News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data. Parent comment

Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data by all_blue_chucks on Tuesday May 19, 2020 @10:32PM (#23242719)
The only reason anyone ever cared transistor count is because that is a rough proxy for measuring speed.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data by TeMPOraL on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @05:06AM (#23244794)
It hasn't been for a long, long time now.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data by marcosdumay on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @08:46AM (#23246220)
Moore's paper was about VLSI manufacturing. He certainly cared about transistor count. He didn't once touch on how those transistors get to be used.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data by all_blue_chucks on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @04:04PM (#23251130)
Why did he care about transistor count?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data by marcosdumay on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @05:39PM (#23252133)
VLSI manufacturing makes chips, made of transistors. It does not sell end products. The end products are a concept that their clients care about, not them. The same way a tree farmer does not spend his days thinking about toilet paper, even though that's what he is actually helping create. Instead, he thinks about trees, and how to best grow them.

Make no mistake, he knew he worked on the production of CPUs and memories, it was just not his focus. Also, he certainly cared about switching time, but his observation was about transistor count, not switching time.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New York Times phasing out all 3rd-party advertising data by all_blue_chucks on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @06:38PM (#23252824)
Why did their clients care about transistor count?
[ Parent | on HN ]