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

We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 265 posts

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#111

Post by plerpin »

qwertywerty wrote: post #109
pjc50 wrote: post #23

The major problem areas are those where it's economically "best" to do the computationally inefficient thing. The obvious example is the quick-to-build MVP, but many of the bigger problems come from platform conflicts. Because we have at least five different actively uncooperating operating system platforms, it's hard to build portable native apps - so people build electron apps instead. We also use the web browser a…

>Beyond that there's cryptocurrency, where finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal to maximise the energy wasted, in order to impose a global rate limit on "minting" virtual tokens. I don't disagree with the gist of this, but from a your technical description verges on nonsense. I'm questioning if you're serious. >...finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal... At no point is anyone searching fo…

That's not true. The coins that advertise ASIC resistance have chosen algorithms which are deliberately stubborn to optimize with HW. In other words, inefficiency (=> high resource consumption) is an explicit goal.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#112

Post by qwertywerty »

plerpin wrote: post #111
qwertywerty wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Beyond that there's cryptocurrency, where finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal to maximise the energy wasted, in order to impose a global rate limit on "minting" virtual tokens. I don't disagree with the gist of this, but from a your technical description verges on nonsense. I'm questioning if you're serious. >...finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal... At no point is anyone searching fo…

That's not true. The coins that advertise ASIC resistance have chosen algorithms which are deliberately stubborn to optimize with HW. In other words, inefficiency (=> high resource consumption) is an explicit goal.

I did forget about ASIC resistant coins. I think my general point still stands.

You're making a logical leap between intentional GPU/CPU coins and inefficiency as an explicit design goal. GPU/CPU coin developers are most likely true believers in a distributed security model. They could also own GPU farms or botnets. I highly doubt developers design cryptocurrencies while dreaming of squandering global resources.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#113

Post by wolco »

kick wrote: post #89
username90 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Excel is a much better product than Google Sheets, but having the better product doesn't mean having the winning product. Much better product? Sheets takes literally seconds to download and install and runs on all your devices. Also it automatically syncs your data between devices and sharing data with other people is as easy as sharing a website. These are very important features in my view and makes Sheets into a…

Excel also has a web client that can be downloaded in seconds and has more features than Google Sheets.

Too many features.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#114

Post by pitaj »

michaelbrave wrote: post #48
pjc50 wrote: post #23

The major problem areas are those where it's economically "best" to do the computationally inefficient thing. The obvious example is the quick-to-build MVP, but many of the bigger problems come from platform conflicts. Because we have at least five different actively uncooperating operating system platforms, it's hard to build portable native apps - so people build electron apps instead. We also use the web browser a…

Flutter looks promising for solving a lot of the platform conflict problems.

Except then you have to use Dart, or call into Dart from some other language. There are many people who dislike Dart or otherwise prefer to use other languages.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#115

Post by g82918 »

qwertywerty wrote: post #109
pjc50 wrote: post #23

The major problem areas are those where it's economically "best" to do the computationally inefficient thing. The obvious example is the quick-to-build MVP, but many of the bigger problems come from platform conflicts. Because we have at least five different actively uncooperating operating system platforms, it's hard to build portable native apps - so people build electron apps instead. We also use the web browser a…

>Beyond that there's cryptocurrency, where finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal to maximise the energy wasted, in order to impose a global rate limit on "minting" virtual tokens. I don't disagree with the gist of this, but from a your technical description verges on nonsense. I'm questioning if you're serious. >...finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal... At no point is anyone searching fo…

I actually prefer "minting" as it is a more accurate name for the activity. Usually governments mint coins. No one mines a coin whole from the ground. The quotes show they know it is an odd usage. I mine cryptocurrency. I "mint" new-type coins.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#116

Post by qwertywerty »

g82918 wrote: post #115
qwertywerty wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Beyond that there's cryptocurrency, where finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal to maximise the energy wasted, in order to impose a global rate limit on "minting" virtual tokens. I don't disagree with the gist of this, but from a your technical description verges on nonsense. I'm questioning if you're serious. >...finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal... At no point is anyone searching fo…

I actually prefer "minting" as it is a more accurate name for the activity. Usually governments mint coins. No one mines a coin whole from the ground. The quotes show they know it is an odd usage. I mine cryptocurrency. I "mint" new-type coins.

>The quotes show they know it is an odd usage.

Using scare quotes to mean that nobody else says something strikes me as odd, but you're probably correct.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#117

Post by meztez »

thechao wrote: post #4
sumanthvepa wrote: post #2

The renewed interest in C++ and other compiled languages is an indication of the need to get more efficient. Programmer skill will become more important in the future. But they won't be today's skills. I expect that programming in the future will be more about getting the AI to do what you want rather than writing code directly.

I’m already an AI you can pay to get a computer to do what you “want”; the problem is ‘what you want’ is so poorly specified, there’s no way to turn it into an actionable set of steps!

This comment has to be the most insightful I have ever read. It is true on so many levels and captures perfectly the mentality that some senior decision makers have about AI.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#118

Post by g82918 »

qwertywerty wrote: post #116
g82918 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually prefer "minting" as it is a more accurate name for the activity. Usually governments mint coins. No one mines a coin whole from the ground. The quotes show they know it is an odd usage. I mine cryptocurrency. I "mint" new-type coins.

>The quotes show they know it is an odd usage. Using scare quotes to mean that nobody else says something strikes me as odd, but you're probably correct.

Imagining you were doing so, what would you do to denote an intentional odd usage? (sic) is used if the originator is incorrect.

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#119

Post by connicpu »

jeffmcmahan wrote: post #102
dehrmann wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this situation hasn't improved much in twenty years It's gotten much worse. Now you have iOS, Android, Windows, Mac, wed, and Linux(?). In 2000, you had Windows. You couldn't do anything interesting on mobile, Web 2.0 (cringe) wasn't a thing, and Mac's market share was about 3%.

It's pretty weird to me to try to picture Microsoft's monopoly as a better situation than the current one?

I think the point they were trying to make is that in a world with platform monopoly, just making your app for that platform is a logical path for a developer

Re: We’re approaching the limits of computer power – we need new programmers

#120

Post by austhrow743 »

ac29 wrote: post #66
majewsky wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's designed to work at human speed. It would be great if most applications worked at human speed. Instead we have web applications taking 5 seconds to load what is basically 3 records from a small database.

That is human speed though (better than human speed, even). For most human tasks that need to be done, 5ms versus 5s doesn't really matter. Consider also that spending an hour at the DMV for them to update a database entry or two is also human speed.

5ms versus 5s is the difference between being tempted to check or think about something else or not. Multiply that option over and over with a repetitive task and anyone but your most disciplined monk is going to find themselves getting side tracked regularly.
Post reply on HN