On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Steve Dekorte <st...@dekorte.com> wrote:
>
> On 2011-12-17 Sat, at 01:17 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 02:16:41PM -0800, Steve Dekorte wrote:
>>> Is speed really the bottleneck for making computers more useful?
>>
>> Many major scientific problems or even gaming are resource-constrained.
>> I personally would have no difficulties keeping astronomical numbers
>> of nodes at 100% CPU for years and decades.
>
>> Consider what a BlueGene/Q on every desktop would mean.
>
>
> Suppose you want to write an app to help people organize events.
> Neither the development or running the app is compute bound
> and a machine 1000x faster in itself likely wouldn't much with either.
>
> However, using a garbage collected OO language would. So in as
> much as faster machines lower the cost of higher abstractions, they
> are helpful for programming. But we are already at the point where
> most of our time programming is sitting in front of an idle machine
> trying to tell it what to do.
>
> I can't make a hard case for it, but I'd suggest that most of the
> utility we've gained from computers has been from communication
> and organization for more efficient resource allocation, that
> the development of tools for these areas is the largest bottleneck
> to maximizing the utility of computers and that this is generally
> not a compute bound problem.

Everything except the last bit is correct, IMHO.

Virtual machines, today, by and large, lack support for first-class
scheduling of resources.  Reasoning about resources is all about
compute bound problems, like how much resources a client is allowed to
reserve per server request.

We have also yet to put into practice languages which limit the client
run-time of an algorithm on a server (assuming the client can
parameterize over the server's service in some disciplined way).

Solving this problem will eliminate virtually all IT jobs.

_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
fonc@vpri.org
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Reply via email to