10 ms·
Given the cooling requirements, I suppose it would create completely impassable rift between datacenter computing and other kinds. Imagine how programming and o
by b0rsuk 6y ago
Given the cooling requirements, I suppose it would create completely impassable rift between datacenter computing and other kinds. Imagine how programming and operating systems might look in a world where processing power is 80x cheaper.
Considering that "data centers alone consume 2% of world's enegy", I think it's worth it.
- layoutIfNeeded 6y ago>Imagine how programming and operating systems might look in a world where processing power is 80x cheaper. So like 2009 compared to 2021? Based on that, I'd say even more inefficient webshit.
- systemvoltage 6y agoJavascript emulator in Javascript!
- dmingod666 6y agoDo you mean the "eval()" function?
- tsimionescu 6y agoNo, they mean writing the eval () function in pure JavaScript.
- dmingod666 6y agoWow
- lkbm 6y agoGary Bernhardt's presentation on the "history" of Javascript from 1995 to 2035 is hilarious and seems like something you'd enjoy: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death... It takes things way beyond simply "emulating Javascript in Javascript", yet is presented so well that you barely notice the transition from current (2014) reality to a comically absurd future.
- jnsie 6y agoAnyone remember Java 3D? 'cause I'm imagining Java 3D!
- vidanay 6y agoJava 11D™ It goes to eleven!
- sago 6y agoI don't understand your reference. It seems negative, but it's hard imho to go down on the success of Minecraft. Or am I misunderstanding you?
- zinekeller 6y agoMinecraft (obviously the Java edition) actually uses some native libraries (LWJGL) so I don't know if Minecraft is a good comparison.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y agoConsidering that many modern interfaces are somehow less responsive than ones written over 20 years ago even when running those programs on period hardware, I feel certain that you are right.
- xxpor 6y agoBut it probably took 80x less time to develop said software.
- layoutIfNeeded 6y agoI'd doubt that.
- nicoburns 6y agoSome things have improved a lot. Remember how long it took to boot a 2009 PC. I suspect if hardware perfromance stagnates then software optimisation will develop again.
- qayxc 6y agoCounter example: a C64 booted pretty much instantly back in 1983 ;) You could load and start an entire game on that thing (albeit from a ROM cartridge) in less time than a 2000-era PC took to just POST :D So PCs were a regression in performance in that regard compared to 1980s home computers and micros.
- Jweb_Guru 6y agoProcessing power is not 80x cheaper now than it was in 2009 unless you can do all your computation on a GPU.
- api 6y agoI don't see an impassible rift. Probably at first, but supercooling something very small is something that could certainly be productized if there is demand for it. I can see demand in areas like graphics. Imagine real-time raytracing at 8K at 100+ FPS with <10ms latency.
- adamredwoods 6y agoCyptocurrency demands.
- whatshisface 6y agoSolid state physics begets both cryogenic technology and cryocooling technology. I wouldn't write off the possibility of making an extremely small cryocooler quite yet. Maybe a pile of solid state heat pumps could do it.
- jessriedel 6y agoThis is true, but the fact that heat absorption scales with the surface area is pretty brutal for tiny cooled objects.
- whatshisface 6y agoHeat conduction also scales with thermal conductivity, which is another thing that advances in solid state can bring us.
- jessriedel 6y agoThis doesn't change the fact that, for any degree of heat conductivity achieved smaller packages will be hard to keep cold than large ones.
- whatshisface 6y agoIt also doesn't change the fact that smaller devices are harder to put wires on - but they're both polynomial scaling factors that other polynomial scaling paradigms could cancel out.
- jessriedel 6y agoThe topic of discussion is datacenter vs. an extremely small cryocooler. What is the other polynomial scaling paradigm that would cancel out the datacenter's advantage?
- whatshisface 6y ago
- hacknat 6y ago> Imagine how programming and operating systems might look in a world where processing power is 80x cheaper. Just wait 10 years?
- Jweb_Guru 6y agoNot sure if you noticed, but Moore's Law died quite awhile ago now.
- mcosta 6y agoFor single thread performance.
- anfilt 6y agoMoore's laws has nothing to do with how fast a chip is. It deals with how many transistors you can fit in a given area. This can equate to a faster chip because you now can do more at once. However, we hit the frequency limits a while ago for silicon. Particularly, parasitic capacitance is a huge limiting factor. A capacitor will start to act like a short circuit the faster your clock is. Moore's law has a little more life, although the rate seems to have slowed. However, at the end of the day it can't go one forever you can only make something so small. One gets to a point they have so few atoms to constructing something useful becomes impossible. Like current transistors are finFETs because the third dimension gives them more atoms to reduce leakage current, compared to the relatively planar designs on older process nodes. However, these finFets still take up less area on a die.
- john_minsk 6y agoSince it can't go forever - it is time to update its definition to reflect what we are doing with computing now - adding cores and improving energy efficiency. No?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- twobitshifter 6y agoJevons Paradox would predict that we’ll end up using even more energy on computing.
- xvedejas 6y agoIt seems likely that the more efficient our processors become, the larger share of the world's energy we'll devote to them [0]. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, if we're getting more than proportionally more utility out of the processors, but I worry about that too [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law
- moosebear847 6y agoIn the future, I don't see why there's anything holding us back from splitting a bunch of atoms and having tons of cheap energy.
- tsimionescu 6y agoNuclear fission has well-known drawbacks and risks that are fundemantal, they will never be engineered away (risk of catastrophic explosion, huge operating costs, risk of nuclear waste leakage, risk of nuclear weapon proliferation). Why do you think the future will be significantly different from the present in this regard?
- moosebear847 6y agoThese risks will most likely only reduce over time as our science and knowledge develops, barring a world-affecting mistake or war. If we can make a ton of energy, we can do many other things like launching the waste into outer space, and having a positive ROI by making more energy than it cost.
- carlmr 6y ago>Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, if we're getting more than proportionally more utility out of the processors The trend seems to be that we get only a little bit of extra utility out of a lot of extra hardware performance. When the developer upgrades their PC it's easier for them to not notice performance issues. This creates the situation where every few years you need to buy a new PC to do the things you always did.
- mailslot 6y agoIt’ll all be wasted. When gasoline prices plummet, everyone buys 8mpg SUVs. If power & performance gets cheaper, it’ll be wasted. Blockchain in your refrigerator.
- xwdv 6y agoAs processing power cheapens, programmers will settle for lazy and inefficient code for everyday consumer applications. It will be easier to be a programmer, because you can get away with writing shitty code. So wages will fall and the prestige of being a software developer wanes. The jobs requiring truly elite skill and understanding will dwindle and face fierce competition for their high pay. Before this happens, I recommend having your exit strategy for the industry, living off whatever profits you made working as a developer during the early 21st century.
- Fronzie 6y agoEnergy cost and thermal cooling place restrictions on the computations. C++, with all it flaws, stays in use because it does give control over performance trade-offs.
- gameswithgo 6y agodid you write this in 1980?
- no_flags 6y agoProcessing power has cheapened exponentially for the last 50 years (Moore's law). I am skeptical that a continuation of this trend will drive a fall in wages. In my own experience performance optimization is an important but infrequent part of my job. There are other skills an elite programmer brings to the table like the ability to build a mental model of a complex system and reason about it. If downward pressure on wages occurs I think it will be for another reason.
- Enginerrrd 6y agoI think in general you are right, however, there will certainly be sectors where it will be a lot easier to just throw it at a wall of computation than pay someone to think about it. But architecting complex systems so that they are maintainable, scalable, and adaptable... there's not gonna be enough cheap computation to solve that problem and omit top talent for a long time.
- vlovich123 6y ago
- ffhhj 6y ago> Imagine how programming and operating systems might look in a world where processing power is 80x cheaper. UI's will have physically based rendering and interaction.