Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ItsAConspiracy t1_it3xcvk wrote

Reply to comment by Fantastic-Climate-84 in The End of Moore’s Law: Silicon computer chips are nearing the limit of their processing capacity. But is this necessarily an issue? Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies by CPHfuturesstudies

I was making eight bucks an hour for most of that time, but it was still fantastic.

Now it doesn't matter how much money you have, you're still not going to buy that kind of performance leap every couple years. Everything's just gonna stay about the same, with just small incremental improvements.

That's the end of Moore's Law. We're going to be stuck with pretty much the same computers we have now, until someone invents a whole new computing technology that's not based on silicon chips.

4

Fantastic-Climate-84 t1_it3y2x5 wrote

Dude, now you’re being glib.

Families couldn’t afford a new computer every two years to keep up with schools, people struggled getting new laptops for universities, that you were able to afford it — shit, so was I — doesn’t make it ideal.

The way we work with computers over the last five years has dramatically changed, already. It’s now possible to work from your phone! You can hook up an adapter to an hdmi cable and run that to a tv, use Bluetooth devices for mouse and keyboard, and off you go.

I do 90% of my work from a tablet today. To do what I do, I would never have dreamed that possible.

You’re choosing to ignore the dynamic swing occurring, which is another element to every. Single. One. Of these articles.

1

ItsAConspiracy t1_it3zkfc wrote

Dude, I was making like a buck and a half over minimum wage. Don't tell me how awful Moore's Law was for people without money. I barely had any and thought it was fantastic. In any case, doesn't matter whether we like it or not, point is that it's gone.

As for phones, I have an iPhone 6s and my girlfriend has a 13, and they're not all that different.

But sure, people are still engineering clever new things. That's great, but it's not Moore's Law, which was an absolute tsunami of raw new computing power every year.

3

Sylvurphlame t1_it4h16i wrote

> As for phones, I have an iPhone 6s and my girlfriend has a 13, and they’re not all that different.

To an extent, I that’s because software developers have to account for people having older phones. Apps don’t fully utilize the performance capability of smartphones because they have to assume somebody has a three or four year old device.

Also, I kind feel like if you’re not noticing a difference between an iPhone 6S and a 13, either you just don’t ask much of your phone or your girlfriend is severely underutilizing hers. :)

3

Fantastic-Climate-84 t1_it411q9 wrote

Now you’re just being dishonest.

> As for phones, I have an iPhone 6s and my girlfriend has a 13, and they’re not all that different.

Really? Really.

> But sure, people are still engineering clever new things.

And what handles the computations and functions those new things? The absolute powerhouses that sit in our pockets — well, not yours, but other pockets.

Again, that you could say that you barely had enough money, but we’re buying a new computer/processor/gpu every two years — because that’s what it was to keep up from the 2000s to about 2016 — tells me you’re not being honest.

I’m hopping off this comment train.

2

ItsAConspiracy t1_it44kxf wrote

I didn't say I bought a new computer every two years. I said people with money did. Doesn't mean I sat around being depressed about it. I was still super excited to see it all happening, and I got to experience it when we upgraded at work, in addition to the few upgrades I managed at home.

And all this is a side issue to that measly 3.5% annual improvement we have now.

But please, yes, hop off, this is getting unpleasant.

2

Fantastic-Climate-84 t1_it45vok wrote

https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/the-short-and-intriguing-history-of-v-16-and-w-16-engines/

−1

ItsAConspiracy t1_it5362d wrote

Yeah that's great, but that's just regular technological progress. Of course that will continue. That's not the same as Moore's Law, which was a doubling of performance every 18 to 24 months over a long period of time. If there had been a Moore's Law for cars, they'd get millions of miles per gallon by now.

1

Fantastic-Climate-84 t1_it5554g wrote

The point was that, even with pistons, adding more doesn’t mean better performance.

It’s no doubt you don’t see a difference when you’re still using tech that’s almost a decade old. Try keeping up, and you’ll notice a difference.

That said, crazy that your MacBook and phone are still working and able to be used, hey? Sure is rough for the consumer these days. Couldn’t use a ten year old computer back in 2008, let alone a phone.

Bleeding edge cuts both ways. Ai, drones, tablets replacing laptops, laptops replacing desktops, phones being the bulk of where we compute, but you’re still complaining.

−1

ItsAConspiracy t1_it5ejgn wrote

Sure there's a difference. But in terms of sheer compute it's still just 3.5% annually, according to OP's article. That's not Moore's Law. Tech progress continues but Moore's Law is still dead until we get a whole new chip tech. It's not complaining to just recognize reality.

1