Re: Physics Simulation (Re: Everything You Know (about Parallel Programming) Is Wrong!: A Wild Screed about the Future)

BGB wrote:
> On 4/4/2012 9:29 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>> - game-like simulations (which I'm more familiar with): but these are 
>> serious games, with lots of people and vehicles running around 
>> practicing techniques, or experimenting with new weapons and tactics, 
>> and so forth; or pilots training in team techniques by flying 
>> missions in a networked simulator (and saving jet fuel); or decision 
>> makers practicing in simulated command posts -- simulators take the 
>> form of both person-in-the-loop (e.g., flight sim. with a real pilot) 
>> and CGF/SAF (an enemy brigade is simulated, with information inserted 
>> into the simulation network so enemy forces show up on radar screens, 
>> heads-up displays, and so forth)
>>
>> For more on the latter, start at:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Interactive_Simulation
>> http://www.sisostds.org/
>>
>
> so, sort of like: this stuff is to gaming what IBM mainframes are to 
> PCs?...
>
Not so sure.  Probably similar levels of complexity between a military 
sim. and, say, World of Warcraft.  Fidelity to real-world behavior is 
more important, and network latency matters for the extreme real-time 
stuff (e.g., networked dogfights at Mach 2), but other than that, IP 
networks, gaming class PCs at the endpoints, serious graphics 
processors.  Also more of a need for interoperability - as there are 
lots of different simulations, plugged together into lots of different 
exercises and training scenarios - vs. a MMORPG controlled by a single 
company.

> I had mostly heard about military people doing all of this stuff using 
> decommissioned vehicles and paintball and similar, but either way.
>
> I guess game-like simulations are probably cheaper.
In terms of jet fuel, travel costs, and other logistics, absolutely.  
But... when you figure in the huge dollars spent paying large systems 
integrators to write software, I'm not sure how much cheaper it all 
becomes.  (The big systems integrators are not known for brilliance of 
their coders, or efficiencies in their process -- not a lot of 20-hour 
days, by 20-somethings betting on their stock options.  A lot of good 
people, but older, slower, more likely to put family first; plus a lot 
of organizational overhead built into the prices.)

--

-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra