Re:Upload Your RAM
by carlosjobim on Sunday November 08, 2026 @08:14AM
(#50413006)
> Technology should be allowed to evolve as needed.
Certainly, you say it yourself: as needed. There is no need for giant amounts of RAM for most productive and entertaining computing tasks.
> The issue is not really the wait time, it's the instability and crashes, which are aliviated by less back and forth between the disc and the RAM.
Very good point! I don't completely recognize this problem, because in the long time I've used Photoshop and such, I haven't noticed a lot of crashes.
> People used to listen to their own sound on dedicated devices, IMHO it mostly moved to their computers, especially as bluetooth gives more flexibility to move around.
Sure, but audio doesn't need a lot of system resources, and neither should video. A feature length film is a couple of gigabytes, and can't take up more RAM than its entire content.
> I'd wager most of these workers job involves more than what you're giving them credit for.
You could do a lot of multitasking between well coded work apps in a well coded operating system. I remember doing that. But if the ticketing system takes a gig of RAM in the browser when it should take a 100 megabytes if made properly...
I remember having video calling fully functioning in Skype with 2 gigs of RAM.
The best outcome of all would be that memory hungry people like Mr Altman started paying home computer users for renting part of their RAM for their AIs to munch on. In the meanwhile, the home user could have the same performance for their computing as before while only using half of their RAM.
And it's already been proven: My Macbook with 8 gigs of RAM is radically faster and more performant than any PC with 16 or 32 gigs of RAM for any kind of task thrown at it.
Certainly, you say it yourself: as needed. There is no need for giant amounts of RAM for most productive and entertaining computing tasks.
> The issue is not really the wait time, it's the instability and crashes, which are aliviated by less back and forth between the disc and the RAM.
Very good point! I don't completely recognize this problem, because in the long time I've used Photoshop and such, I haven't noticed a lot of crashes.
> People used to listen to their own sound on dedicated devices, IMHO it mostly moved to their computers, especially as bluetooth gives more flexibility to move around.
Sure, but audio doesn't need a lot of system resources, and neither should video. A feature length film is a couple of gigabytes, and can't take up more RAM than its entire content.
> I'd wager most of these workers job involves more than what you're giving them credit for.
You could do a lot of multitasking between well coded work apps in a well coded operating system. I remember doing that. But if the ticketing system takes a gig of RAM in the browser when it should take a 100 megabytes if made properly...
I remember having video calling fully functioning in Skype with 2 gigs of RAM.
The best outcome of all would be that memory hungry people like Mr Altman started paying home computer users for renting part of their RAM for their AIs to munch on. In the meanwhile, the home user could have the same performance for their computing as before while only using half of their RAM.
And it's already been proven: My Macbook with 8 gigs of RAM is radically faster and more performant than any PC with 16 or 32 gigs of RAM for any kind of task thrown at it.