SirEDCaLot

joined 11 months ago
[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 1 points 18 hours ago

Actually I'm not sure we agree on that.

What sort of guns do you feel would be appropriate for pest control in rural areas?

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 1 points 18 hours ago

You nailed it. look at their more recent announcements about execs not taking bonuses--- they're giving up bonuses for the coming year. I expect most of them to 'pursue other interests' but they'll keep their bonuses, whatever team gets brought in to right the ship will then get screwed.

Might also be ass covering- with a pre-emptive promise of no bonuses it may be harder to replace them...

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 14 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

the end of Moores law

It's been talked about a lot. Lots of people have predicted it.
It does eventually have to end though. And I think even if this isn't the end, we're close to the end. At the very least, we're close to the point of diminishing returns.

Look at the road to here-- We got to the smallest features the wavelength of light could produce (and people said Moore's Law was dead), so we used funky multilayer masks to make things smaller and Moore lived on. Then we hit the limits of masking and again people said Moore's Law was dead, so ASML created a whole new kind of light with a narrower wavelength (EUV) and Moore lived on.

But there is a very hard limit that we won't work around without a serious rethink of how we build chips- the width of the silicon atom. Today's chips have pathways that are in many cases well under 100 atoms wide. Companies like ASML and TSMC are pulling out all the stops to make things smaller, but we're getting close to the limit of what's possible with the current concepts of chip production (using photolithography to etch transistors onto silicon wafers). Not possible like can we do it, but possible like what the laws of physics will let us do.

That's going to be an interesting change for the industry, it will mean slower growth in processing power. That won't be a problem for the desktop market as most people only use a fraction of their CPU's power. It will mean the end of the 'more efficient chip every year' improvement for cell phones and mobile devices though.

There will be of course customers calling for more bigger better, and I think that will be served by more and bigger. Chiplets will become more common, complete with higher TDP. That'll help squeeze more yield out of an expensive wafer as the discarded parts will contain fewer mm^2. Wouldn't be surprised to see watercooling become more common in high performance workstations, and I expect we'll start to see more interest in centralized watercooling in the server markets. The most efficient setup I've seen so far basically hangs server mainboards on hooks and dunks them in a pool of non-conductive liquid. That might even lead to a rethink of the typical vertical rack setup to something horizontal.

It's gonna be an interesting next few years...

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago

It was worth it... Best pastrami I've ever had

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

For anyone not familiar- Katz Deli is a somewhat famous sandwich place in NYC. Their primary menu item is the pastrami on rye sandwich, and it's like $20-$30. They slice the pastrami right in front of you, still warm.

I've only had it once but it was worth it.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 25 points 3 days ago

Absolutely 100% this. Or at the very least, have all schematics and software source code and other such things placed in escrow so if the company refuses to support them there is some kind of option. This goes double for anything implanted.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So you're left with departments full of clock punchers who don't have vision or leadership. If you want to kill your Golden Goose, that's a good way to do it. The remaining departments full of drone followers aren't going to be making you the exciting groundbreaking products that make you money.

Of course then again I personally see value in employees, maybe business leadership does not or thinks they are all generic replaceable.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 1 points 3 days ago

No, but it will bring into question the process by which they were acquired to begin with. Somebody will ask, why did you spend x billion on real estate when it was obvious that remote work was the future? Or if they are locked into a long-term lease, eventually the question will come up why are we spending all this money for office space we aren't using? Shouldn't we have thought of this earlier? Not having workers in the office makes it obvious that real estate was a bad investment, and many of these companies are pretty heavily invested in real estate. Easier to screw the workers with what can be explained away as a management strategy than admit a wasted a whole bunch of money buying and building and renovating space you don't need.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 30 points 4 days ago (7 children)

That and executive ass covering, a way to avoid admitting to shareholders that they wasted their money on useless commercial real estate.

It's also shooting themselves in the foot. The first people to leave aren't going to be the clock punchers, it will be the best and brightest who can easily find other jobs.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Worst that could happen is that you get denied insurance coverage

If you end up getting a serious illness or cancer or something like that, you might reevaluate how big of a problem this is.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago

I agree.

I think the filibuster is vitally important as a last-ditch way to stop really bad laws. But there SHOULD be a high cost to using it. It SHOULD gum up the works. Because if it doesn't, then it becomes status quo that getting something through the Senate takes 60 votes instead of 50 because the losing party will always filibuster. That's not a good way to run things.

view more: next ›