Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 842 posts

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#111

Post by makeitdouble »

Gigachad wrote: post #60
_aavaa_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except we've squandered that 1000x not on bounds checking but on countless layers of abstractions and inefficiency.

Am I taking crazy pills or are programs not nearly as slow as HN comments make them out to be? Almost everything loads instantly on my 2021 MacBook and 2020 iPhone. Every program is incredibly responsive. 5 year old mobile CPUs load modern SPA web apps with no problems. The only thing I can think of that’s slow is Autodesk Fusion starting up. Not really sure how they made that so bad but everything else seems super s…

To note, people will have wildly different tolerance to delays and lag.

On the extreme, my retired parents don't feel the difference between 5s or 1s when loading a window or clicking somewhere. I offered a switch to a new laptop, cloning their data, and they didn't give a damn and just opened the laptop the closest to them.

Most people aren't that desensitized, but for some a 600ms delay is instantaneous when for other it's 500ms too slow.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#112

Post by bluGill »

ngneer wrote: post #67
titzer wrote: post #12

I like to point out that since ~1980, computing power has increased about 1000X. If dynamic array bounds checking cost 5% (narrator: it is far less than that), and we turned it on everywhere, we could have computers that are just a mere 950X faster. If you went back in time to 1980 and offered the following choice: I'll give you a computer that runs 950X faster and doesn't have a huge class of memory safety vulnerabi…

I agree with the sentiment and analysis that most humans prefer short term gains over long term ones. One correction to your example, though. Dynamic bounds checking does not solve security. And we do not know of a way to solve security. So, the gains are not as crisp as you are making them seem.

Bounds checking solves one tiny subset of security. There are hundreds of other subsets that we know how to solve. However these days the majority of the bad attacks are social and no technology is likely to solve them - as more than 10,000 years of history of the same attack has shown. Technology makes the attacks worse because they now scale, but social attacks have been happening for longer than recorded history (well there is every reason to believe that - there is unlikely to evidence going back that far).

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#113

Post by skydhash »

esperent wrote: post #40
tgv wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the kind of economics that shifts the financial debt to accumulating waste, and technical debt, which is paid for by someone else. It's basically stealing. There are --of course-- many cases in which thorough optimizing doesn't make much sense, but the idea of just adding servers instead of rewriting is a sad state of affairs.

> It's basically stealing This feels like hyperbole to me. Who is being stolen from here? Not the end user, they're getting the tradeoff of more features for a low price in exchange for less optimized software.

From what I’m seeing people do on their computers, it barely changed from what they’ve been doing on their pentium 4 one. But now, with Electron-based software and the generals state of Windows, you can’t recommend something older than 4 years. It’s hard to not see it as stealing when you have to buy a 1000+ laptop, when a 400 one could easily do the job if the software were a bit better.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#114

Post by myth_drannon »

don_searchcraft wrote: post #102

100% agree with Carmack. There was a craft in writing software that I feel has been lost with access to inexpensive memory and compute. Programmers can be inefficient because they have all that extra headroom to do so which just contributes to the cycle of needing better hardware.

Software development has been commoditized and is directed by MBA's and others who don't see it as a craft. The need for fast project execution is above the craft of programming, hence, the code is bug-riddled and slow. There are some niche areas (vintage,pico-8, arduino...) where people can still practise the craft, but that's just a hobby now. When this topic comes up I always think about Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev movie, the artist's struggle.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#115

Post by skydhash »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #55
tgv wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the kind of economics that shifts the financial debt to accumulating waste, and technical debt, which is paid for by someone else. It's basically stealing. There are --of course-- many cases in which thorough optimizing doesn't make much sense, but the idea of just adding servers instead of rewriting is a sad state of affairs.

Not really stealing. You could off course build software that is more optimized and with the same features but at a higher cost. Would most buyers pay twice the price for a webb app that loads in 1 sec instead of 2? Probably not.

Try loading slack and youtube on a 4 year old laptop. It’s more in the 10s, and good luck if you only have 8GB of ram.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#116

Post by noobermin »

I'm already moving in this direction in my personal life. It's partly nostalgia but it's partly practical. It's just that work requires working with people who only use what hr and it hoists on them, then I need a separate machine for that.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#117

Post by bluGill »

scotty79 wrote: post #56
slowmovintarget wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're stuck with browsers now until the primary touch with the internet is assistants / agent UIs / chat consoles. That could end up being Electron (VS Code), though that would be a bit sad.

I don't think we are gonna go there. Talking is cumbersome. There's a reason, besides social anxiety that people prefer to use self-checkout and electronically order fastfood. There are easier ways to do a lot of things than with words. I'd bet on maybe ad hoc ai designed ui-s you click but have a voice search when you are confused about something.

If you know what you want then not talking to a human is faster. However if you are not sure a human can figure out. I'm not sure I'd trust a voice assistant - the value in the human is an informed opinion which is hard to program, but it is easy to program a recommendation for whatever makes the most profit. Of course humans often don't have an informed opinion either, but at least sometimes they do, and they will also sometimes admit it when they don't.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#118

Post by dreamcompiler »

jsheard wrote: post #17
kunley wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Related: I wonder what cpu Artemis/Orion is using

IBM PowerPC 750X apparently, which was the CPU the Power Mac G3 used back in the day. Since it's going into space it'll be one of the fancy radiation-hardened versions which probably still costs more than your car though, and they run four of them in lockstep to guard against errors. https://www.eetimes.com/comparing-tech-used-for-apollo-artem...

> fancy radiation-hardened versions

Ha! What's special about rad-hard chips is that they're old designs. You need big geometries to survive cosmic rays, and new chips all have tiny geometries.

So there are two solutions:

1. Find a warehouse full of 20-year old chips.

2. Build a fab to produce 20-year old designs.

Both approaches are used, and both approaches are expensive. (Approach 1 is expensive because as you eventually run out of chips they become very, very valuable and you end up having to build a fab anyway.)

There's more to it than just big geometries but that's a major part of the solution.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#119

Post by maccard »

Gigachad wrote: post #60
_aavaa_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except we've squandered that 1000x not on bounds checking but on countless layers of abstractions and inefficiency.

Am I taking crazy pills or are programs not nearly as slow as HN comments make them out to be? Almost everything loads instantly on my 2021 MacBook and 2020 iPhone. Every program is incredibly responsive. 5 year old mobile CPUs load modern SPA web apps with no problems. The only thing I can think of that’s slow is Autodesk Fusion starting up. Not really sure how they made that so bad but everything else seems super s…

Slack, teams, vs code, miro, excel, rider/intellij, outlook, photoshop/affinity are all applications I use every day that take 20+ seconds to launch. My corporate VPN app takes 30 seconds to go from a blank screen to deciding if it’s going to prompt me for credentials or remember my login, every morning. This is on an i9 with 64GB ram, and 1GN fiber.

On the website front - Facebook, twitter, Airbnb, Reddit, most news sites, all take 10+ seconds to load or be functional, and their core functionality has regressed significantly in the last decade. I’m not talking about features that I prefer, but as an example if you load two links in Reddit in two different tabs my experience has been that it’s 50/50 if they’ll actually both load or if one gets stuck either way skeletons.

Re: The world could run on older hardware if software optimization was a priority

#120

Post by HappMacDonald »

fsloth wrote: post #41
titzer wrote: post #12

I like to point out that since ~1980, computing power has increased about 1000X. If dynamic array bounds checking cost 5% (narrator: it is far less than that), and we turned it on everywhere, we could have computers that are just a mere 950X faster. If you went back in time to 1980 and offered the following choice: I'll give you a computer that runs 950X faster and doesn't have a huge class of memory safety vulnerabi…

The problem is 1000xers are a rarity. The software desktop users have to put up with is slow .

You can always install DOS as your daily driver and run 1980's software on any hardware from the past decade, and then tell me how that's slow.

1000x referred to the hardware capability, and that's not a rarity that is here.

The trouble is how software has since wasted a majority of that performance improvement.

Some of it has been quality of life improvements, leading nobody to want to use 1980s software or OS when newer versions are available.

But the lion's share of the performance benefit got chucked into the bin with poor design decisions, layers of abstractions, too many resources managed by too many different teams that never communicate making any software task have to knit together a zillion incompatible APIs, etc.

Post reply on HN