggyggg2272 i still listen to its songs. Anime or not, its really good
I get most of it. my solution is: break the effing chopstick in half and use the two smaller chopsticks. but it's NOT really about chopsticks.
Or just use our hands
no, i mean that does work.
split the resources equally between systems and have them all run proceses at the same time, though slightly less efficient and more power requirement due to "smaller chopsticks"
i'm ditching house of the dragons to watch this
Smart move.
Good
Did I just fucking get dinning philospher'ed in a show... LEAVE ME ALONE I don't want to think about mutex's while not geting paid
Borrow a stick while someone chewing. :(
Dammit still no season 2😢
season 2 coming out now
in October 15th
Yeah I still don't get it.
If someone can summarize this for me I would be grateful
Basically if the program has an assigned hierarchy, it’ll work if you have only one database. If you introduce more than one database it stalls and crashes, to solve the issue introduce a third party, essentially a mediator who grants permission to allocate resources so the program runs smoothly
Edit: I hoped that helped. If not tell me and I’ll try to explain better, I’m not good at it but that’s why I try. Practice makes better
👌
Unfortunately it was canceled. If it was on Netflix or hulu it would definitely have succeeded
Good news, it's on Amazon Prime, second season starts on Sunday.
@@drybjed seriously? Holy shit yes!
@@ElasticGoblinwatched the entire season.
OBAMNA
SODA!!!
0:25
my whole issue was why they would want a boy genius to grow up with an abusive dad
Because for the inflection points in his life must be achieved, the trauma and experience with his father would have to shape him into becoming holstrom, this is an expensive experiment with a lot of people pulling the strings, and Caspian has a purpose, he wasn't born to run in the dark bumbling for meaning.
His life was modeled after Stevens. To manipulate Caspians character development they tried to mirror the childhood of the original.
@@argonauttales We get that. The question is that are abused kids more accustomed to complex problem solving skills? Because they were deprived?
@@suzygirl1843 No, this was just Steven Holstroms development. Every person has a different brain, that reacts different to certain stimuli. Holstrom in particular became the way he did because of his abusive dad and fighting back. So a clone of Holstrom would react the same way, provided everything else was in order. However, if they just raised a random baby like this, it might react differently, like becoming more violent/aggressive or even killing himself.
@@nbkhnzzr That can't be proven IRL
Our religion is too powerful for this show! Help! 😭
What show is this?
Pantheon
too bad you can't watch this legally anymore
@@abman136 lmfao
@@abman136 let's hope. I heard it could still get picked up