Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Let a Private Company Do It (Score 1) 400

You got his point totally backwards. He wasn't saying that private industry should be the ones to do this type of project, he's saying that BECAUSE private industry has shown no interest, it must not be possible to do it profitably, meaning it is likely to be a money sink.

I am pretty sure that lots of private companies would love to be in the road building and maintenance business, I'll bet it's easy to make a buck there given the steady use those get, the proven tech, the low capital outlay.

Comment Re:Let's not hallucinate (Score 2) 91

Why, yes I do. Simply put, all the low hanging fruit x86 processor development has been picked already. The only remaining advancements are incredibly expensive to make, both in time and money, and as a result even Intel can't appreciably speed up x86 processors anymore.

Now that Intel is mostly standing still, AMD has a chance to catch up. It can benefit from all of the research work, process developments, etc, that have occurred, and implement its own version of the same advancements that Intel made over the past 7 years or so, much more cheaply than Intel did. AMD's limited budget may just be enough.

I actually don'tt think that Ryzen will be as fast as Intel's best. But I expect it to come within 25%, and for a reduced cost. My prediction is that x86 won't get much faster as AMD becomes more competitive with Intel, but it will become a lot cheaper. Intel's high end consumer chips that cost $350 now will be available for $100 in a couple of years, whereas without AMD's Ryzen providing the competition, they probably would only have come down by $50 or so.

Comment Re:Sounds like a pretty easy job for a type (Score 1) 297

More power to you. I made the mistake of visiting rotten.com once in the late 90's, and somehow morbid curiosity caused me to spend about 2 hours looking at the worst stuff that I could see on there, I couldn't tear myself away because I couldn't believe what I was seeing. And afterwards I went into a sort of depression for several days. I have never gone back and have actively avoided any situation in which I might see something similar. If I had to watch that stuff on a regular basis I would either, like you, somehow disassociate myself from the feelings that I have about such things, or go crazy. I don't think either is a good outcome personally.

However, if such people have to exist, then I am thankful that they do and that they can protect myself and those I care about from these things. So to everyone who has to do it - I owe you a tremendous debt of gratitude, and I hope you are paid very well.

Comment Re:Same problem refueling my gas car at home... (Score 1) 198

Despite your obvious pessimism about the market's ability to solve these problems, I'd be willing to bet quite a lot that if a home battery system like you describe were cheap enough and safe enough to do the job, it would absolutely be chosen in preference to a complex and costly substation based solution.

In fact it sounds like a great idea, and I'm sure you're not the only person to have thought of it. Maybe that's part of why Tesla is pushing those home battery systems its selling?

Comment Re:'Developed a Clear Preference' For Trump (Score 3) 732

It is true that there would be a rife of problems were CA to try to secede; but you didn't actually state any of them. Instead you went on a rant full of your own biases and judgements. And who cares what you think? I don't, not enough to even finish reading your crap.

Comment Re:Maybe dying? (Score 1) 240

But it would cost enough in R&D and tooling that Intel would not find enough buyers for the faster chips to make that back and still turn a profit. It's just that hard to increase speeds now that absolutely all of the low hanging fruit have already been picked, and most of the medium-hanging fruit too.

The number of customers who will pay handsomly for faster chips is an ever shrinking pool, and there is not enough money left in that pool to fund the R&D necessary for large increases in processor speed.

Comment Re: It's because AMD quit (Score 1) 240

I disagree. We're pretty far along the asymptotic curve at this point. And Intel can only increase processor performance at the rate that people are willing to pay. Maybe they could double processor speeds but the R&D and tooling costs would require that they charge 4x the price of current processors for it. The thing is, so few people are willing to pay significantly for more CPU power (because the number of users for whom CPU speed is a significant issue has declined precipitously as CPU speeds have increased), that Intel would never make back its investment. So it doesn't try.

The thing is that the longer that this is true, the more that gradual investment by AMD will allow them to catch up to the state of the art that Intel has. Which will then drive the prices down considerably. AMD will never make much money, but then when AMD finally regains performance parity with Intel, Intel won't be making much money any more either.

So you can expect top end consumer oriented CPU performance to remain stagnant but prices to drop considerably. I'd still call that a win.

Comment Re: Bottleneck? (Score 2) 240

Professional software development typically has compilation steps that can use all processors at 100% for minutes at a time. I can easily use 100% of all CPUs for 20 minutes straight when compiling 5 million lines of source code scattered across 25,000 files. Which I do several times per day typically.

Of course, not all of compilation is embarassingly parallel; there is usually a link step at the end which cannot be multithreaded (at least not by current tools) and which just sits there adding another 5 minutes using only a single core the whole time.

Slashdot Top Deals

fortune: cpu time/usefulness ratio too high -- core dumped.

Working...