needs a [podcast] tag. there's no useful text content on this page
Right? And not even a way to get a transcript, that I can see. Who has an hour to listen to some dudes talk about a question that could and has been answered in a few seconds?
Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
21–30 of 48 posts
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#22Isn't the real challenge finding anything made today that has less compute power than the lander? I challenge you to find that.
That's easy. The challenge would be finding something that has less than the lander, but more than zero.
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#23We have all these amazing technological resources and yet, houses are still out of reach for like half the population.
I’d love to see some disruption of those markets. Let’s see … laws that promote rather than restrict development … search programs that reduce friction identifying maximum buildable area lots for sale … trading platforms for combining lots into larger developments … optimization of actual building technology … innovation in ownership and governance models…. Of course, none of those are strictly dependent on MHz.
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#24We have all these amazing technological resources and yet, houses are still out of reach for like half the population.
The problem isn't the houses themselves, it's the land to put them on. Technology doesn't help much with that.
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#25The way I first heard this was regarding Voyager.
Something akin to: "Right now, you're carrying more computing power than what's on Voyager. And I'm not talking about your phone, I'm talking about your keyfob."
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#26Isn't the real challenge finding anything made today that has less compute power than the lander? I challenge you to find that.
[deleted]
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#27TL/DL: yes, it does, and by significant amount Key fob has nRF52840l, 64 MHz ARM, 1024 KB Flash, 256 KB RAM Apollo Guidance Computer was 2MHz, ~72 KB ROM, ~4 KB RAM The comparison might be up to 10x different due to more efficient architecture and different MIPS/MHz ratio, but it does not change much, since the differences are so dramatic. (This is based on links in the podcast description, which I assume what they t…
Here's something to bake your noodle:
Apple makes Lightning to HDMI dongles that contain 400 MHz Samsung ARM SoCs and 256 MiB of RAM onboard.
They run frickin' Darwin.
There is more power in one of those dongles than there was in the OG iMac, and it runs a cut-down macOS. No cap.
And yes, Doom has been ported: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4XCkeN0XuqA
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess even a disposable vape has more computing power than the Lunar lander. (I don't know if that's more or less ridiculous than a key fob, but at least a key is not so disposable.)
Car chargers for usbs, or digital thermometers, or disposable pregnancy tests - it's absurd the amount of compute that ends up even in single use or trivial products.
Never mind the car charger, what about the cable itself?
https://appleinsider.com/articles/12/10/16/lightning-cables-...
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#29Isn't the real challenge finding anything made today that has less compute power than the lander? I challenge you to find that.
Another related question: Is there any production software system so inefficient that it would run faster if implemented in machine language on the AGC
Re: Does my key fob have more computing power than the Lunar lander?
#30The contactless chip in your credit card is a full computer that powers up via inductive charging when tapped. It then negotiates 2 way public/private key encryption to verify you. These usually run jme which requires a lot more power than the lunar lander.
Another good one is the many little computers on cars such as the TPMS sensor in each tyre valve.