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

191–200 of 265 posts

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

#191

Post by nobleach »

jdnenej wrote: post #133
Gaelan wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some times, there's one feature that's so useful it justifies the lack of many others. Google Docs is a terrible word processor compared to Word or even Pages, but being able to edit a document at the same time as someone else (with full features and little friction—IIRC Pages doesn't support Track Changes while collaborating) is so useful that I end up using Google Docs anyway.

How is google docs a terrible word editor? Do you mean that it lacking the advanced but rarely used features of word?

Yep, WordArt...

Honestly though, I do think Word captured a really nice standard feature set. And docs does a darn fine job of matching that set one to one. The image placement and handling can be a little wonky at times (at least the last time that I used it) but that's what one gets for trying to handle it all in html/javascript/canvas? For what it does, it's a mighty fine product.

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

#192

Post by pjc50 »

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 have read the paper; unsurprisingly, it doesn't address any of the subsequent developments in the field.

>> finding a less-efficient algorithm is a design goal

The Bitcoin paper doesn't actually specify a specific algorithm at all, it just says "such as":

> To implement a distributed timestamp server on a peer-to-peer basis, we will need to use a proof of-work system similar to Adam Back's Hashcash [6], rather than newspaper or Usenet posts. The proof-of-work involves scanning for a value that when hashed, such as with SHA-256, the hash begins with a number of zero bits.

The Hashcash paper uses the term "minting".

>>...in order to impose a global rate limit..

> To compensate for increasing hardware speed and varying interest in running nodes over time, the proof-of-work difficulty is determined by a moving average targeting an average number of blocks per hour. If they're generated too fast, the difficulty increases.

ie to limit the global rate of block generation. Which is what makes it useful as a global distributed timestamp server.

>> maximise the energy wasted

> The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation. In our case, it is CPU time and electricity that is expended.

As everyone noticed fairly early on, like gold mining, this creates a means of expending energy to produce something which can be sold. Just as it's economically advantageous to burn down rainforest, it's economically advantageous to perform a trillion SHA operations and throw away the results of almost all of them.

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

#193

Post by luord »

There were several good points both for and against the article in this comment section. I was pleasantly surprised, usually the threads caused by posts like this turn into "static typing vs dynamic typing" or "functional vs object oriented" flamewars.

As for my own opinion: yes, optimization is key, but we gotta remember not to make it premature. Take advantage of the fast hardware to actually create something; once we know that the something is viable, let's refactor and optimize.

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

#194

Post by o-__-o »

username90 wrote: post #65
errantspark wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it can't, but it doesn't matter in the way your colleagues thought it would. Excel is a much better product than Google Sheets, but having the better product doesn't mean having the winning product.

> 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…

Why are you comparing sheets to a desktop app when the comparable product is excel 365? (Which handily blows sheets out the water)

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

#195

Post by o-__-o »

trakout wrote: post #130
g82918 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The word "mint" really takes the meaning out of the word "mine". True though, minting is part of the economics included in mining. Usually governments mint coins, but no government (or centralized entity) currently operates a legitimate network that matches up with the same properties as bitcoin. I might have used an asterisk, maybe? :)

Governments need to mine or turn to mining companies to get the raw material that makes their coins. This is what you are doing with cryptocurrency. You look for the bits that make a coin valid and then the network mints the coin.

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

#196

Post by pier25 »

PedroBatista wrote: post #171
pier25 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly the flutter team seems more focused on mobile and web than desktop.

It’s a bummer but the reasons are obvious. Mobile is the reason of Flutter’s existence, if they don’t win there there’s no win anywhere else.

Ok, but web?

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

#197

Post by c-cube »

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 hopeful about Crystal filling this niche in the future.

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

#198

Post by mikehollinger »

zozbot234 wrote: post #69
contingencies wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the benefits of portability and the need to hire people as factors contributing to the use of higher level, generally less efficient languages: a few days back I read a description of C as a "hard to find skill these days".

There are plenty of people with real skills in C working in embedded. It might even be easier to find C than C++ developers.

I challenge you to find a C “boot camp.”

In fact doesn’t this point to a gap in the marketplace? Where are my “IOT ALL THE THINGS / 5G / Edge” bootcamps? Where are the “leetcode” challenges that talk about proper sampling rates for an 8-bit A/D converter, or implementing a closed loop PID in a 16-bit architecture?

I suspect that that’s what the Grandparent comment is commenting on — there’s so much talking about the former and so little talking about the latter - even if every computer engineer graduating from a ABET-certified institution is these skills.

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

#199

Post by PedroBatista »

pier25 wrote: post #196
PedroBatista wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a bummer but the reasons are obvious. Mobile is the reason of Flutter’s existence, if they don’t win there there’s no win anywhere else.

Ok, but web?

Google is a web company ( at least in their heads ) and Dart was supposed to replace Javascript ( lol ), they used GWT for their projects since forever and now many use Dart and Angular - Adsense for sure and many other very important products for them ( $$$ ) so it's important they capture the Web side of things with Flutter because Google and their PMs and VPs are the most important clients in order to ensure the future of Flutter.

Please note I didn't mentioned anything technical, it's pure product management and strategy and that's one of the reasons I'm optimistic about Flutter's future.

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

#200

Post by yyhhsj0521 »

atq2119 wrote: post #146
yyhhsj0521 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then we'd have to pour in more manpower, which involves more commute, more upkeeping (AC, lunch), etc.

So... are you saying people are going to have more kids because we stop using Python? For equal numbers of humans, all those energy/environmental costs you mention are going to be there regardless of which programming language is used...

This has to happen if we use a lot of manpower inefficient tools, and still want to keep our current pace of R&D.
Post reply on HN