News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by bharam on Monday November 11, 2019 @08:28AM (#21504652)
Analogy: "In the past, a well-meaning body of public servants decided there was a need to slow down microprocessors to protect jobs threatened by automation, reduce resource consumption and benefit the climate. CPU frequency was capped at 25MHz and instruction length was limited to 8 bits. The move was hailed as a great victory for humans, nature and the climate"

As a nation, where would we be today (compared to where we are) if a policy like that had actually been adopted?

Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by ajdlinux on Monday November 11, 2019 @08:47AM (#21504769)
This analogy is completely broken, obviously.

But off-topic: I wonder what computers would look like if there _were_ arbitrary restrictions like that. What directions would we have pursued in microarchitecture, distributed systems, etc etc if there was a regulation capping clock speed or number of transistors, or a rule that made it illegal to have asymmetric network connections?

Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by clarry on Monday November 11, 2019 @09:45AM (#21505200)
Look at mobile CPUs? What limits them might have arised naturally, but it's still quite arbitrary (battery life, cooling capacity).
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by bharam on Monday November 11, 2019 @09:35AM (#21505114)
Enlighten me. How is the analogy broken?
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by rpmisms on Monday November 11, 2019 @11:13AM (#21505968)
Electronic devices != giant diesel engines with very very specific use cases.
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by undersuit on Monday November 11, 2019 @08:42PM (#21510772)
A faster computer can shutdown or enter a lower power mode earlier. The base power draw of a computer hardly changes if you replace just the processor with a faster clocked one.
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by pjc50 on Monday November 11, 2019 @11:41AM (#21506239)
There's no Moore's law for ship speeds. If there were, then in the century since tea clippers we'd have ships somehow zipping across the sea at a decent fraction of the speed of light, somehow using less power than the baseline.

In fact that probably would have already made the case for speed restrictions, as every multi-thousand-knot container ship created its own tsunami. There have long been speed restrictions on canals at a few miles an hour to avoid erosion.

Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by tonyedgecombe on Monday November 11, 2019 @10:00AM (#21505326)
We would have adapted to the situation we found ourselves in. Some of the most creative solutions can come from constrained environments.
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by thefounder on Monday November 11, 2019 @08:34AM (#21504684)
So you compare automation with pollution? Really?
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by bharam on Monday November 11, 2019 @09:30AM (#21505078)
Nope. Automation is technology and so is transportation. Both can cause pollution but that's besides the point.
Re:Cutting the speed of ships has benefits for humans, natur... by danw1979 on Monday November 11, 2019 @08:46AM (#21504762)
We'd be dying on the roads in droves because faster is always better ?