@Gribnit said in Australia Tax: the price of international routing:
@Luhmann yup. Next time you die, you'll be standing somewhere in there.
Unlike the last time he died.
@Gribnit said in Australia Tax: the price of international routing:
@Luhmann yup. Next time you die, you'll be standing somewhere in there.
Unlike the last time he died.
@kazitor said in Australia Tax: the price of international routing:
I wonder if I can bankrupt these companies by just hard-refreshing their storefronts over and over.
I tried. Did not work.
[realistic]
Steam regional prices confirms Australia is #1 cash-cow.
besides: They show Steam has multiple tiers of prices for European countries, which (I assume) is against the law.
[edit]
Does Steam's dashboard/tool displays expected product or monetary value? Maybe some feedback-loop between such tool, selling gamedevelopers, and buying customers, created these big differences.
Ah, a good preserved article from the previous century
Did someone mention the solution? It's readable on Distill.
This research is probably the source, of the verge imagery. Includes many more examples and how to counteract this type of attack.
Has many interesting topics. Mostly about the results of their network. Seems it organizes relational images and texts, into 'concept-neurons'. and how useful it's representation is.
ps includes pics and a partial playground for the kids, like me
[edit]
Pff, skipped over boomzilla his post, somehow. But this article is still worth mentioning it, because of it's value.
@aitap said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
So the real (natural) colour space is "all possible spectral functions
P(λ)
" and the colours we perceive (with our puny(X,Y,Z)
tristimuli instead of infinite amounts of infinitely small buckets ofΔλ
) are all fake, then? I hope I understand you correctly this time.
Our eyesight just has some purple-colory side-effects of fitting it's XYZ vector on a 1-dimensional function. And yes, apparently I believe that color-perception in itself is fake.
I could argue that stimuli and perceiving those, are by definition a translation (interpretation) of the actual experience (receiving the stimuli by photon). Or that by definition, light could be perceived in a non-visual way (like having a skin which tickles dependent on light perceived), which is coded without any notion of color.
Very useless to argue for so I won't.
I argue that our eyes interpret signals in context of previous ones (cone-saturation) and interpret averages over timespans (gray-scaling), so our eyes in itself, interpret the same color, differently, depending on our state.
A human is just the worst measuring-stick, science can use.
@cvi said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
You should read up on black body radiation / thermal radiation. In short, it's generated by thermal motion, not from e.g. electron decay from discrete states.
I understand. I assume we can break that non-atomic operation down, to the point that 'every different wavelength is produced by a different internal state and/or process, and the complete spectrum we see consists of millions of these processes happening with millions of particles, at the same time'.
Don't get me wrong. I am way out of line here, if I compare my knowledge with some of you. Hell, I can't even define what I mean with a natural process, as it differs in many ways on many scales.
So as a request: I would love to see some kind of natural process in which Process(objects [2..inf]) -> [2..inf] photons + restproducts
where all photons are a result from the starting process, not from any sub-process, nor dependent on the others' creation.
@cvi said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
When it's produced, no.
No, when it's produced too. Black body radiation is (as mentioned) broad-spectrum. It's the number one source of light (mainly because the sun outshines everything else by unfunny amounts).
The black body would have multiple states in which different processes, create different wavelengths.
If you're talking about singular photons, the first part of your statements makes no sense. Singular photons have a single wavelength/frequency, so they will be single wavelength when they reach our eyes as well.
You are totally right. The photon still is monochromatic. I only tried to claim, that light we see in our lifes, is from multiple sources and as such it would be an exception when you can perceive a monochromatic color in it's true glory (without surrounding noise).
When we argue for a 100% isolated case (a LED on steroids), we maybe can conclude that for some power supply over x time, all energy went in the process exiting 1 or multiple electrons, and all energy came out in the form of light with the same amount of energy (hence, all light had the same frequency, regardless of empirical measurement-variances).
(b) There are always minor variations to everything in the real world. Even in a perfect system, you still have to deal with uncertainty. In a real-world system, you additionally have all sorts of noise (thermal, ...). This isn't a measurement variance; "imperfect" measurements just add on top.
Uncertainty already starts at power supply. If we can't input with deterministic accuracy, how can we conclude that the output does not correspond to the input, with deterministic accuracy? Not to mention we need to measure the complete state as well. For every planck's length and dT (preferably less).
Possible? No. Feasible? Yes. When you're a determinist.
@cvi said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
But that complete spectrum, did not come from 1 source, so it would be a mistake to think, that there exist objects who emit more then 1 frequency at the same time.
Monochromatic light is rather the exception than the rule.
When it reaches your eye? yes. When it's produced, no.
Black body radiation (=sunlight) is full-spectrum. Most materials have more than one absorption/emission line.
But only when you bombard them with energy.
LEDs/Lasers are the exception here, where the emitted light is often quite narrow-band (though it's possible to construct LEDs that have multiple or even wide emission bands).
The question becomes how you'd even define "1 frequency". Take something like an Na-lamp (Sodium vapour lamp). These are often considered to be monochromatic, but they actually emit at two distinct frequencies, 589nm ad 589.56nm. And both of those peaks also have a certain width.
defining it is easier then observing it. Take your lamp:
Power goes in. Light, heat, friction, chemical reactions, come out.
Which (concrete) processes are there, and which are responsible for which frequency?
When we argue for a 100% isolated case (a LED on steroids), we maybe can conclude that for some power supply over x time, all energy went in the process exiting 1 or multiple electrons, and all energy came out in the form of light with the same amount of energy (hence, all light had the same frequency, regardless of empirical measurement-variances).
@aitap said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
I guess the problem boils down to whether "a real colour" is
- a tristimulus / a point in a colour space (with a separate holy war on which colour space represents "real" colours), i.e. something that happens in the head, with @kazitor supporting this point in the CIE XYZ colour space
- a single wavelength, which seems to be the point preferred by @Flips
- the spectrum (as a real-valued function of wavelength) of visible-range electromagnetic radiation emitted, reflected or transmitted by an object that reaches the observer in a given point in space, which is the definition that some spectroscopists I know like the most
- something else
But no sir. I do view the complete spectrum as real color space. But that complete spectrum, did not come from 1 source, so it would be a mistake to think, that there exist objects who emit more then 1 frequency at the same time. A spectrum is more like a statistical analysis on a group of said objects.
But my point is:
When you see light, you can't determine the constituent frequencies based on how you perceive the color of that light. There seem to be multiple ways to 'construct light' which look the same but have different properties.
And apparently this phenomenon is basis to discerning real (natural) colors, and that imaginary family of purples, as those fakey ones are not represented on the spectrum, only in our brain.
Come to think of it.. It's actually the same as the black/white discussion.
Flips retroactively upvotes all previous posts
@dkf said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
there is no single (lightwave) frequency which would exite both red and blue cones in our eyes
So, where is the purple?
@error said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
[...]
It seems there are multiple sets of imaginary colors, dependent on the source and target.
Your article talks about the hyperbolic colors, but starts off with a composite of all colors (white) instead of the opposite color only (as appearing in wiki's infographic).
Most interesting for me is the stygian set of colors. You superimpose color on an image where color is 100% absent, which is in line with the article: Our visual state gets saturated and continues to send signals, after the visual input has stopped.
@kazitor said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
Called it!
@Flips said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
Purple only exists as a combined light of red and blue
@kazitor said in Unreal claims concerning purple:
On an entirely unrelated note, here’s an empirical approximation of the appearance of 420 nm light.
C'monnnn, the least you could do is offer something beyond the pre-emptive canned responses!
I still don't understand why the unrelated note about some violet will help us identify a purple
ps About your infographic; Every object can only have real colors. But when emitted these colors get interfered with, which shapes them into fake colors. This will be true for 100% of light we experience on a daily basis.
Purple only exists as a combined light of red and blue, as there is no single (lightwave) frequency which would exite both red and blue cones in our eyes.
@sloosecannon said in Security Snake Oil Inc.:
@Bulb said in Security Snake Oil Inc.:
I don't see how, but maybe somebody could make the user click, some time in advance, the always option with some trick like this (see here for more detailed discussion).
[...] In fact, being able to interact with any other app (aside from passing an intent) is pretty hard to do in general
Which is often a requirement for a sand-boxed security system
Re: I am a real programmer damnit!
I agree with DogsB that DBA is more of a formality nowadays because of ORMs. And because the requirement that logic should be part of the software (a service which the ORMs provide) and not part of the data(base), businesses reduced databases to a storage-slave like any HDD drive.
@Benjamin-Hall
statements as "“Stochastic” is just a scientific-sounding word for “random”." makes me dislike the tone of the article. It's the level of "yo mama"-jokes.
To top it all off: It was ignorance from the writer how the software (or any software) operates under specific conditions.
Happens to everyone. But in this case, would bring shame on the writer, because of said tone.
@levicki said in Gąska is a tart savour and wants to give floating jobs to Javascript:
[...] I am not amused. [...]
I can read that in every post you make.
In the Netherlands (in Europe really), tracking is illegal when you don't have a consent of the user who is being tracked. Some cities used wifi-tracking and got a (symbolic) fine because of it.
@dfdub said in Ubuntu has decided to no longer support Steam:
The problem was that every attempt ended up being technically inferior
Nice to know Windows is a superior product
ps Someone should create a poll on that.
@JBert
After reading through the responses to issues in their npm.community, I get the feel that npm developers approach to solving problems seems to be just use a different hacky workaround and not actually resolving the actual issue.
As probably every company does when they prefer pushing their products onto the shelf.
also: backwards compatibility
@Gąska
I felt that quote was applicable to both me and levicki. Maybe I'm silly again for like the third time... But thanks for telling me
@levicki said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
@Flips said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
Actually, every piece of software can be rewritten so they would never create objects dynamically. That's like forcing to load a complete blu-ray movie into memory, before you can play it.
Actually, static code would stream Blu-ray movie through reusing fixed size buffers, dynamic code would be constantly allocating and freeing all kinds of buffers and doing endless, pointless copying of data. Guess which one is faster, more predictable, and more reliable?
@Gąska said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
Why are you always comparing the best possible implementation of one technology to the worst possible implementation of another technology? Usually that leads to wrong conclusions, and even in those rare cases when the conclusions are right, you come off as insincere and people get very cautious about believing you.
Yes you guys are right.
My comparisons suck most of the time. I use them a lot (unfortunately) because I'm not that known with the English language, and the IT nomenclature/jargon.
ps The discussion about Inform's keywords/grammar in multiple languages.....
I would suggest to write a "rulebook" or whatcha-ma-call-it which converts Inform back to an imperative programming language. That would be so funny. And would be much easier to comprehend the differences (= shortcomings of Inform)
@JBert said in FIrefox armagadd-on:
@loopback0 The trick is that nobody wants to do that.
Ofcourse not because it would rip a hole in the space-time continuum.
@Gąska said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
@Flips said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
Inform7 is unable to implement about 100% of the design patterns, because objects are immutable (static), and as such it's not even suited for making a text-based adventure like Leisure Suit Larry.
That's not true. Object creation is static - that is, you cannot create more objects than you started with - but objects themselves can be freely modified.
Hm sorry I misunderstood (partially). I knew you ment about object creation (so we would not be able to implement the Factory design-patterns, or create other objects "on the fly" for that matter).
Think it's my lack of knowledge.. But I'm still wondering on what you ment by
I'm saying it'd be PITA to work with. For something like Inform 7, you need attributes as "first class citizens" - take value, save it in variable, add to object, remove from object, look up object by attribute, create new attributes, create objects without attributes and make it interactable to some degree. With the API you proposed - where every object is an instance of some static class with fixed behavior - most of these are very hard bordering on impossible
Still I think my conclusion "Inform7 is unable to implement about 100% of the design patterns" is a correct one, and as such Inform7 seems a worthless language to me. Would be kind of you guys (including @levicki ) if you still can react on this statement.
_
@levicki said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
@Flips said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
What you (Levicki) says is "How many code do you need for writing this wearable-behaviour INCLUDING the code to be able to implement players and wearables (which Inform7 does for me, so I need to write less code, so Inform7 is better)"
No, I explicitly said EXCLUDING that code, hence the simple example of Wearable class on which he got stuck up.
Excluding that code, makes the assumption these structures (Inform7 implements) are already in place, which results in (again) about the same lines of code as Inform7 needs...
Then it becomes a ridiculous question, equal to "How many particles you need to create the same universe we life in, assuming you already have such a universe"
What you (Levicki) actually say: "C (a
functionalimperative programming language) isn't object-orientated, so it has to be a static language, just like Inform7"No, that's absolutely not what I said. You are a fucking moron.
- I never said anything about C language itself in that quote.
You made the verbose comparison, whether you like it or not.
- I said programmers are making a conscious choice to write certain kind of software (i.e. embedded stuff in C) without using dynamic objects.
Not needing to create objects on the fly, is different then not being able to create objects on the fly.
- I also said that it has served them (and us) extremely well.
ofcourse it serves extremely well, if you only make software which would never create objects on the fly.
Actually, every piece of software can be rewritten so they would never create objects dynamically. That's like forcing to load a complete blu-ray movie into memory, before you can play it.
@dkf said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
@Flips Well, the first one is that C isn't a functional programming language…
I already looked it up and indeed, it isn't.
C is a general-purpose, imperative computer programming language
I called every language without OOP, a functional programming language. But it is indeed very different. Thanks, and I will fix my previous post.
@Gąska said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
Obviously you never tried to make command processor for an extremely extensible system. (I did. I quickly abandoned the project because it was simply too much work for me at the time.)
That's like creating your own interpreter..
I once had the idea to create an interpreter for PHP-scripts, to enumerate a (dependency)tree for documentation-purposes. It only needed a limited amount of syntax-parsing (include, require, object-construction calls and namespaces). But due to the "endless" variants of syntax-markup I deemed the task too big to pursue.
I thought it was obvious that "keywords" is shorthand for "grammar rules that use keywords for reference points".
Ofcourse that's obvious. Keywords define which type of grammar rules has to be used. IFs, FORs, SWITCHes, etc all have their specific grammar.
@levicki said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
Again, what I posted wasn't a design -- I was trying to explain to you (a moron), what I wanted you to replicate (not really implement, just to eyeball how much effort would it be) in a language other than Inform 7. Maybe I failed because I am bad at explaining, maybe I failed because you have proven yourself to be a dickless asshat moron time and time again. It doesn't matter -- what matters is that you first said it's the same number of lines like Inform and now you are saying how it is complicated. In other words you are full of bovine excrement as usual.
What you (Levicki) says is "How many code do you need for writing this wearable-behaviour INCLUDING the code to be able to implement players and wearables (which Inform7 does for me, so I need to write less code, so Inform7 is better)"
I think Gqaska talked about 2 subjects:
I think the counter-argument of Gqaska would/should be like:
I can create a 3D game in Unity with less then 35 lines of code. How many lines of code you need to write a 3D game in Inform7, without a library which implements a 3D game-engine in Inform7?
And
Inform7 is unable to implement about 100% of the design patterns, because objects are immutable (static), and as such it's not even suited for making a text-based adventure like Leisure Suit Larry.
Most embedded programs written in C do not create objects dynamically as a matter of choice yet they still work and represent some of the safest computer systems ever built.
What you (Levicki) actually say: "C (a functional imperative programming language) isn't object-orientated, so it has to be a static language, just like Inform7"
@admiral_p said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
@Flips I find Einaudi quite mundane, not because he isn't "out there" (I dislike most "avantgarde" music, even though his stuff is "extremely safe" from a compositional point of view), but because his stuff is competent, yet cliché-ridden "melancholic" soundtrack music, with the saccharine pianos, dramatic crescendos, pause, a single soft string phrase adding even more suspension, piano again repeating the main theme but faster with a mp/mf string backing and some staccato maybe, etc. I put him in the same category as Yann Tiersen for instance. I have absolutely nothing against them, it's just that they appear to be churning out a product and not a soulful work of art.
I like Yann Tiersen too!
Look.. I don't know any better then what my heart tells me. Even tough Einaudi is "musically a low-class componist" (paraphrasing), my heart (sometimes) just wants cliché-ridden melancholic music, apparently. And by the way, life is just a stack of pseudo-randomly generated cliches, if you ask me.
Still it's interesting to know, Einaudi is classical's variant of a money-grabber pop-artist.
I am wondering what you think about another "classical artist" I like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuWpbTt2_p0
@sh_code said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
... not that i want to be an asshole (in this specific case), but... was it intentional to make it sound like all of the pretentious "contemporary classical" crap which i can't help but think is precisely the result of theory-laden bigheads who think that if it makes theoretical sense and uses lots of "advanced" theoretical "techniques", it automatically must be good music?
Your explanation is a little attacking, but I agree with your conclusion (see below). For what it's worth, @zekka has courage to let us hear his music, so it would be nice to act a bit encouraging in your critique.
@zekka said in Microsoft debuts Bosque – a yet another pointless programming language:
@sh_code it sounds like you do want to be an asshole
I would like to point out, that explaining music pros/cons is kinda hard, but I try it a bit more positive.
I actually love the style, but it's not coherent. I compare music to books; Every progression in the story has a action->reaction like behaviour, where the "situational status" is followed by relevant, "real-life-like" change to another "state of the story". The proven path from "exposition and rising action to a climax, followed by falling action to denoument".
In music, it is often deduced by the feeling it gives and "state-transitions" between the "building-blocks/pieces".
Best I can do is let you all listen to one of my favorite composers with (I think) the same sounding style of music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8X_aMT5z0A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYEooPeyz5M
Would love to hear if you guys like/dislike these songs.
@levicki
@Gąska
I actually love these natural programming languages; Part of it, is because they fail (programmers still describe everything as in a 'normal formal programming language'). It actually undermines the goal/usefullness of themself.
But mostly because the people, who discuss them, have to act like a "normal formal programming language" interpreter themselves.
Flips hands out the 2019 Anti-Turing-Award to Gąska and Levicki
@boomzilla said in April Fools Day is leaking?:
I think I've gotten used to Arial at this point.
You got to be high to name a font to the most famous mermaid ever
I'm so glad I have a custom style, with the best font ever made
@blek said in We need to be more user hostile to help them embrace freedom!:
@Zerosquare People who go to install parties are nowhere close to normal. Hell, I had no idea those were still happening.
Me neither, but they sounds somewhat erotic, ment for real fetishists.
Anyway, instead of the devil having, well, a devil mask, they could dress him up as Bill Gates.
Can't imagine the people, who visit these parties, will be "closer to normal" when the devil is cos-playing as Bill Gates.
Vanilla allows you to build concurrent software in Python
_
Bookmarked topic for future-bashing of PHP and JS.
ps @Tsaukpaetra Random Poke
@sloosecannon
I never thought Delphi has the ability to make native applications (on any platform besides Windows/x86). afaik there's something finicky going on with programming for mobile platforms, as they function more like interpreters then 'binary assemblers' (or what should I call it). And actually I don't know how Delphi builds mobile apps as I only used it for Windows/x86 applications.
@sloosecannon said in WTF Bites:
X. [Design] Navbar/Textfields/Buttons does not follow standard Material Design patterns [...]
However I did develop apps some time ago. Though I never grasped how I could build anything with Material Design, or a visual nice interface in general. So my one (released) app looks somewhat the same.
I definitely lack knowledge for creating a professional looking app... To the point I preferred another method for creating easy, flexible and good-looking interfaces: OpenGL
@Rhywden
Well.. I like the Pascal Language. But they support a lot more I've seen.
Btw I think 5000 dollar is rather cheap, as a good piece of software can be sold for lots more. Or even saves lots of money spend on salaries.
WTF of my day: So I had been using a framework (Meteor) which allows me to do everything in one package, using Cordova I could even deal with iOS and Android with merely one codebase.
However, due to the nature of the beast (I should've suspected as much), something went wrong - basically, the browser side worked just fine, the Android part didn't register any calls to the server (which, for example, prevented something as unimportant as users logging in) and Hot Code Push didn't work as well which made a complete restart neccessary every time I changed client-side code ... and the iOS version simply exploded.
I would suggest you try this product. I don't have experience with this new version, or the requirements you have, but RAD Studio advertises it can do what you want.
Embarcadero® RAD Studio XE2 [...] build data-rich, visually engaging applications for Windows, Mac, mobile, .NET, PHP and the Web. [...] across multiple desktop, mobile, Web, and database platforms
Currently pivoting to something more sane. Am considering either Flutter (based on Dart) which would mean two codebases. Or going completely native (i.e. Swift, Kotlin and Javascript) but that would be three codebases. FML.
Haha, native Javascript That always cranks me up. Even though I would argue the same for Swift and Kotlin: I wouldn't call them native (even tough they have better performance). But maybe I'm just unaware of the definition of "native".
@Gąska
What? You forgot that the last two pages is filled with offtopic conversations, by amnesia-struck people with the attention-span of a goldfish? And maybe, maybe... you are one of them
Can someone point me to the 'PHP == TR ' so I can post this article and
@DogsB said in EU testing "lie-detecting" AI on external borders:
From the article about facial recognition:This was despite the pair having a number of different features, including different haircuts
Quality
The article was written this way because the only distinction DailyMail can make between these chinese people, is their haircut, and they didn't want to admit how RACIST© they felt about it.
If these journalists can't differentiate between the chinese, why expect that a computer-program can? conclusion: DailyMail is discriminating Apple's Facetime.
@Xyro said in Overheard at Work:
I don't think I'd advocate 32-bit byte architectures, though. Imagine the hex dumps!
Hex dumps will stay the same size if you encode them in tetrahexaconta/base 64 encoding (16 bits per character). The only thing which actually will change is the name 'Hex dumps'.
[edit]
thought/calculated wrong, probably..
Mind=blown
@_P_ said in TRWTF is the entire JS ecosystem:
Prototype, or how to do OO in JS the right way
[...]
We can even override just one specific instance.
Who want's a lot of Ducks where you (as the programmer) aren't sure how and why some specific Ducks quack different then the others? Specially if they quack in different datatypes.
@Lorne-Kates said in Stardock, Star Control, I'm in space?:
Fuck both of them and buy Star Citizen!
The most expensive and longest running joke of the gaming history.
"Fuck all of them and buy Duke Nukem Forever!"
@Gurth said in Mr. Musk, you tease us...:
Nobody so far gave a reason for why it would have worked, so I’m wondering what makes yours different :)
That <p>-artiicle you gave was reason I disagreed. Hope you understand now (I'm not always clarifying enough unfortunately. Specially with my broken Dutch-English language)
YMBNH
@anotherusername said in Mr. Musk, you tease us...:
If you click the "COMPOSE " in the composer, you'll see that it does accept<a>
, as well as a few other "safe" HTML tags.
Thanks. I never knew. So finally I learned how I can make code-blocks too! Kind-of handy, on a programmers forum
@Gurth said in Mr. Musk, you tease us...:
It did work well enough for the kinds of web pages people typically made back then: little more than straight text with headers, some colours, and a couple of images.
I can imagine it worked. But for a different reason. To elaborate:
If you got an <a> anchor, with a <parent> element, and you close the </parent> it would auto-close the children (in this example ) too.because the browser assumes this anchor should've been closed by now. Which probably is expected/correct behavior.
Otherwise (without such parent) you get this behaivor, where the rest of the text will be part of the anchor <a>.
Funniest part: even tough this forum should not accept <a> (and maybe all html-elements for that matter), it does. This forum even makes it a clickable link (and the browser autocloses with </a> after the parent-element, my forumpost-element, gets closed. again, expected behavior).
Who's gonna file a bug-report?
@Gurth said in Mr. Musk, you tease us...:
It just worked, really.
No it did not work, really. Evidence.
@pie_flavor
Hehe thanks.. Too busy with my new job. Maybe I can share some WTFs in the future if I encounter one (even tough I hope I won't find any, as it makes life harder then necessary).
DESKTOP-B8VU58U
10 64-bit
Intel I7 4770 @3.4 Ghz
Time: 91134.100ms
Time: 59175.500ms
(Strange time difference, and strangely a better performance then some better CPUs of you guys here)