Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   alcinnz (alcinnz@floss.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 04:07:09 JST alcinnz

   I wonder... Could we call 2005 the year computing power reached sufficiency?

   Is the only reason *basically* any of us need more computing power down to inefficient software?

   I'm sure some of you will want to draw the line earlier, but I made sure to include fully-programmable GPUs (like the XBox 360's) in my cut-off!

   This is before smartphones, but only just!

   • Embed this notice
     Code of Amor 💘 (codeofamor@social.codeofamor.net)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 11:53:09 JST Code of Amor 💘

     in reply to

     • Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     @alcinnz @rysiek It's always been inefficient software. But greater computing power allows more progress by allowing inefficiencies to enter the human domain - either by employing less intelligent, less skilled workers, or pushing them to do it quicker or to take shortcuts. ☹️ #capitalismruinseverything

   • Embed this notice
     maswan (maswan@mastodon.acc.sunet.se)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 11:53:34 JST maswan

     in reply to

     @alcinnz
     Personal, yes. Scientific, no.

   • Embed this notice
     steeph 🎆 ٩(˘◡˘)۶ (steeph@todon.eu)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 11:53:58 JST steeph 🎆 ٩(˘◡˘)۶

     in reply to

     @alcinnz I mean, when I build a website, it usually doesn't work in all browsers. When I write software for myself, I don't ware how inefficient it is. When I build hardware, I use an ESP even if it wouldn't be necessary. Many people may be different. But actual design choices say that most people are similarly lazy and don't want to miss the frameworks that have been built around already working tech once they're there.

   • Embed this notice
     steeph 🎆 ٩(˘◡˘)۶ (steeph@todon.eu)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 11:53:59 JST steeph 🎆 ٩(˘◡˘)۶

     in reply to

     @alcinnz Two cores in consumer CPUs were a big step. That is where I'd define the cut-off. So, very close.

     It's interesting to think about. But even if we would agree that inefficient software is to blame for everything, most still wouldn't want to write only software that runs well on almost 20 year old hardware.

     alcinnz repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     alcinnz (alcinnz@floss.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 12:02:14 JST alcinnz

     in reply to

     • jollyrogue
     • Downbeatdan

     Reflecting some more...

     I think I'd bump that year I suggested by a year (to 2006) to edge in SSD drives! Those do make a real difference! Thus addressing @downbeatdan 's needs!

     Then again @jollyrogue likes 2013 Haswell CPUs with 8GB RAM...

     So we're still saying computers a decade or two old *should* suffice for home use...

   • Embed this notice
     Downbeatdan (downbeatdan@mastodon.nz)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 12:08:15 JST Downbeatdan

     in reply to

     @alcinnz A bit later for sound recording. I remember getting my first MacPro in 2008 and could finally have as many tracks, with as many processing plugins as I ever wanted.

   • Embed this notice
     Duchamp Pérez (hugoestr@functional.cafe)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 12:13:38 JST Duchamp Pérez

     in reply to

     @alcinnz I switched to writing on vim because it feels fast. It also doesn't overheat my computer or drains my battery like VS Code did some years ago, or having Word open