3 ms·

If I can summarize what you are saying, we have been experiencing early symptoms of end of Moore's Law for the past 5 to 10 years, and nothing drastic has happe

by n00b101 10y ago

If I can summarize what you are saying, we have been experiencing early symptoms of end of Moore's Law for the past 5 to 10 years, and nothing drastic has happened yet, so there's nothing to worry about? Consider the possibility that such a narrative is simply describing a "slow-motion train wreck" as opposed to the absence of a "train wreck?" There is no doubt that the slow-down has been occurring for several years. One turning point was the collapse of Dennard Scaling around 2005, which led to stalling CPU clock speeds and the "multi-core crisis." I know that CPU clock speed has plateaued over a decade ago. I have not tracked costs, cache sizes, and other factors as closely, but comments here seem to be confirming that many factors have been stalled for the past 5 to 10 years (somewhere between the failure of Dennard Scaling and 28nm nodes). There have been other slow-motion slowdowns happening as well, including the collapse of PC sales growth and now the emerging collapse of smartphone sales growth. The fact that this has been happening for "a while" does not make me feel any more at ease. To be frank, I am less confident in your comments regarding the dependence (or lack thereof) of global economic growth on technology consumption. I beg to differ that it is just a "SV-startup-scene cognitive bubble" ... I'm pretty sure technology is systemically important to global economic growth.

brian-armstrong 10y ago
Most software companies won't have a lot of exposure here, since they just depend on the devices being out there. As long as there's no shortage of ideas, software advancements are still possible. There is certainly quite a lot of downside for hardware and device companies, though, and it's hard to guess how that will also ripple into companies that just do software
aleksei 10y ago
This is OT, but I can't wrap my head around the reverence of global economic growth. Surely it is unsustainable in the long run. It would seem far better if people weren't required to buy a new, slightly shinier, device every few years just to keep society from collapsing. As for the stalling of technological progress & sales, I would venture it's partly because the technology has caught up with other industries; eg. I can now watch HD movies on demand on my smartphone, at practically no cost. While it may be impractical to design smaller CPUs, there is also no incentive to do that, as people don't really have a need for it (also, see the rise in high end GPUs for VR gear, since that's what people want). However, I'd say there are other avenues of progress available than mere clock speeds, eg. energy consumption. I doubt marketing departments around the world will shrug and say 'Well, we had a good run, now it's time to call it a day'. Although that's what I'd hope for.
skybrian 10y ago
The thing is, we're not actually all in the same industry. Companies that sell phones might not be so happy if sales level off or decline, but others will do fine. On the software side, there are plenty of ways to innovate without the hardware getting better. If people stop upgrading phones, all the companies writing software to run on phones can still do their thing. Uber and AirBnB aren't really going to care; their apps already work. New businesses can come along based on mobile phone apps that put today's hardware to good use, even if the specs don't get any better. Or looking at entertainment, the game industry doesn't actually depend on better hardware. If the VR thing turns out to be a fad, game designers will still manage to come up with innovative new video games for existing platforms, and people will keep playing them. (Minecraft doesn't require the latest hardware.) Also, the design of phones can improve even if the raw hardware specs for CPU or memory aren't any better. You can see hardware innovations in other areas (like new sensors). Most recently, the fingerprint sensor is a good improvement. There are all sorts of opportunities for innovation and refinement that have nothing to do with Moore's law.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  When phones were wired you didn't 'upgrade' your phone for years if not decades. All the end of Moore's law indicates is the end of the free lunch: free performance increase for software without any work on that software. So instead of 'doom and gloom' I predict a very healthy re-surgence in reduction of bloat and efficiency, something that as far as I'm concerned can't happen fast enough. FWIW my cell phone is 6 years old and as long as it works I'll happily use it. If a phone is a status symbol or a fashion accessory then there are plenty of ways to get people to upgrade even if the underlying tech doesn't change so I'm quite sure that manufacturers will find a way to re-package the same tech in ways that allows them to sell into the elective replacement market.
UweSchmidt 10y ago
Excellent point. We have received technological advancement reliably and automatically for a long time. "Oops looks like we can have navigation software on the phone, just like that." - "Oh and VR goggles have just become viable, thanks Moore's Law". There is plenty of stuff to do with our current hardware, but a new breakthrough would be nice.
adwn 10y ago
> If I can summarize what you are saying, we have been experiencing early symptoms of end of Moore's Law for the past 5 to 10 years, and nothing drastic has happened yet, so there's nothing to worry about? Yes, and what's more, the software industry seems to be stronger than ever. > To be frank, I am less confident in your comments regarding the dependence (or lack thereof) of global economic growth on technology consumption. Oh no, I think a large part of global economic growth depends on technology, I just don't think it depends on continued exponential improvements in the underlying semiconductor process nodes. There are other ways to innovate than just relying on automatic hardware improvements.

by n00b101 10y ago

brian-armstrong 10y ago

Most software companies won't have a lot of exposure here, since they just depend on the devices being out there. As long as there's no shortage of ideas, software advancements are still possible. There is certainly quite a lot of downside for hardware and device companies, though, and it's hard to guess how that will also ripple into companies that just do software

aleksei 10y ago

This is OT, but I can't wrap my head around the reverence of global economic growth. Surely it is unsustainable in the long run. It would seem far better if people weren't required to buy a new, slightly shinier, device every few years just to keep society from collapsing. As for the stalling of technological progress & sales, I would venture it's partly because the technology has caught up with other industries; eg. I can now watch HD movies on demand on my smartphone, at practically no cost. While it may be impractical to design smaller CPUs, there is also no incentive to do that, as people don't really have a need for it (also, see the rise in high end GPUs for VR gear, since that's what people want). However, I'd say there are other avenues of progress available than mere clock speeds, eg. energy consumption. I doubt marketing departments around the world will shrug and say 'Well, we had a good run, now it's time to call it a day'. Although that's what I'd hope for.

skybrian 10y ago

The thing is, we're not actually all in the same industry. Companies that sell phones might not be so happy if sales level off or decline, but others will do fine. On the software side, there are plenty of ways to innovate without the hardware getting better. If people stop upgrading phones, all the companies writing software to run on phones can still do their thing. Uber and AirBnB aren't really going to care; their apps already work. New businesses can come along based on mobile phone apps that put today's hardware to good use, even if the specs don't get any better. Or looking at entertainment, the game industry doesn't actually depend on better hardware. If the VR thing turns out to be a fad, game designers will still manage to come up with innovative new video games for existing platforms, and people will keep playing them. (Minecraft doesn't require the latest hardware.) Also, the design of phones can improve even if the raw hardware specs for CPU or memory aren't any better. You can see hardware innovations in other areas (like new sensors). Most recently, the fingerprint sensor is a good improvement. There are all sorts of opportunities for innovation and refinement that have nothing to do with Moore's law.

jacquesm 10y ago
When phones were wired you didn't 'upgrade' your phone for years if not decades. All the end of Moore's law indicates is the end of the free lunch: free performance increase for software without any work on that software. So instead of 'doom and gloom' I predict a very healthy re-surgence in reduction of bloat and efficiency, something that as far as I'm concerned can't happen fast enough. FWIW my cell phone is 6 years old and as long as it works I'll happily use it. If a phone is a status symbol or a fashion accessory then there are plenty of ways to get people to upgrade even if the underlying tech doesn't change so I'm quite sure that manufacturers will find a way to re-package the same tech in ways that allows them to sell into the elective replacement market.

UweSchmidt 10y ago

Excellent point. We have received technological advancement reliably and automatically for a long time. "Oops looks like we can have navigation software on the phone, just like that." - "Oh and VR goggles have just become viable, thanks Moore's Law". There is plenty of stuff to do with our current hardware, but a new breakthrough would be nice.

adwn 10y ago

> If I can summarize what you are saying, we have been experiencing early symptoms of end of Moore's Law for the past 5 to 10 years, and nothing drastic has happened yet, so there's nothing to worry about? Yes, and what's more, the software industry seems to be stronger than ever. > To be frank, I am less confident in your comments regarding the dependence (or lack thereof) of global economic growth on technology consumption. Oh no, I think a large part of global economic growth depends on technology, I just don't think it depends on continued exponential improvements in the underlying semiconductor process nodes. There are other ways to innovate than just relying on automatic hardware improvements.