Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
no more user changeable cpu from intel???
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Clad in Sky
l33t
l33t


Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 778
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about that:
The government makes a law that makes it obligatory to recycle electronics. Ah, wait. I said the evil G-word.
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I only have a problem with government that is too large. For example, I'd like to try a 10-15% fixed rate on which government was allowed to function. Live within your means.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2031
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clad in Sky wrote:
True. I considered getting a new CPU. Couldn't find one for AM2+ socket, though. And that's AMD, who're changing less often compared to Intel.


hm? I thought you could plug am3 cpus in am2+ boards?
_________________
AidanJT wrote:

Libertardian denial of reality is wholly unimpressive and unconvincing, and simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of delusional fools they all are.

Satan's got perfectly toned abs and rocks a c-cup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ichbinsisyphos
Guru
Guru


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 547

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How would that work? You can only buy motherboards with the CPU already soldered unto it? Only motherboard/CPU combinations from the CPU manufacturer?

Not being able to upgrade the CPU on the same motherboard is not what I am going to miss, but when I buy both I'd like to have some choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Simply amazing. If that's what goes along with Government-without-government Anarchy, then you lost me as a possible supporter.

You can keep writing things like "Wow" and "Amazing" and "Simply amazing," but you should know that I can't discern what your objections are from reading "Simply amazing." Can't you tell me what it is you object to?

Suppose you were expecting a massive natural disaster where you live, and you anticipated shortages of many crucial goods. What would you do? You would stockpile: food, water, medicine, batteries, clothing, and so on. But of course everyone would attempt to do so, and this would put tremendous upward pressure on prices. An anticipated future shortage raises present prices. This would of course attract more supply to your area, but more to the point you would become extremely frugal and careful not to waste. For example if you only drank half the water in your cup, you would save the other half rather than throw it out. That's because water is now scare instead of plentiful.

Yet this reasoning doesn't require a natural disaster: the same reasoning applies regardless of the precise cause of the anticipated future shortage. So I'm arguing that if silicon and computing power are expected to become scarce, then prices will rise to reflect the new reality, and people will no longer have a "disposable consumption" attitude, because consumption has become expensive.

Now can you tell me where I'm going wrong rather than just saying "Wow"?
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clad in Sky
l33t
l33t


Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 778
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2012 7:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

energyman76b wrote:
Clad in Sky wrote:
True. I considered getting a new CPU. Couldn't find one for AM2+ socket, though. And that's AMD, who're changing less often compared to Intel.


hm? I thought you could plug am3 cpus in am2+ boards?

Ah... wasn't quite sure about that. Good point.

ichbinsysiphos wrote:

Not being able to upgrade the CPU on the same motherboard is not what I am going to miss, but when I buy both I'd like to have some choice.

Good point.

dmitchell wrote:

You would stockpile: food, water, medicine, batteries, clothing, and so on. But of course everyone would attempt to do so, and this would put tremendous upward pressure on prices. An anticipated future shortage raises present prices. This would of course attract more supply to your area, but more to the point you would become extremely frugal and careful not to waste.
...
Yet this reasoning doesn't require a natural disaster: the same reasoning applies regardless of the precise cause of the anticipated future shortage. So I'm arguing that if silicon and computing power are expected to become scarce, then prices will rise to reflect the new reality, and people will no longer have a "disposable consumption" attitude, because consumption has become expensive.

I'm always surprised that this "demand-price-dogma" is treated as if it were a universal law. But ok, from observation it seems like it is, if not universal, global. Anyway, the reasoning to buy up stuff (or rather, as entrepreneurs do, buy options on stuff) to create a virtual scarcity so that people would consume less seems flawed. It would certainly make consumption more expensive, so perhaps less people would waste stuff. But perhaps it would also make manufacturers wander off to even less developed countries and exploit the people there or produce lower quality goods that are cheaper but also won't be functional after a comparatively short time, so waste would increase.
Rising prices also can make less profitable resource deposits more profitable (as happened for example with oil - before the prices were up, no one really bothered with oil sands. Now Canada is extracting oil from them) which will lead to the destruction of yet intact nature.
It could, of course, also lead to more scrap metal, electronics etc. being recycled or to the realization of the space lift and mining on asteroids etc.
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
You can keep writing things like "Wow" and "Amazing" and "Simply amazing," but you should know that I can't discern what your objections are from reading "Simply amazing." Can't you tell me what it is you object to?
Think of Spock saying "fascinating." I find your described approach to resource stewardship demonstrative of what is wrong with check and balance mechanism. Trust but verify is accurate in probably most situations.


dmitchell wrote:
So I'm arguing that if silicon and computing power are expected to become scarce, then prices will rise to reflect the new reality, and people will no longer have a "disposable consumption" attitude, because consumption has become expensive.

Now can you tell me where I'm going wrong rather than just saying "Wow"?
I wasn't trying to explain where you were going wrong. But given a finite resource, it is egregiously irresponsible to waste resources for no better reason than because you can. I'm sure you'll disagree, which is why I only bothered to show my amazement.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1566
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's time for computer prices to really plunge. With obviation of moving parts, rapidly developing nano-technologies, and diversification of device forms (which should multiply economies of scale), what we know of as "computers" are likely to be come nearly "disposable" within a decade or two. Increased miniaturization and synthesis of components will drastically reduce material requirements.

Think of portable calculators, electronic watches, and basic cell phones. You can get them all in blister-paks for about $20 now. I predict that the basic price point for a desktop will drop to $300 by the end of this coming year, and sub-$100 computers will be the norm by 2015.

Guys like us who tinker with PCs will be a thing of the past, like the radio and small-engine hobbyists of the early 20th century, or will evolve into some more network-centric equivalent.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm still waiting to see the interface which can replace a reasonable sized monitor. A phablet is not it. A tablet is not it. I seriously doubt a pair of Nexus Oakleys will do it (lack of input).

The main problem I see is each hermetically sealed vertical garden. Most people really don't want to be limited to a single option.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1566
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big displays will continue to be needed. I think they'll be shared devices, though.

Users will keep data on the "cloud", and access it using multiple devices, migrating in usage behaviors away from being 'desktop-centric' toward being more "mobile-centric' and network-centric. We'll probably continue to have multiple personal devices, and one is likely to serve many of the functions of our present "desktop" becoming the user's tool of choice and primary computer, with others for specialized purposes.

I visualize a tablet-like computer which, when a user is near one, can use a large display conveniently via a high-bandwidth wireless protocol (akin to Bluetooth, NFC or "wireless USB"). Desks will be equipped with large displays, as will other likely locations (coffee tables, kiosks, various work locations). This will vary, though. For many, that primary device will be something else: a smartphone perhaps, or even an in-vehicle system.

When you're not at one of those work or entertainment-oriented locations, your portable device has its own small display for quck-and-dirty use. The ability to switch from small-screen to large-screen mode will be a key feature of user environments (we're already seeing people like Microsoft figure this out).

That reality will also be a necessary feature of the GUI presented by applications: present a powerfully-equipped large-screen interface which assumes the user has a keyboard, or present an alternative "mobile" interface which assumes they're using a touch-screen, stylus, or voice-actuated interface (we're also already seeing this, with websites presenting a "desktop" or "mobile" version).

If some new kind of visualization technology emerges, that could change this. For example, some kind of goggles, retinal projection, or direct neural interface technology would allow the miniaturization to proceed all the way to a vanishing point, where the "computer" is effectively gone (miniaturized or leveraged to the net), and all that is left, effectively, is the means of interacting with it.

But, over the shorter term (i.e., over the next 5 to 10 years), I anticipate most people moving to sub-$100 tablet-like computers that you use for a year and then throw away, but can use with a big screen when you want to. So, if you can figure out who is going to successfully produce the wireless technology for graphics that will become the standard, buy stock.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2031
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
It's time for computer prices to really plunge. With obviation of moving parts, rapidly developing nano-technologies, and diversification of device forms (which should multiply economies of scale), what we know of as "computers" are likely to be come nearly "disposable" within a decade or two. Increased miniaturization and synthesis of components will drastically reduce material requirements.

Think of portable calculators, electronic watches, and basic cell phones. You can get them all in blister-paks for about $20 now. I predict that the basic price point for a desktop will drop to $300 by the end of this coming year, and sub-$100 computers will be the norm by 2015.

Guys like us who tinker with PCs will be a thing of the past, like the radio and small-engine hobbyists of the early 20th century, or will evolve into some more network-centric equivalent.


I disagree. Intel's move will kill the mobo industry. So there will be intel - and nobody else. All the development from that sector gone. Intel in a position to dictate prices will, at the end increase prices and slash development. At the end, we, the customers, will see rising prices.

Besides, a basic price point for desktops is 350€ at the moment. So I don't see any improvement if it comes with Intel cementing its quasi-monopoly for all eternity.
_________________
AidanJT wrote:

Libertardian denial of reality is wholly unimpressive and unconvincing, and simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of delusional fools they all are.

Satan's got perfectly toned abs and rocks a c-cup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Big displays will continue to be needed. I think they'll be shared devices, though.

[...]

So, if you can figure out who is going to successfully produce the wireless technology for graphics that will become the standard, buy stock.
I pretty much agree with all of that. Which MS device(s) allow you to switch between small & large displays? I've not perceived this yet. "People like MS" Who are the others?

I think goggles are going to be the next major evolution. They'll be able to replace the need to switch between most displays (initially perhaps not for graphically intensive functions). The phone will be the local node. Without Flavor Flav sized screens, phones will go back in the appropriate direction for size, and become less noticeable.

I suspect the wireless technology will be an open standard that won't specifically generate profit. Unless the market changes and we see more fragmentation. Apple with their own, Google with theirs, and MS with yet another. If something like the scenarios we've described actually arrives, it'll probably be Apple able to integrate it most successfully, with everyone else not quite getting it to work as well.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
I wasn't trying to explain where you were going wrong. But given a finite resource, it is egregiously irresponsible to waste resources for no better reason than because you can. I'm sure you'll disagree, which is why I only bothered to show my amazement.

No one wastes for no better reason than he can; people waste because taking additional measures to conserve is uneconomical.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2031
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
pjp wrote:
I wasn't trying to explain where you were going wrong. But given a finite resource, it is egregiously irresponsible to waste resources for no better reason than because you can. I'm sure you'll disagree, which is why I only bothered to show my amazement.

No one wastes for no better reason than he can; people waste because taking additional measures to conserve is uneconomical.


wrong and wrong
_________________
AidanJT wrote:

Libertardian denial of reality is wholly unimpressive and unconvincing, and simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of delusional fools they all are.

Satan's got perfectly toned abs and rocks a c-cup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why is he wrong?
_________________
The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Do you understand? --Capt Jack Sparrow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2031
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

notageek wrote:
Why is he wrong?


people waste stuff all the time. Just because they can (from Bugatti drivers to people who don't turn off the lights, to those who just dump their garbage somewhere or celebrities drinking champagne from cans). And they don't do it because not to waste is uneconomical, but because to be 'cool'. 'Hey look. I know that I am a nature destroying asshole. But I am too cool to care. Look at me!'

....

of course, as soon as I am benevolent world dictator this will have a sudden end. Also new impulses for the crematory industry).
_________________
AidanJT wrote:

Libertardian denial of reality is wholly unimpressive and unconvincing, and simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of delusional fools they all are.

Satan's got perfectly toned abs and rocks a c-cup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
No one wastes for no better reason than he can
I agree completely that people waste because they can. I disagree that it should be acceptable. The tip of your nose / why should I have to pay a higher price due to needless waste. Exactly, I shouldn't.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1102
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 4:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
No one wastes for no better reason than he can; people waste because taking additional measures to conserve is uneconomical.

Is it uneconomical to walk over to a light switch and turn off a light you're not using? Or the same for a power hungry appliance like a TV? Or ordering/serving sensible portions of food? People waste all the time, contrary to their own best economic interests, even. It's just laziness and complete obliviousness of the consequences of their actions, or inaction in this case.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clad in Sky
l33t
l33t


Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 778
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I want to live where dmitchell lives. The world seem to be a better place there. People act rationally all the time, you don't need a government, just a free market that solves all problems. I'm intrigued by the concept of wasting because not wasting would be uneconomical. It means in essence, that they're not wasting at all.
Where does this Utopia lie?
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clad in Sky wrote:
Where does this Utopia lie?
I think you know where this is.

Sorry, couldn't resist.
_________________
The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Do you understand? --Capt Jack Sparrow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clad in Sky
l33t
l33t


Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 778
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Indeed. My Greek is strong.
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dE_logics
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 Jan 2009
Posts: 2178
Location: $TERM

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As of the current time, it's unlikely a user will 'upgrade' her powerful i3 with an i7....

With this step, their products will be cheaper.

Also gaming doesn't need powerful processors.
_________________
Buy from companies supporting opensource -- IBM, Dell, HP, Hitachi, Google etc...
Disfavor companies supporting only Win -- Logitech, Epson, Adobe, Autodesk, Pioneer, Kingston, WD, Yahoo, MSI, XFX
My blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clad in Sky wrote:
I want to live where dmitchell lives. The world seem to be a better place there. People act rationally all the time, you don't need a government, just a free market that solves all problems.
I wish it worked that way, but I see no evidence that it would. Which is why I'm a Trust but Verify Libertarian. We need something which ensures responsible behavior. This should, for the most part, be one of the very few roles of government.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerwylie
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 456
Location: /US/Illinois

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Which is why I'm a Trust but Verify Libertarian.
lol
_________________
Bastiat wrote:
“The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Buying luxury items isn't waste. At least not in the sense the term is being used here.

Let me go meta for a moment and say it might be helpful to pin down what exactly is meant by waste. Because when I start thinking about specific examples of waste, it seems pretty subjective.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum