News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Koomey's law by beat on Friday March 31, 2017 @03:39PM (#14007383)
I find the idea of power limits to be fascinating. As computing becomes more distributed, more detached, more mobile, then power, not computation, will be the boundary.

It's not just the cpu... it's the screen, and the antenna. A screen needs to produce a certain number of lumens of light to be readable. That provides a theoretical limit. An antenna needs to transmit clean signal over a certain range. That takes power, too. And the size of the device limits the size of the battery. How many joules of energy can we store in that physical space?

We may be coming up on limits for mobile devices much harder and faster than we think. Of course, IoT devices can be better off by not supporting a screen, but communication is still a problem.

Re:Koomey's law by oh_sigh on Friday March 31, 2017 @05:51PM (#14008640)
Modern devices are actually pretty close(within a factor of 10) to the theoretical energy requirements for producing light.

Computation, on the other hand, is still no where near the theoretical limit[1]. We literally use more than 10,000,000x the theoretical limit to erase a bit of data.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle

Re:Koomey's law by tedsanders on Friday March 31, 2017 @09:22PM (#14009817)
Nothing against your specific comment, but in general I wish that the Landauer limit had less cultural importance and salience in discussions of computation & energy. It's a simple result, but the assumptions leading to it are quite subtle. First, it relies on the widely misinterpreted second law of thermodynamics and second, it relies on the subtle notion of 'erasure'. In loose analogy, it reminds me of quantum mechanics - "what's the definition of a measurement?" "It's anything that causes the system to act like it was measured." "What's the definition of information erasure?" "It's anything that causes the system to obey the Landauer limit." In any case, this limit is so far away it's practically theory (though experiments purport to show it), and since the limit can be exceeded in theory, it doesn't seem like a useful principle to guide us.
Re:Koomey's law by _0ffh on Friday March 31, 2017 @08:58PM (#14009711)
That's because our computers continually destroy and re-create bits, instead of reusing them. Google "fredkin toffoli conservative logic reversible computing".

Edit: I am aware that claim sounds hilarious when expressed in this simplified way. Don't fret, it's hard science.

Re:Koomey's law by dredmorbius on Friday March 31, 2017 @04:49PM (#14008039)
Taking your thought and running with it:

Yes, energy/cycle is the ultimate limit, and imposes bounds on what we can do with computers. There are other factors, including dissipating of waste heat. Both those concepts are joined in Gene Amdahl's observations. He noted that in paralellisation, though you could extend this to any efficiency improvement, your efficiency bound is imposed by the unaddressable task component. For parallelisation, it's the nonparallel component, for energy efficiency, it's the non-CPU power draws. He also noted that everything ultimately comes down to a matter of plumbing (including heat dissipation).

Screen tech has benefitted greatly from the transitions from paper => CRT => LCD (flourescent) => LCD (LED), and increasingly e-ink devices. Applications and devices which can utilise largely-static screens, where only state transitions require energising (as with e-ink and textual interfaces) have far less power draw than any emissive screen tech.

Other peripherals -- input/output, including keyboards, touch devices, antennas, ports, etc., also play a role. Physical keyboards have advantages over screens, though audio input/output might address size constraints (and impose numerous others...). The possibility of passive antennas (see the 1960s Russian "shield" audio bugging device in the US Embassy in Moscow) could offer other options, assuming that a fixed station would have a power budget mobile devices wouldn't.

There's been a lot made of small and adhesive solar PV innovations. I see the real use of that as offering the ability for very small computational devices to power and/or recharge themselves opportunistically when and as ambient light is available. Incorporating both battery storage and PV into designs -- say, an adhesive data-tracking and reporting label which could be attached to shipping packages -- as layers of PV, battery, compute, and antenna, would allow for very cheap monitoring of conditions (location, shock, temperature, humidity) for deliveries, at a cost of pennies, and without extensive engineering considerations.

(The hackability of such devices might ... pose interesting considerations.)

We're approaching a state where, theoretically, any device of more than a few dollars' value could have some integrated computational capacity, whether you like it or not.

Re:Koomey's law by throwayedidqo on Friday March 31, 2017 @10:30PM (#14010065)
With mobile devices a large majority of power is used by the screen and radio. These two parts already within maybe 50% of theoretical max efficiency.

The only thing to revolutionize mobile battery life will be a better battery.

Re:Koomey's law by vivekd on Saturday April 01, 2017 @12:21PM (#14012828)
or improvements in alternative radio or screen tech like e-ink