Nvidia Replaces Intel on DOW

[[e-mail]]

https://techxplore.com/news/2024-11-nvidia-intel-dow-index-ai.html

. . .

NVidia makes the special parallel-processing chips most
widely used for "AI" applications these days. It has been
selling VAST quantities of those for awhile.

These are not really "CPU" chips however - they do
parallel math ops REALLY fast and that's their main
thing.

However the way most people will ACCESS those "AI"
apps will be through Intel-powered PCs.

So don't think Intel is goin' down anytime soon, but
it WILL have to share the processor market a bit more.

--
033-33

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 03/11/2024 04:54, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
> https://techxplore.com/news/2024-11-nvidia-intel-dow-index-ai.html
>
> . . .
>
>   NVidia makes the special parallel-processing chips most
>   widely used for "AI" applications these days. It has been
>   selling VAST quantities of those for awhile.
>
>   These are not really "CPU" chips however - they do
>   parallel math ops REALLY fast and that's their main
>   thing.
>
>   However the way most people will ACCESS those "AI"
>   apps will be through Intel-powered PCs.
>
>   So don't think Intel is goin' down anytime soon, but
>   it WILL have to share the processor market a bit more.
>

I think that ARM having eaten into its market in low power devices is
now swinging up towards an equal power performance solution.

And the trend away from customisable solutions towards pure consumer
crap, means its not important what the OS actually is.

No, I don't think intel powered PCs are the future any more than I think
that Windows PCs are.

What we seem to be seeing is a consumer base that is delighted to have
Siri or whatever talk to someone else's cloud, share all their secret
life online and drip feed them with marketing propaganda, whilst tying
them in to rented software and a planned lifetime of a few years for the
latest 'shiny new thing'

A gentler more commercial form of communism...


--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-11-03, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> What we seem to be seeing is a consumer base that is delighted to have
> Siri or whatever talk to someone else's cloud, share all their secret
> life online and drip feed them with marketing propaganda, whilst tying
> them in to rented software and a planned lifetime of a few years for the
> latest 'shiny new thing'
>
> A gentler more commercial form of communism...

Well, all this subscription-based stuff shows that even right-wing
corporations are pursuing Karl Marx's fondest dream: the elimination
of private property.

"Siri, define 'bugging'."

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

[[e-mail]]

On 11/3/24 2:15 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-11-03, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> What we seem to be seeing is a consumer base that is delighted to have
>> Siri or whatever talk to someone else's cloud, share all their secret
>> life online and drip feed them with marketing propaganda, whilst tying
>> them in to rented software and a planned lifetime of a few years for the
>> latest 'shiny new thing'
>>
>> A gentler more commercial form of communism...
>
> Well, all this subscription-based stuff shows that even right-wing
> corporations are pursuing Karl Marx's fondest dream: the elimination
> of private property.
>
> "Siri, define 'bugging'."


Money talks the loudest.

Nothing new there.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Sun, 03 Nov 2024 19:15:59 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> Well, all this subscription-based stuff shows that even right-wing
> corporations are pursuing Karl Marx's fondest dream: the elimination of
> private property.

Oh no, it is still “private property”, only it is owned by corporations
too powerful for any mere Government to rein in.

Karl Marx never saw such a thing coming. It’s basically a Capitalist
robber baron’s wet dream.

[[e-mail]]

On 11/3/24 3:48 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/11/2024 04:54, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> https://techxplore.com/news/2024-11-nvidia-intel-dow-index-ai.html
>>
>> . . .
>>
>>    NVidia makes the special parallel-processing chips most
>>    widely used for "AI" applications these days. It has been
>>    selling VAST quantities of those for awhile.
>>
>>    These are not really "CPU" chips however - they do
>>    parallel math ops REALLY fast and that's their main
>>    thing.
>>
>>    However the way most people will ACCESS those "AI"
>>    apps will be through Intel-powered PCs.
>>
>>    So don't think Intel is goin' down anytime soon, but
>>    it WILL have to share the processor market a bit more.
>>
>
> I think that ARM having eaten into its market in low power devices is
> now swinging up towards an equal power performance solution.


They're trying, but Intel has very well refined solutions
in that market. ARM may ruin itself trying to catch up
and they still won't have that Intel brand-rec. IMHO
ARM should continue to focus on 'devices', seeking the
best mix of performance and low power consumption.


> And the trend away from customisable solutions towards pure consumer
> crap, means its not important what  the OS actually is.

Any OS will do ... but Winders WILL remain very popular
"just because" and Apple has a similar claim to the
market foundation. Android(-like) systems are geared
for 'devices' and well known. Linux will remain something
of an outsider, albeit with a number of useful niches.

> No, I don't think intel powered PCs are the future any more than I think
> that Windows PCs are.

Somewhere I posted the other day that M$ profits were up 16%
the last quarter. It's not JUST the OS, but I think "Windows PCs"
aren't going away anytime soon. They're entrenched, they are
the devil everyone knows. Hell, developers rarely bother to make
their good apps for anything other than M$/iOS - an investment/
return equation at the very least.

> What we seem to be seeing is a consumer base that is delighted to have
> Siri or whatever talk to someone else's cloud, share all their secret
> life online and drip feed them with marketing propaganda, whilst tying
> them in to rented software and a planned lifetime of a few years for the
> latest 'shiny new thing'
>
> A gentler more commercial form of communism...


Yea, there's that ...

But nobody gets it and their lives now revolve around
such digital crack & candy. They will be all confused
when it's turned against them (if they even figure
that it IS).

For totalitarianism to work you don't have to fool EVERYBODY,
just ENOUGH. The rest can be intimidated, pushed along with
the herd.

It's why autocracies have been by FAR the default form of
govt/herd-management all through history. Looks like we're
going back to that right now.

The EU is so pleased to save you from all those
bad/wrong/dangerous ideas out there - can even use
AI to do it automatically ! Nothing but good
govt-certified/purified truths ! Keeps yer
kiddies safe ! Alleviates stress ! Yay !!!

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:24:19 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 11/3/24 3:48 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> I think that ARM having eaten into its market in low power devices is
>> now swinging up towards an equal power performance solution.
>
> They're trying, but Intel has very well refined solutions in that
> market. ARM may ruin itself trying to catch up ...

I’ve got news for you: ARM has already caught up and has long been
inhabiting the high-performance computing space.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu_A64FX>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugaku_(supercomputer)>

[Pancho]

On 11/3/24 22:56, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:24:19 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> On 11/3/24 3:48 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> I think that ARM having eaten into its market in low power devices is
>>> now swinging up towards an equal power performance solution.
>>
>> They're trying, but Intel has very well refined solutions in that
>> market. ARM may ruin itself trying to catch up ...
>
> I’ve got news for you: ARM has already caught up and has long been
> inhabiting the high-performance computing space.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu_A64FX>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugaku_(supercomputer)>

And you also have ARM based OS X Apple Macs in the consumer market.

Intel have had competitor chips (non 86) in the past and survived. I
think the main difference this time is that MS Windows is no longer
dominant. Competitor chips have similar revenue to fund development.

[Rich]

In comp.os.linux.misc Pancho <***@proton.me> wrote:
> On 11/3/24 22:56, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:24:19 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/3/24 3:48 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think that ARM having eaten into its market in low power devices
>>>> is now swinging up towards an equal power performance solution.
>>>
>>> They're trying, but Intel has very well refined solutions in that
>>> market. ARM may ruin itself trying to catch up ...
>>
>> I’ve got news for you: ARM has already caught up and has long been
>> inhabiting the high-performance computing space.
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu_A64FX>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugaku_(supercomputer)>
>
> And you also have ARM based OS X Apple Macs in the consumer market.
>
> Intel have had competitor chips (non 86) in the past and survived. I
> think the main difference this time is that MS Windows is no longer
> dominant. Competitor chips have similar revenue to fund development.

A second effect is the rise of GPU computation. Some portion of the
money flow that used to go to Intel for their "next faster CPU" is now
instead flowing to Nvidia for their "next faster GPU".

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:40:30 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> A second effect is the rise of GPU computation. Some portion of the
> money flow that used to go to Intel for their "next faster CPU" is now
> instead flowing to Nvidia for their "next faster GPU".

If the AI bubble dies down there will be bloodshed. (not advocating
violence but there's a lot of money riding on that game)

[John Ames]

On 4 Nov 2024 18:14:42 GMT
rbowman <***@montana.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:40:30 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
>
> > A second effect is the rise of GPU computation. Some portion of the
> > money flow that used to go to Intel for their "next faster CPU" is
> > now instead flowing to Nvidia for their "next faster GPU".
>
> If the AI bubble dies down there will be bloodshed. (not advocating
> violence but there's a lot of money riding on that game)

It's going to die; the only question is when. Ed Zitron at
https://www.wheresyoured.at/ has done a lot of solid writing on this
the last year or so, and we've already seen a few ominous "Jurassic
Park" ripple-in-the-glass moments with the investor class starting to
ask just *when* they can expect to see a return on the piles of money
they've lit on fire.

NVidia, of course, will make out like bandits in the meantime.

[Rich]

In comp.os.linux.misc rbowman <***@montana.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:40:30 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
>
>> A second effect is the rise of GPU computation. Some portion of the
>> money flow that used to go to Intel for their "next faster CPU" is now
>> instead flowing to Nvidia for their "next faster GPU".
>
> If the AI bubble dies down there will be bloodshed. (not advocating
> violence but there's a lot of money riding on that game)

There will certainly likely be a dramatic drop in Nvidia's stock price,
which many who invested in it will see as "bloodshed" for their
portfolios (unless they managed to get out in time).

And I rather expect the current AI marketer driven hype cycle to crash
down just like all the other marketer driven AI hype cycles of the
past crashed down. At which point, what small usefulness the current
AI's do have that the marketer's have been hyping will finally come
out.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:41:53 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> And I rather expect the current AI marketer driven hype cycle to crash
> down just like all the other marketer driven AI hype cycles of the past
> crashed down. At which point, what small usefulness the current AI's do
> have that the marketer's have been hyping will finally come out.

The trouble with being an antiquated geezer is you've seen too many cycles
of over-hyped dreams collapsing. Like the broken promises of politicians,
the 'peace dividend' that never came, and so forth, it makes one cynical.

[rbowman]

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:24:19 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> They're trying, but Intel has very well refined solutions in that
> market. ARM may ruin itself trying to catch up and they still won't
> have that Intel brand-rec. IMHO ARM should continue to focus on
> 'devices', seeking the best mix of performance and low power
> consumption.

<quibble>
I doubt Arm Holdings will ruin itself. Its licensees, otoh, may well do
so.
</quibble>

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 3 Nov 2024 23:10:33 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> I doubt Arm Holdings will ruin itself.

They do seem to be getting a bit greedy. Cf the stoush with Qualcomm.

[[e-mail]]

On 11/3/24 6:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:24:19 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> They're trying, but Intel has very well refined solutions in that
>> market. ARM may ruin itself trying to catch up and they still won't
>> have that Intel brand-rec. IMHO ARM should continue to focus on
>> 'devices', seeking the best mix of performance and low power
>> consumption.
>
> <quibble>
> I doubt Arm Holdings will ruin itself. Its licensees, otoh, may well do
> so.
> </quibble>

Sometimes you get an exec who wants to GO FOR IT - win
or die trying. Death is NOT so unusual in these cases.
Corps take out huge loans, pay insane salaries to woo
top minds away from the competition, ASSUME it'll all
pay off Just In Time.

How many Big Tech corps from the 60s/70s went under ?
Hell, Apple almost went under - the cute little orig
Mac was a brilliant save.

Even "merit" alone can't always save a corp, there are
many factors affecting sales. And hey, why did Red Hat
sell out to IBM ? Their product was as good before as
after - but IBM had the money/name/clout to elevate it
to more 'significant' roles (and no doubt some RH
investors got a nice fat pay-off.

ANYway - ARM can surely improve chip performance, but
should that be it's priority, something to blow the
net worth on ? Lower-energy seems more of an ARM thing
and what all 'device' owners want.

Oh well, we can guess all we will - ARM will do what
it's gonna do.

[rbowman]

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:30:47 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> ANYway - ARM can surely improve chip performance, but should that be
> it's priority, something to blow the net worth on ? Lower-energy
> seems more of an ARM thing and what all 'device' owners want.

It isn't clear to me how the interaction of Arm Holdings and their
licensees works. Arm Holdings doesn't fabricate devices. Overlooking the
current feud, when Arm licenses its designs to Qualcomm, who is
responsible for the integration into a Snapdragon SoC?

The Raspberry Pi family is another example. The Pi 4 uses the Broadcom
BCM2711 with 4 Cortex-A72 cores at 1.5 GHZ. The Pi 5 has the BCM2712 with
4 Cortex-A76 cores at 2.4 GHz. The 5 is much faster but requires a better
power supply. Cooling is strongly suggested if you're going to push it.
How much of the power and performance difference is from the core design
and how much from Broadcom's decisions during integration.

The A78 is claimed to be better for power and performance where the
Cortex-X1 is the balls to the wall rework of the A78 used in the
Snapdragon 888 but that design also has 3 A76 cores and 4 A55 cores to
balance things out.

The first devices were hot little buggers which ultimately got blamed on
Samsung's manufacturing process versus TSMC so it seems It's not only the
Arm design but who fabs the device.

https://www.patentlyapple.com/2021/05/tsmc-bailed-qualcomm-out-of-a-jam-
earlier-this-year-when-the-snapdragon-888-produced-by-samsung-caused-
overheating-issues.html

In short, Arm's designs are aimed at different criteria but much of the
responsibility depends on what the licensees do with the designs. Bring on
the finger pointing.

[[e-mail]]

On 11/3/24 9:49 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:30:47 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> ANYway - ARM can surely improve chip performance, but should that be
>> it's priority, something to blow the net worth on ? Lower-energy
>> seems more of an ARM thing and what all 'device' owners want.
>
> It isn't clear to me how the interaction of Arm Holdings and their
> licensees works. Arm Holdings doesn't fabricate devices. Overlooking the
> current feud, when Arm licenses its designs to Qualcomm, who is
> responsible for the integration into a Snapdragon SoC?
>
> The Raspberry Pi family is another example. The Pi 4 uses the Broadcom
> BCM2711 with 4 Cortex-A72 cores at 1.5 GHZ. The Pi 5 has the BCM2712 with
> 4 Cortex-A76 cores at 2.4 GHz. The 5 is much faster but requires a better
> power supply. Cooling is strongly suggested if you're going to push it.
> How much of the power and performance difference is from the core design
> and how much from Broadcom's decisions during integration.
>
> The A78 is claimed to be better for power and performance where the
> Cortex-X1 is the balls to the wall rework of the A78 used in the
> Snapdragon 888 but that design also has 3 A76 cores and 4 A55 cores to
> balance things out.
>
> The first devices were hot little buggers which ultimately got blamed on
> Samsung's manufacturing process versus TSMC so it seems It's not only the
> Arm design but who fabs the device.
>
> https://www.patentlyapple.com/2021/05/tsmc-bailed-qualcomm-out-of-a-jam-
> earlier-this-year-when-the-snapdragon-888-produced-by-samsung-caused-
> overheating-issues.html
>
> In short, Arm's designs are aimed at different criteria but much of the
> responsibility depends on what the licensees do with the designs. Bring on
> the finger pointing.


True ... it's rarely THAT simple these days.

My direct experience with Pi4 vs Pi5 is that the thing
seems mostly twice as fast. The 5 may have better power
management too - but at full tilt it can use more juice.

My main gripe was the version of Deb rolled out with
the P5 - it wasn't right, seemed like every thing I was
using them for didn't work. Too-early release maybe ?

Sometime I'll try a later version and see if they've
fixed things. NOT happy with the Canonical direction
Deb has taken. Deb is supposed to be the solid stodgy
FOUNDATION, not just another sub-version of Ubuntu.
There's STILL not a Fedora that's properly tuned for a
P5, despite promises, or I'd use that. Last Pi I bought,
went back to the P4.

Been into BMax/BeeLink mini-boxes of late ... all have
kinda 'cheap laptop' i3 calibre CPUs. Put Manjaro on
a couple, F40 on one and maybe FreeBSD on the remaining
unit. Happy to brag that the included Win did not run
for a single microsecond on any unit :-)

[rbowman]

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 22:25:34 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:


> My main gripe was the version of Deb rolled out with the P5 - it
> wasn't right, seemed like every thing I was using them for didn't
> work. Too-early release maybe ?

I avoided bookworm on my Debian desktop box but I haven't has a problem
with the Raspberry Pi OS version. It runs VS Code and the Pico SDK which
is about all I've done with it so far.

> Been into BMax/BeeLink mini-boxes of late ... all have kinda 'cheap
> laptop' i3 calibre CPUs. Put Manjaro on a couple, F40 on one and
> maybe FreeBSD on the remaining unit. Happy to brag that the included
> Win did not run for a single microsecond on any unit

My main machine has been a Beelink with a Ryzen 7 4700U. The specs are
very similar to my Acer Swift 3 laptop. It has Ubuntu 22.04 and has been
perking along since February 2023. I'm not that crazy about Ubuntu but my
previuos main box was SuSS and I wanted a change.

[[e-mail]]

On 11/4/24 1:27 AM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 22:25:34 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>
>> My main gripe was the version of Deb rolled out with the P5 - it
>> wasn't right, seemed like every thing I was using them for didn't
>> work. Too-early release maybe ?
>
> I avoided bookworm on my Debian desktop box but I haven't has a problem
> with the Raspberry Pi OS version. It runs VS Code and the Pico SDK which
> is about all I've done with it so far.

I use some for security-cam apps. The /dev/video stuff
was NOT right fer sure. The devices would disappear and
appear under entirely different numbers over and over.
Useless. Still working on a comprehensive home-security
system and I will stick to the P4/Buster and stay the
hell away from Worm.

>> Been into BMax/BeeLink mini-boxes of late ... all have kinda 'cheap
>> laptop' i3 calibre CPUs. Put Manjaro on a couple, F40 on one and
>> maybe FreeBSD on the remaining unit. Happy to brag that the included
>> Win did not run for a single microsecond on any unit
>
> My main machine has been a Beelink with a Ryzen 7 4700U. The specs are
> very similar to my Acer Swift 3 laptop. It has Ubuntu 22.04 and has been
> perking along since February 2023. I'm not that crazy about Ubuntu but my
> previuos main box was SuSS and I wanted a change.

These mini-boxes ARE pretty good - and at very fair
prices too. You get as much CPU as you wanna pay for.

MY needs, so far, fit into the i3 area, so I can get
by pretty cheap. I added 500gb SSDs to two boxes and
a 500gb USB3->M7 on another. For the likely eventual
FreeBSD I have a four bay external mag-disk enclosure
intended for NAS purposes.

Noted : BMax tend to have two usb2 and two usb3 while
the BeeLinks have four usb3.

If you want serious kiosk/industrial mini-boxes, look
at SuperMicro. Some of those tiny boards/boxes have
headers for connections even I never heard of, obscure
industrial stuff. Price isn't TOO bad.

Anyway, Linux lets these boxes be all that they can
be as opposed to the obese pig Win - and you don't
have to create an online M$ spy account !

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 01:51:43 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> Anyway, Linux lets these boxes be all that they can be as opposed to
> the obese pig Win - and you don't have to create an online M$ spy
> account !

The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the
license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual boots
in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on the
drive.

[[e-mail]]

On 11/4/24 2:03 AM, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 01:51:43 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> Anyway, Linux lets these boxes be all that they can be as opposed to
>> the obese pig Win - and you don't have to create an online M$ spy
>> account !
>
> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the
> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual boots
> in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on the
> drive.

I do NOT need M$ for anything whatsoever - so Win DIES
immediately !

Made a VM of a recent FreeBSD so I could experiment with
installation quirks and see how to install xorg and xfce
desktop. The way it works the GUI stuff does NOT come up
automagically, but you have to 'startx'. For my needs this
is kinda exactly what I want. MOST access will be SSH.

The GUIs *can* be very handy sometimes ... but you don't
necessarily want them to start EVERY time.

In any case, very happy with BeeLink/BMax. Alas do NOT
have the Pi I/O pins, but different boards for different
uses hey ........

Recently got an Ard Uno and the bits and pieces to build
an electronic door lock. TWO-button switch. The idea is
to enter a 7 or 8 digit BINARY combo using the buttons
with maybe a 10-15 second time-out. Gotta decide on
polling -vs- interrupt ... interrupt can use much less
standby power if you do it right combined with the Ard
low-power/sleep library. Amazing what can be done even
with really weak/slow chips. For MOST Ard uses though
I'd rec the Mega2560 - but you may have to tweak the libs
for accessories as the pins are different. Built some
good multi-channel solar-powered environmental
monitors using those boards.

Note the "RuggedDurino 2560" ... all pins zener
protected.

You CAN buy 3.3v logic-level MOSFETS now, which would
be handier for PI applications that have to drive relays
and such. However I tend to put optoisolators between
boards and the outside world if extreme signal speed
isn't required. This is both safe AND you can drive
the optos with 3.3 but use 5v or more on the transistor
side of things. Also great at rejecting high-volt/low-amp
noise from motors, relays, ignition systems and such.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:35:50 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> Recently got an Ard Uno and the bits and pieces to build an
> electronic door lock. TWO-button switch. The idea is to enter a 7 or
> 8 digit BINARY combo using the buttons with maybe a 10-15 second
> time-out. Gotta decide on polling -vs- interrupt ... interrupt can
> use much less standby power if you do it right combined with the Ard
> low-power/sleep library. Amazing what can be done even with really
> weak/slow chips. For MOST Ard uses though I'd rec the Mega2560 - but
> you may have to tweak the libs for accessories as the pins are
> different. Built some good multi-channel solar-powered environmental
> monitors using those boards.

I've got a few Unos. My problem is figuring out what to do with them. I
don't mean the coding/peripheral aspects but projects that are something I
need. Right now I have a 4 wheel chassis with a primitive IR keypad
controller. The long range plan is to incorporate the PWM ability of the
L298Ns and go to the nfr240l01 for two way communication. The problem is
the chassis has limitations.

I've got a couple of the Nano 33 BLE Sense boards. A MIT course in TinyML
used them. The nRF52840 is Arm. All of the onboard sensors make it more
expensive but it's handier if you can make use of them.

Right now I'm messing around with the Pico W. Too many choices, too little
discipline...

[[e-mail]]

On 11/4/24 1:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:35:50 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> Recently got an Ard Uno and the bits and pieces to build an
>> electronic door lock. TWO-button switch. The idea is to enter a 7 or
>> 8 digit BINARY combo using the buttons with maybe a 10-15 second
>> time-out. Gotta decide on polling -vs- interrupt ... interrupt can
>> use much less standby power if you do it right combined with the Ard
>> low-power/sleep library. Amazing what can be done even with really
>> weak/slow chips. For MOST Ard uses though I'd rec the Mega2560 - but
>> you may have to tweak the libs for accessories as the pins are
>> different. Built some good multi-channel solar-powered environmental
>> monitors using those boards.
>
> I've got a few Unos. My problem is figuring out what to do with them. I
> don't mean the coding/peripheral aspects but projects that are something I
> need.o


Know what you mean ... I've got tons of parts - for
those "someday" projects :-)

The executors of my estate are NOT gonna be happy.
Hell, even have a ZX-81 in The Heap somewhere :-)


> Right now I have a 4 wheel chassis with a primitive IR keypad
> controller. The long range plan is to incorporate the PWM ability of the
> L298Ns and go to the nfr240l01 for two way communication. The problem is
> the chassis has limitations.

PWM ... why not steppers ?

Build a better chassis ? Of course that requires the right
tools, which means off to the hardware store, which
means bringing back a bunch of other stuff you didn't
know you needed and ........

I come across robotics sites selling more-or-less
finished chassis. Just bolt yer stuff on.

Radio comms, esp with limited units like Ards, can
be annoying. They DO make an Uno with built-in
wifi now - so depending on your coverage you might
be able to run it straight up from a laptop. There
are various 900 MHz bi-di modules too.

https://store.arduino.cc/products/arduino-uno-wifi-rev2


> I've got a couple of the Nano 33 BLE Sense boards. A MIT course in TinyML
> used them. The nRF52840 is Arm. All of the onboard sensors make it more
> expensive but it's handier if you can make use of them.
>
> Right now I'm messing around with the Pico W. Too many choices, too little
> discipline...

Again, I get it.

My last job left me time and leeway to fool around with
various projects that MIGHT, maybe, be useful someday
some way. A few were. Fun, and I learned a lot.

The Pico does interest me. Basically a hopped-up
microcontroller and you can get wi-fi too. Looks
easier than starting with a raw PIC or '51 and
building up from there.

In any case you can get surprisingly good computing
power and peripherials for pretty cheap now. Outfits
like Grove have whole fams of accessories kinda
meant to go together.

https://wiki.seeedstudio.com/Grove_System/

I don't build a UNIVAC to start any new
computer project, so perhaps it's not
"cheating" to take advantage of what the
modern microcontroller/microcomputer
catalog offers.

Just glad a LOT of people are still into this
sort of stuff - don't think a smartphone is
the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio Shack
lives on. :-)

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:30:22 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 11/4/24 1:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:35:50 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
> Know what you mean ... I've got tons of parts - for those "someday"
> projects :-)
>
> The executors of my estate are NOT gonna be happy.
> Hell, even have a ZX-81 in The Heap somewhere :-)

Whoever cleans up after me would be best served with a 5 gallon can of
gasoline and a match. There are several books about 'Swedish death
cleaning'. Supposedly the Swedes have a word for getting rid of all your
junk before dying.

>> Right now I have a 4 wheel chassis with a primitive IR keypad
>> controller. The long range plan is to incorporate the PWM ability of
>> the L298Ns and go to the nfr240l01 for two way communication. The
>> problem is the chassis has limitations.
>
> PWM ... why not steppers ?

Path of least resistance. There are a lot of chassis available in the $20
range. They're a couple of pieces of plexiglas, standoffs, encoders and
other hardware. Most include TT gearbox motors.

https://www.adafruit.com/product/3777

I'd previously built a 3 wheel chassis with converted R/C servos but these
seemed a little more, um, finished looking. A problem with 4WD is the
motors don't have quite enough torque to skid steer for tight turns. You
need to reverse the drive on one side rather than just bulling around.

> Build a better chassis ? Of course that requires the right tools,
> which means off to the hardware store, which means bringing back a
> bunch of other stuff you didn't know you needed and ........

I'm pretty sure I read it about 30 years ago but I'm reading Neal
Stephenson's 'Zodiac'. The protagonist goes to a hardware store to find
some way to block the ports in a chemical plants underwater diffuser.

He notes that young clerks try to be helpful while the older ones let you
wander around without bothering you knowing that almost nothing that's
bought in a hardware store is put to its intended use. I had to laugh
having been there too many times over the years.

> I come across robotics sites selling more-or-less finished chassis.
> Just bolt yer stuff on.

Yup.

> Radio comms, esp with limited units like Ards, can be annoying. They
> DO make an Uno with built-in wifi now - so depending on your coverage
> you might be able to run it straight up from a laptop. There are
> various 900 MHz bi-di modules too.
>
> https://store.arduino.cc/products/arduino-uno-wifi-rev2

The R4? I've been working with the Pico W but the Arduino format is
attractive. I like the USB C rather than Micro USB. My eyes aren't what
they were 50 years ago. That's the mice thing about the original Uno --
you can't confuse USB B with anything as you search through the cable
collection.


> The Pico does interest me. Basically a hopped-up microcontroller and
> you can get wi-fi too. Looks easier than starting with a raw PIC or
> '51 and building up from there.

As everyone moves to Arm M cores it's a little less like the wild west. I
never worked with the PICs, only the AVRs. Back then I was working with
assembly and the AVRs were more like the Intel devices I was familiar
with.

> Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't
> think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio Shack
> lives on. :-)

When they built the new library they incorporated a maker space rather
than a few things stuffed into a meeting room. I don't think it's a formal
class but someone is available Saturdays to help with Arduino projects.

[John Ames]

On 5 Nov 2024 20:07:07 GMT
rbowman <***@montana.com> wrote:

> > Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't
> > think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio
> > Shack lives on. :-)
>
> When they built the new library they incorporated a maker space
> rather than a few things stuffed into a meeting room. I don't think
> it's a formal class but someone is available Saturdays to help with
> Arduino projects.

Really need more of these kinds of things outside of major metro areas,
but yes, it's encouraging to see :)

(Reminds me, I should do a writeup over in alt.music.makers.electronic
and rec.music.makers.synth on the MFOS synthesizer I'm building...!)

[rbowman]

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 12:24:24 -0800, John Ames wrote:

> On 5 Nov 2024 20:07:07 GMT rbowman <***@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> > Just glad a LOT of people are still into this sort of stuff - don't
>> > think a smartphone is the end-all of tech. The spirit of Radio Shack
>> > lives on.
>>
>> When they built the new library they incorporated a maker space rather
>> than a few things stuffed into a meeting room. I don't think it's a
>> formal class but someone is available Saturdays to help with Arduino
>> projects.
>
> Really need more of these kinds of things outside of major metro areas,
> but yes, it's encouraging to see

Nobody ever accused Missoula of being a major metro area :) I should
cruise by more often to see what the utilization is. I'm guilty of using
the libby app to borrow digital books delivered via Amazon without setting
foot in the library. Times are changing. The new library does have
physical books but a lot of floor space is devoted to a childrens'
discovery area, the maker space, a video creation area, and even a demo
kitchen.

[Harold Stevens]

(nudefroups trimmed to colm...)

In <***@mid.individual.net> rbowman:

[Snip...]

> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the
> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual boots
> in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on the
> drive.

+1

I have a wowe Mini PC (AMD Excavator)

Here's the review I wrote about it for Amazon:

<Quote>

I don't use Microsoft, but the Linux version I received has outstanding value
as a personal or SOHO PC.

Runs very quietly, and onboard cooling seems very effective (personal or SOHO
tasks).

Additional 16GB RAM (separate order) installed easily and works flawlessly.

Delivered with Ubuntu Linux. I prefer Debian, which installed flawlessly.

Minor Linux nit: neither the Ubuntu nor the Debian install supports switching
from X console to a non-X console (TTY command line), via the CNTL-ALT-F(1:6)
keyboard toggles.

</Quote>

FWIW: installed Bookworm over (I think) Ubuntu 22.4 delivered.

Caveat: The wowe does not get good reviews on Amazon (2.7 out of
5 stars, last I checked).

I'm unsure what that's about (overclocker Winduds gamers?).

--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at att, dotted with net. * DO NOT SPAM IT. *
I toss GoogleGroup (http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/).

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:02:38 -0600, Harold Stevens wrote:

> Caveat: The wowe does not get good reviews on Amazon (2.7 out of 5
> stars, last I checked).

I got interested in minis when the company bought a Mac mini to build a
iPhone app, not the Mac part but the form factor. The Intel NUCs were
overpriced for what they were and I prefer AMD.

I won't say Beelink was the only offering a couple of years ago but they
were one of the first. Now there's a whole raft of copycats. The Beelink
has worked for me so I'd stick with them if I buy another although I'm
sure some of the others are just as good.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 4 Nov 2024 17:47:36 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> The Intel NUCs were overpriced for what they were ...

And Intel still couldn’t make money on them. That’s why it gave up.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:00:37 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 4 Nov 2024 17:47:36 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> The Intel NUCs were overpriced for what they were ...
>
> And Intel still couldn’t make money on them. That’s why it gave up.

It will be interesting to see how ASUS does with the line. They're not
going for the budget consumer market. I think the cheapest NUC 14 is $800
and it's up from there.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

rbowman wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:02:38 -0600, Harold Stevens wrote:
>
>> Caveat: The wowe does not get good reviews on Amazon (2.7 out of 5
>> stars, last I checked).
>
> I got interested in minis when the company bought a Mac mini to build a
> iPhone app, not the Mac part but the form factor. The Intel NUCs were
> overpriced for what they were and I prefer AMD.
>
> I won't say Beelink was the only offering a couple of years ago but they
> were one of the first. Now there's a whole raft of copycats. The Beelink
> has worked for me so I'd stick with them if I buy another although I'm
> sure some of the others are just as good.

So far I'm liking my Trycoo mini PC. (Dual boot Win 11 Pro / Debian)

--
Used with permission.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 4 Nov 2024 07:03:56 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the
> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual
> boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on
> the drive.

The trouble with that is, you are still paying the Microsoft tax.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:59:07 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 4 Nov 2024 07:03:56 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the
>> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual
>> boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on
>> the drive.
>
> The trouble with that is, you are still paying the Microsoft tax.

At $350 the tax must be bargained down. That's why I said I didn't have
complete confidence in the 11 Pro it came with, not that a company in
Shenzhen would cut corners.

Maybe it's entirely legit. The Swift 3 was $679 with very similar hardware
including the display, keyboard, laptop configuration.

amazon.com/dp/B0D8NS7KSH/

When you get down to $165 that claims to come with Windows 11 Pro you've
got to wonder what exactly the 'tax' is. Not the greatest processor and I
doubt the other components are top shelf, but there still has to be some
cost involved for the physical components and assembly.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

rbowman wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:59:07 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 4 Nov 2024 07:03:56 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> The Beelink came with Windows 11 Pro. I was a little skeptical of the
>>> license but Win11 didn't last long enough to bother. I've done dual
>>> boots in the past but lately I go scorched earth if there's anything on
>>> the drive.
>>
>> The trouble with that is, you are still paying the Microsoft tax.
>
> At $350 the tax must be bargained down. That's why I said I didn't have
> complete confidence in the 11 Pro it came with, not that a company in
> Shenzhen would cut corners.
>
> Maybe it's entirely legit. The Swift 3 was $679 with very similar hardware
> including the display, keyboard, laptop configuration.
>
> amazon.com/dp/B0D8NS7KSH/
>
> When you get down to $165 that claims to come with Windows 11 Pro you've
> got to wonder what exactly the 'tax' is. Not the greatest processor and I
> doubt the other components are top shelf, but there still has to be some
> cost involved for the physical components and assembly.

I thought it well-known that Microsoft sells Windows dirt-cheap to OEMs.

--
Cosmotronic Software Unlimited Inc. does not warrant that the
functions contained in the program will meet your requirements or that
the operation of the program will be uninterrupted or error-free.
However, Cosmotronic Software Unlimited Inc. warrants the
diskette(s) on which the program is furnished to be of black color and
square shape under normal use for a period of ninety (90) days from the
date of purchase.
NOTE: IN NO EVENT WILL COSMOTRONIC SOFTWARE UNLIMITED OR ITS
DISTRIBUTORS AND THEIR DEALERS BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING
ANY LOST PROFIT, LOST SAVINGS, LOST PATIENCE OR OTHER INCIDENTAL OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
-- Horstmann Software Design, the "ChiWriter" user manual

[rbowman]

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 07:33:29 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> I thought it well-known that Microsoft sells Windows dirt-cheap to OEMs.

I wonder how cheap dirt is these days? OEM keys that fell off the back of
a truck are cheap enough. Anyway I have no regrets when I overwrite
Windows.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 04/11/2024 03:25, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
> My direct experience with Pi4 vs Pi5 is that the thing
>   seems mostly twice as fast. The 5 may have better power
>   management too - but at full tilt it can use more juice.

I was having a chat yesterday with a man who was fairly involved with
ACORN and ARM back in the day. He put it very simply:

For a given clock speed, which is limited by the physical dimensions of
the chip, the smaller the transistors the less power it takes to run the
chips.

However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below, and
clock speeds are stuck at a few GHz which means that the
power-performance ratio is pretty much the same for Intel and ARM
architectures. Only by having fewer transistors and implicitly doing
less, can the power be reduced.

I.e. Moore's law has basically stopped representing reality. And ARM is
no longer fantastic power performance compared with Intel. Its one
advantage is it doesn't have to support a legacy architecture. And so
its probably cheaper and less buggy.

So the price performance is probably still there, but not power.



--
Civilization exists by geological consent, subject to change without notice.
– Will Durant

[John Ames]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:01:01 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below, and
> clock speeds are stuck at a few GHz which means that the
> power-performance ratio is pretty much the same for Intel and ARM
> architectures. Only by having fewer transistors and implicitly doing
> less, can the power be reduced.
>
> I.e. Moore's law has basically stopped representing reality. And ARM
> is no longer fantastic power performance compared with Intel. Its one
> advantage is it doesn't have to support a legacy architecture. And so
> its probably cheaper and less buggy.

I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of
programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs
afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a
nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a
finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting
when we finally hit the wall.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 04/11/2024 18:20, John Ames wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:01:01 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below, and
>> clock speeds are stuck at a few GHz which means that the
>> power-performance ratio is pretty much the same for Intel and ARM
>> architectures. Only by having fewer transistors and implicitly doing
>> less, can the power be reduced.
>>
>> I.e. Moore's law has basically stopped representing reality. And ARM
>> is no longer fantastic power performance compared with Intel. Its one
>> advantage is it doesn't have to support a legacy architecture. And so
>> its probably cheaper and less buggy.
>
> I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of
> programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs
> afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a
> nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a
> finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting
> when we finally hit the wall.
>

It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature
technology, and there isn't much more to actually do.


--
There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons
that sound good.

Burton Hillis (William Vaughn, American columnist)

[John Ames]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:30:27 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature
> technology, and there isn't much more to actually do.

You have to wonder - but businesses accustomed to getting cheap-as-free
upgrades of ~2^N in raw compute every few years will doubtless still
expect to scale their capabilities upward accordingly. When they can't,
it's gonna be real interesting to see what kind of renewed interest
there'll be in maximizing efficient use of the available resources, vs.
the "throw a beefier computer at it" approach that has very much been
standard practice for the last ~30 yrs.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-11-04, John Ames <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:30:27 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature
>> technology, and there isn't much more to actually do.
>
> You have to wonder - but businesses accustomed to getting cheap-as-free
> upgrades of ~2^N in raw compute every few years will doubtless still
> expect to scale their capabilities upward accordingly. When they can't,
> it's gonna be real interesting to see what kind of renewed interest
> there'll be in maximizing efficient use of the available resources, vs.
> the "throw a beefier computer at it" approach that has very much been
> standard practice for the last ~30 yrs.

It'd be a nice change from the "abundance justifies waste" mindset
which has taken hold.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

[John Ames]

On Mon, 04 Nov 2024 19:57:21 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> It'd be a nice change from the "abundance justifies waste" mindset
> which has taken hold.

Indeed...

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-11-04, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 04/11/2024 18:20, John Ames wrote:
>
>> I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of
>> programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs
>> afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a
>> nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a
>> finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting
>> when we finally hit the wall.

Horrors - we might have to start programming efficiently again.

> It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature
> technology, and there isn't much more to actually do.

I've been seeing a lot of immature behaviour lately.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

[[e-mail]]

On 11/4/24 2:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-11-04, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 04/11/2024 18:20, John Ames wrote:
>>
>>> I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of
>>> programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs
>>> afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a
>>> nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a
>>> finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting
>>> when we finally hit the wall.
>
> Horrors - we might have to start programming efficiently again.


No ! NO !!! =:-<>

Only we 'older people' learned to make due, sculpt
ASM, for chips with teenie-weenie RAM/ROM. The
follow-ons think only in mega/giga/terabytes and
NEVER in terms of optimizing code. Hand them a PIC-12f
series chip and they'd ask how to start Win-12 on it.

There was a guy at the office who was always claiming
he needed a new PC (mostly because he always left
like 20 windows from last week opened) and I was VERY
tempted to hand him one of those 8-pin jobbies with
tweezers and say "There's your new computer !" :-)

How about "We want a semi-intelligent human-presence
aware unit for controlling room lighting - by the
end of the month. Why, you have a whole 1024 bytes
of flash to write the pgm in and 64 bytes of RAM
should be plenty !"

>> It may be that computing as we understand it is simply a mature
>> technology, and there isn't much more to actually do.
>
> I've been seeing a lot of immature behaviour lately.

'Computing' may have a few tricks left. Neural/quantum
and a few other things. Even getting thousands of
NVidia's coordinated on the same question must be
interesting.

But as for 'conventional computing', yea, it's down
about as good as it'll ever be. All you can do add is
more/faster hardware - until there ain't no more.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:08:02 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> Only we 'older people' learned to make due, sculpt ASM, for chips
> with teenie-weenie RAM/ROM. The follow-ons think only in
> mega/giga/terabytes and NEVER in terms of optimizing code. Hand them
> a PIC-12f series chip and they'd ask how to start Win-12 on it.

When I interviewed for my current job about 25 years ago one of the
interview questions started with 'Assume you have unlimited memory...' I
thought to myself that I was entering a different world.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-11-05, rbowman <***@montana.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:08:02 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> Only we 'older people' learned to make due, sculpt ASM, for chips
>> with teenie-weenie RAM/ROM. The follow-ons think only in
>> mega/giga/terabytes and NEVER in terms of optimizing code. Hand them
>> a PIC-12f series chip and they'd ask how to start Win-12 on it.
>
> When I interviewed for my current job about 25 years ago one of the
> interview questions started with 'Assume you have unlimited memory...' I
> thought to myself that I was entering a different world.

When a PPOE upgraded its Univac 9300 from 16K of memory to 32K,
we wondered what we would do with all that space. (We soon
figured that out.)

On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program
to build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all
input files had been read, because I realized that these days,
given the finite volume of data I'm working with, I effectively
_do_ have unlimited memory. So I threw out lots of disk sorts,
matching routines, etc. That program now runs _fast_ - but I
guess speed vs. memory was always the classic trade-off.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program
> to build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all
> input files had been read, because I realized that these days,
> given the finite volume of data I'm working with, I effectively
> _do_ have unlimited memory.

I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on
gigantic matrices.
His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure
INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.
On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.
That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to suit
the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.

Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the computer is
about 500W.

So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

[rbowman]

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:38:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program to
>> build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all input files
>> had been read, because I realized that these days, given the finite
>> volume of data I'm working with, I effectively _do_ have unlimited
>> memory.
>
> I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on
> gigantic matrices.
> His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure
> INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.
> On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.
> That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to suit
> the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.
>
> Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the computer is
> about 500W.
>
> So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.

AI is great for that. You know you're in trouble when companies are trying
to buy nuclear plants to keep the lights in in the computing centers.

It doesn't get as much mention yet but all that energy eventually becomes
heat. Is the answer something like the Seabrook nuke where you can use the
Atlantic to keep the processors cool? When they were building Seabrook one
of the spins was that the lobsters would love their cozy new homes.

[[e-mail]]

On 11/5/24 7:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:38:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program to
>>> build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all input files
>>> had been read, because I realized that these days, given the finite
>>> volume of data I'm working with, I effectively _do_ have unlimited
>>> memory.
>>
>> I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on
>> gigantic matrices.
>> His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure
>> INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.
>> On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.
>> That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to suit
>> the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.
>>
>> Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the computer is
>> about 500W.
>>
>> So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.
>
> AI is great for that. You know you're in trouble when companies are trying
> to buy nuclear plants to keep the lights in in the computing centers.
>
> It doesn't get as much mention yet but all that energy eventually becomes
> heat. Is the answer something like the Seabrook nuke where you can use the
> Atlantic to keep the processors cool? When they were building Seabrook one
> of the spins was that the lobsters would love their cozy new homes.


The "nuke plant" thing IS impressive - just a hint
of HOW much energy 'AI' consumes using current
hardware/methods.

Expect the energy hunger to double or triple VERY soon.

The human brain gets by on about 25 watts.

In short, the 'AI' approach everybody's using
just SUCKS ... seriously defective and about
as anti-Green as possible.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 06/11/2024 06:29, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
> In short, the 'AI' approach everybody's using
>   just SUCKS ... seriously defective and about
>   as anti-Green as possible.

Oh, if its anti Green it cant be all bad...
--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

[[e-mail]]

On 11/6/24 6:12 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 06/11/2024 06:29, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> In short, the 'AI' approach everybody's using
>>    just SUCKS ... seriously defective and about
>>    as anti-Green as possible.
>
> Oh, if its anti Green it cant be all bad...

Well ..... just sayin' :-)

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 06/11/2024 00:26, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:38:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program to
>>> build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all input files
>>> had been read, because I realized that these days, given the finite
>>> volume of data I'm working with, I effectively _do_ have unlimited
>>> memory.
>>
>> I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on
>> gigantic matrices.
>> His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure
>> INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.
>> On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.
>> That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to suit
>> the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.
>>
>> Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the computer is
>> about 500W.
>>
>> So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.
>
> AI is great for that. You know you're in trouble when companies are trying
> to buy nuclear plants to keep the lights in in the computing centers.
>
Frankly I regard that as pure serendipity.
The world needs nuclear power in unheard of quantities, and if AI is the
trigger to start that avalanche, I dont care if in the end its utterly
pointless.

The nuclear power stations will still be there. and usable


> It doesn't get as much mention yet but all that energy eventually becomes
> heat. Is the answer something like the Seabrook nuke where you can use the
> Atlantic to keep the processors cool? When they were building Seabrook one
> of the spins was that the lobsters would love their cozy new homes.
>

Yes. There is a distinct change in species near the outfalls of coastal
reactors - but its the same for any thermal power plant - aside from CCGT..

60% of the energy ends up as low grade heat. (Its more like 30% on a
CCGT but no one is talking about efficient uses of Uranium via a tow
stage gas/steam turbine setup yet). Its dirt cheap and plentiful. So
waste heat it will be.

But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a
cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of
polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.

De-salination plants for fresh water.

Thermodynamics tells us that in a thermal plant, 100% effeciency is not
available, and its a balance between efficiency and cost. No one is
comfortable mixing extremely hot high pressure steam and nuclear
reactors, so they run at safer temperatures and pressures.



--
The higher up the mountainside
The greener grows the grass.
The higher up the monkey climbs
The more he shows his arse.

Traditional

[rbowman]

On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 11:11:41 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a
> cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of
> polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.

District heating has been used for over 200 years.

https://www.powermag.com/district-heating-supply-from-nuclear-power-
plants/

"An extensive study was conducted in Connecticut, which focused on using
waste heat from an existing nuclear power plant. It found substantial
benefits from using nuclear heat, but concluded that the realization of
maximum economic and social benefits would require current laws,
practices, and regulations to be modified. It suggested the larger energy
perspective would have to be considered including desegregating the
treatment of energy, and incorporating land use planning and associated
economic development into the process."

And there is the problem -- existing regulations and the NIMBY phenomenon.
40 years ago I was skeptical about some of the proposed nuclear plants,
not because of the technology but because of the over-optimistic
projections of future demand. That was then.

https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/index.html

Many of the plants are at end of life, and that doesn't count the ones
that were decommissioned long ago like Maine Yankee or San Onofre. It
should be possible to design a plant that lasts longer than 40 or 50
years. That would require a prevailing attitude in the US that thinks in
terms of 20 years. That even was used for the interstate system. Summer
travel in this state can be painful because of the bottlenecks caused by
bridge and pavement replacement.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 06/11/2024 17:49, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 11:11:41 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a
>> cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of
>> polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.
>
> District heating has been used for over 200 years.
>
> https://www.powermag.com/district-heating-supply-from-nuclear-power-
> plants/
>
> "An extensive study was conducted in Connecticut, which focused on using
> waste heat from an existing nuclear power plant. It found substantial
> benefits from using nuclear heat, but concluded that the realization of
> maximum economic and social benefits would require current laws,
> practices, and regulations to be modified. It suggested the larger energy
> perspective would have to be considered including desegregating the
> treatment of energy, and incorporating land use planning and associated
> economic development into the process."
>

yup. Battersea power station in the middle of london took coal delivered
by rail and river and had a network of hot water pipes feeding local houses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pimlico_District_Heating_Undertaking

Everybody in the industry knows that to get the best out of nuclear the
rule book needs to be torn up and re-written using modern understanding
of the real much lower danger from low level radiation.

But politicians wont do that. Not even Trump I suspect.

He is happy to protect the fossil fuels, not hasten their demise with
cheap nuclear


> And there is the problem -- existing regulations and the NIMBY phenomenon.
> 40 years ago I was skeptical about some of the proposed nuclear plants,
> not because of the technology but because of the over-optimistic
> projections of future demand. That was then.
>
> https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/index.html
>
> Many of the plants are at end of life, and that doesn't count the ones
> that were decommissioned long ago like Maine Yankee or San Onofre. It
> should be possible to design a plant that lasts longer than 40 or 50
> years.

As I understand it, the UKs AGR reactors were only supposed to do about
25 years, but made it further. Someone told me that the reason for
closure is in all cases corrosion and loss of strength in materials
subject to heavy neutron bombardment.

The knowledge gained from these early reactors means that at least 40
years is the design target with lifetimes up to 60 envisaged.

In the end its a cost-benefit judgement. More expensive reactors might
last longer, but wouldnt recoup the extra costs in their lifetimes. Maybe.

Uk's first reactor - and the worlds first - lasted 47 years.

That would require a prevailing attitude in the US that thinks in
> terms of 20 years. That even was used for the interstate system. Summer
> travel in this state can be painful because of the bottlenecks caused by
> bridge and pavement replacement.

Its much easier to buy votes than build infratsructure.


--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

[[e-mail]]

On 11/6/24 1:38 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 06/11/2024 17:49, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 11:11:41 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a
>>> cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of
>>> polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.
>>
>> District heating has been used for over 200 years.
>>
>> https://www.powermag.com/district-heating-supply-from-nuclear-power-
>> plants/
>>
>> "An extensive study was conducted in Connecticut, which focused on using
>> waste heat from an existing nuclear power plant. It found substantial
>> benefits from using nuclear heat, but concluded that the realization of
>> maximum economic and social benefits would require current laws,
>> practices, and regulations to be modified. It suggested the larger energy
>> perspective would have to be considered including desegregating the
>> treatment of energy, and incorporating land use planning and associated
>> economic development into the process."
>>
>
> yup. Battersea power station in the middle of london took coal delivered
> by rail and river and had a network of hot water pipes feeding local
> houses.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pimlico_District_Heating_Undertaking
>
> Everybody in the industry knows that to get the best out of nuclear the
> rule book needs to be torn up and re-written using modern understanding
> of the real much lower danger from low level radiation.
>
> But politicians wont do that. Not even Trump I suspect.
>
> He is happy to protect the fossil fuels, not hasten their demise with
> cheap nuclear
>
>
>> And there is the problem -- existing regulations and the NIMBY
>> phenomenon.
>> 40 years ago I was skeptical about some of the proposed nuclear plants,
>> not because of the technology but because of the over-optimistic
>> projections of future demand.  That was then.
>>
>> https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/index.html
>>
>> Many of the plants are at end of life, and that doesn't count the ones
>> that were decommissioned long ago like Maine Yankee or San Onofre. It
>> should be possible to design a plant that lasts longer than 40 or 50
>> years.
>
> As I understand it, the UKs AGR reactors were only supposed to do about
> 25 years, but made it further. Someone told me that the reason for
> closure is in all cases corrosion and loss of strength in materials
> subject to heavy neutron bombardment.
>
> The knowledge gained from these early reactors means that at least 40
> years is the design target with lifetimes up to 60 envisaged.
>
> In the end its a cost-benefit judgement. More expensive reactors might
> last longer, but wouldnt recoup the extra costs in their lifetimes. Maybe.
>
> Uk's first reactor - and the worlds first - lasted 47 years.
>
> That would require a prevailing attitude in the US that thinks in
>> terms of 20 years. That even was used for the interstate system. Summer
>> travel in this state can be painful because of the bottlenecks caused by
>> bridge and pavement replacement.
>
> Its much easier to buy votes than build infratsructure.


From a few negative experiences, the one thing you REALLY
need to guard against is some kind of melt-down. To that
end, "pebble bed" reactors are THE solution. Word is that
China is building a number of them right now.

The thermodynamic efficiency of pebble beds isn't AS great
as with some modern designs, but the SAFETY factor is
WORTH it IMHO.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 06/11/2024 21:46, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

>   From a few negative experiences, the one thing you REALLY
>   need to guard against is some kind of melt-down. To that
>   end, "pebble bed" reactors are THE solution. Word is that
>   China is building a number of them right now.
>
SMRs are also meltdown proof, in practice.
But a meltdown as in 3MI or Fukushima is by itself only a destroyed
reactor. It represents no public danger.


>   The thermodynamic efficiency of pebble beds isn't AS great
>   as with some modern designs, but the SAFETY factor is
>   WORTH it IMHO.
>
Same for SMRs.

>

--
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

[[e-mail]]

On 11/7/24 5:37 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 06/11/2024 21:46, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>>    From a few negative experiences, the one thing you REALLY
>>    need to guard against is some kind of melt-down. To that
>>    end, "pebble bed" reactors are THE solution. Word is that
>>    China is building a number of them right now.
>>
> SMRs are also meltdown proof, in practice.
> But a meltdown as in 3MI or Fukushima is by itself only a destroyed
> reactor. It represents no public danger.
>
>
>>    The thermodynamic efficiency of pebble beds isn't AS great
>>    as with some modern designs, but the SAFETY factor is
>>    WORTH it IMHO.
>>
> Same for SMRs.


A key part of "SMR" is *Small* ... but if you want to
power up half a STATE then "small" isn't how to do it.

Or do you propose Edison's vision of a power plant
on every block ?

"Now down here we have the laundry room on the right,
the rec room on the left, and down at the end of the
hall is the reactor room ..."

[rbowman]

On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 17:12:34 -0500, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:

> A key part of "SMR" is *Small* ... but if you want to power up half a
> STATE then "small" isn't how to do it.
>
> Or do you propose Edison's vision of a power plant on every block ?

That will never happen but it would solve a lot of distribution problems.
At least in the US new HV transmission lines are as popular as herpes only
matches by the NIMBY distaste for nuclear plants.

It would also solve the single point of failure problem. Many post-
apocalyptic novels correctly point out the lead times for new switch gear
if it's destroyed in some sort of Carrington event, assuming the gear can
even be manufactured.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 07/11/2024 22:12, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
> On 11/7/24 5:37 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 06/11/2024 21:46, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>>    From a few negative experiences, the one thing you REALLY
>>>    need to guard against is some kind of melt-down. To that
>>>    end, "pebble bed" reactors are THE solution. Word is that
>>>    China is building a number of them right now.
>>>
>> SMRs are also meltdown proof, in practice.
>> But a meltdown as in 3MI or Fukushima is by itself only a destroyed
>> reactor. It represents no public danger.
>>
>>
>>>    The thermodynamic efficiency of pebble beds isn't AS great
>>>    as with some modern designs, but the SAFETY factor is
>>>    WORTH it IMHO.
>>>
>> Same for SMRs.
>
>
>   A key part of "SMR" is *Small* ... but if you want to
>   power up half a STATE then "small" isn't how to do it.
>
Currently Rolls Royce's SMR is 470MWe.

That sits well with steam turbines and generators

Big nuclear power stations usually have several reactors.

Hinkley point will be 2x 1600MWe.
Britain's existing reactors are all 600Mwe or thereabouts, in pairs for
around 1200 Mwe per station, except Sizwelll B which is a single 1200MWe


three to four SMRs will do the same, and can be placed on the same site.

The advantage of multiple smaller power stations is the reduction in
grid capacity it affords, as they can be sited closer to where demand
is, and the finer granularity means that if one reactor goes off line
its no huge loss.



>   Or do you propose Edison's vision of a power plant
>   on every block ?
>

One SMR at 470MWe will do around 250,000 homes and a bit of industry.

How big are US blocks?


>   "Now down here we have the laundry room on the right,
>   the rec room on the left, and down at the end of the
>   hall is the reactor room ..."
>
If only.

Sadly reactors that small are not really feasible. I think the smallest
ever built was military and about 5MWe.

That's still around 2000 homes

>
>

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

[[e-mail]]

On 11/6/24 6:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 06/11/2024 00:26, rbowman wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:38:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program to
>>>> build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all input files
>>>> had been read, because I realized that these days, given the finite
>>>> volume of data I'm working with, I effectively _do_  have unlimited
>>>> memory.
>>>
>>> I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on
>>> gigantic matrices.
>>> His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure
>>> INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.
>>> On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.
>>> That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to suit
>>> the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.
>>>
>>> Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the computer is
>>> about 500W.
>>>
>>> So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.
>>
>> AI is great for that. You know you're in trouble when companies are
>> trying
>> to buy nuclear plants to keep the lights in in the computing centers.
>>
> Frankly I regard that as pure serendipity.
> The world needs nuclear power in unheard of quantities, and if AI is the
> trigger to start that avalanche, I dont care if in the end its utterly
> pointless.
>
> The nuclear power stations will still be there. and usable
>
>
>> It doesn't get as much mention yet but all that energy eventually becomes
>> heat. Is the answer something like the Seabrook nuke where you can use
>> the
>> Atlantic to keep the processors cool? When they were building Seabrook
>> one
>> of the spins was that the lobsters would love their cozy new homes.
>>
>
> Yes. There is a distinct change in species near the outfalls of coastal
> reactors - but its the same for any thermal power plant - aside from CCGT..
>
> 60% of  the energy ends up as low grade heat. (Its more like 30% on a
> CCGT but no one is talking about efficient uses of Uranium via a tow
> stage gas/steam turbine setup yet). Its dirt cheap and plentiful. So
> waste heat it will be.
>
> But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a
> cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of
> polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.
>
> De-salination plants for fresh water.
>
> Thermodynamics tells us that in a thermal plant, 100% effeciency is not
> available, and its a balance between efficiency and cost. No one is
> comfortable mixing extremely hot high pressure steam and nuclear
> reactors, so they run at safer temperatures and pressures.


An insane amount of energy goes into just HEATING WATER
for whatever uses.

If yer nuke plant has pre-heated the water, as you said,
there are many uses for it, recover an extra percentage of
the heat.

They keep trying to get more electricity from 'lower'
quality heat sources ... but from what I can tell it
may not be worth it except maybe in a space station
or similar. Easier to just use "warm" for what it is.

Anyway, thermodynamics is The Law and no kind of power
plant is gonna be close to 100% efficiency.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 06/11/2024 21:41, ***@ud0s4.net wrote:
> On 11/6/24 6:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 06/11/2024 00:26, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:38:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program to
>>>>> build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all input files
>>>>> had been read, because I realized that these days, given the finite
>>>>> volume of data I'm working with, I effectively _do_  have unlimited
>>>>> memory.
>>>>
>>>> I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on
>>>> gigantic matrices.
>>>> His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure
>>>> INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.
>>>> On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.
>>>> That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to
>>>> suit
>>>> the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.
>>>>
>>>> Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the
>>>> computer is
>>>> about 500W.
>>>>
>>>> So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.
>>>
>>> AI is great for that. You know you're in trouble when companies are
>>> trying
>>> to buy nuclear plants to keep the lights in in the computing centers.
>>>
>> Frankly I regard that as pure serendipity.
>> The world needs nuclear power in unheard of quantities, and if AI is
>> the trigger to start that avalanche, I dont care if in the end its
>> utterly pointless.
>>
>> The nuclear power stations will still be there. and usable
>>
>>
>>> It doesn't get as much mention yet but all that energy eventually
>>> becomes
>>> heat. Is the answer something like the Seabrook nuke where you can
>>> use the
>>> Atlantic to keep the processors cool? When they were building
>>> Seabrook one
>>> of the spins was that the lobsters would love their cozy new homes.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. There is a distinct change in species near the outfalls of
>> coastal reactors - but its the same for any thermal power plant -
>> aside from CCGT..
>>
>> 60% of  the energy ends up as low grade heat. (Its more like 30% on a
>> CCGT but no one is talking about efficient uses of Uranium via a tow
>> stage gas/steam turbine setup yet). Its dirt cheap and plentiful. So
>> waste heat it will be.
>>
>> But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a
>> cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of
>> polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.
>>
>> De-salination plants for fresh water.
>>
>> Thermodynamics tells us that in a thermal plant, 100% effeciency is
>> not available, and its a balance between efficiency and cost. No one
>> is comfortable mixing extremely hot high pressure steam and nuclear
>> reactors, so they run at safer temperatures and pressures.
>
>
>   An insane amount of energy goes into just HEATING WATER
>   for whatever uses.
>
>   If yer nuke plant has pre-heated the water, as you said,
>   there are many uses for it, recover an extra percentage of
>   the heat.
>
Yes. The phrase is 'low grade heat' - so near to ambient that very
little mechanical energy can be extracted, but sill enough to heat
[green] houses.


>   They keep trying to get more electricity from 'lower'
>   quality heat sources ... but from what I can tell it
>   may not be worth it except maybe in a space station
>   or similar. Easier to just use "warm" for what it is.
>
Basically yes. Uranium is cheap. The power statins are expensive. Just
use more uranium

>   Anyway, thermodynamics is The Law and no kind of power
>   plant is gonna be close to 100% efficiency.

Thermal plant, anyway.
--
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit
atrocities.”

― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de
Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de
M. de Voltaire

[rbowman]

On Tue, 05 Nov 2024 20:31:23 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> When a PPOE upgraded its Univac 9300 from 16K of memory to 32K,
> we wondered what we would do with all that space. (We soon figured that
> out.)

The System 360/30 did have 32k but for some operations you had to write
partial products to tape, rewind, and take another pass.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 5 Nov 2024 20:18:34 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> ... 'Assume you have unlimited memory...' ...

The paradox of today’s computer architectures is that, while memory is
cheap, accessing that memory is expensive.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 10:20:13 -0800, John Ames wrote:

> i.e. "eighteen inches is a nanosecond"

For suitably small definitions of “inch”, I suppose ...

[John Ames]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:58:09 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <***@nz.invalid> wrote:

> > i.e. "eighteen inches is a nanosecond"
>
> For suitably small definitions of “inch”, I suppose ...

Well damn, I was misremembering from accounts of Grace Hopper's famous
"nanosecond" wires. I guess another fundamental principle is "double-
check yer dang constants..." ;)

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 11:29:47 -0800, John Ames wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 18:58:09 -0000 (UTC)
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <***@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > i.e. "eighteen inches is a nanosecond"
>>
>> For suitably small definitions of “inch”, I suppose ...
>
> Well damn, I was misremembering from accounts of Grace Hopper's famous
> "nanosecond" wires. I guess another fundamental principle is "double-
> check yer dang constants..." ;)

1 light-nanosecond is close enough to 12 inches, or almost exactly 30cm.
The speed of light is officially defined as 299 792 458 m/s exactly.

But remember, that’s for light or radio waves in a vacuum (or a close
enough approximation, like Earth’s atmosphere). Electrical signals through
a wire travel much slower -- I believe half the speed of light or even
less.

And the actual charge carriers (electrons, in a metal wire) move even
slower; I remember a book that said they can take several days to go
completely around an electrical circuit.

By the way, the speed of sound under normal Earth atmospheric conditions
is very close to 1 millionth of the speed of light. Coincidence? You be
the judge. ;)

[rbowman]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 10:20:13 -0800, John Ames wrote:

> I've long held that necessity will ultimately force a serious rethink of
> programming practices w.r.t. resource-efficiency once Moore's Law runs
> afoul of pesky real-world physics principles, i.e. "eighteen inches is a
> nanosecond" vs. "you can't cram an arbitrary amount of stuff into a
> finite space without creating a black hole." Gonna be real interesting
> when we finally hit the wall.

That giant sucking sound is the lights going out... Meta's plan to acquire
a nuke ran into a problem. There was a program to create bee friendly
environments around the disused nuclear plants. It happens the one Meta
had their eye own is populated by a rare sort of honeybee.

Amazon's plan to splice into an operating nuke hit a more prosaic block.
Two power companies sharing the plant's output sued claiming Amazon would
be the preferred customer and they might get short-changed in a pinch.

[John Ames]

On 5 Nov 2024 00:25:23 GMT
rbowman <***@montana.com> wrote:

> That giant sucking sound is the lights going out... Meta's plan to
> acquire a nuke ran into a problem. There was a program to create bee
> friendly environments around the disused nuclear plants. It happens
> the one Meta had their eye own is populated by a rare sort of
> honeybee.

Couldn'tve happened to a nicer sociopath!

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:01:01 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> For a given clock speed, which is limited by the physical dimensions of
> the chip, the smaller the transistors the less power it takes to run the
> chips.
>
> However fabrication limits are getting stuck at 10nm and below ...

Why? Because each transistor is being made out of fewer and fewer atoms,
and they are simply not working so well as transistors any more, because
of quantum leakage effects.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 4 Nov 2024 02:49:58 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Arm Holdings doesn't fabricate devices.

True, but they do have core circuits that licensees can incorporate into
their chips if they don’t want to create the entire design from scratch. I
wonder how you test such core circuits without at least doing some test
fabrications.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:48:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> A gentler more commercial form of communism...

“Communism” is when the Government does it.

What do you call it when a private company does it?

[rbowman]

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:50:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:48:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> A gentler more commercial form of communism...
>
> “Communism” is when the Government does it.
>
> What do you call it when a private company does it?

Corporatocracy. The government plays its part. C Wirght Mills wasn't very
far off in his 1956 'The Power Elite'. Eisenhower warned about it as he
was walking out the door and other politicians havetalked about it when it
was safe to do so.

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On 3 Nov 2024 22:58:02 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 20:50:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:48:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> A gentler more commercial form of communism...
>>
>> “Communism” is when the Government does it.
>>
>> What do you call it when a private company does it?
>
> Corporatocracy. The government plays its part.

It mainly happens when the Government doesn’t do enough of its part.
Namely, regulating against anticompetitive practices.

Yes, it takes rules, and enforcement of those rules, to keep a free market
free.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-11-03, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <***@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:48:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> A gentler more commercial form of communism...
>
> “Communism” is when the Government does it.
>
> What do you call it when a private company does it?

I've heard the term "corporatism". IMHO that's a
contraction of "corporate fascism".

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Mon, 04 Nov 2024 04:57:29 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2024-11-03, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <***@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:48:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> A gentler more commercial form of communism...
>>
>> “Communism” is when the Government does it.
>>
>> What do you call it when a private company does it?
>
> I've heard the term "corporatism". IMHO that's a contraction of
> "corporate fascism".

Yup, “fascism” sounds about right ...

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 04/11/2024 04:57, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-11-03, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <***@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:48:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> A gentler more commercial form of communism...
>>
>> “Communism” is when the Government does it.
>>
>> What do you call it when a private company does it?
>
> I've heard the term "corporatism". IMHO that's a
> contraction of "corporate fascism".
>

Mmm. It is a rather new phenomenon - the collusion of state and big
capital to capture markets by diktat, rather than by competition. It is
very similar to the way Russia is run, although there, with no
democracy, they don't even bother to pretend its anything but a mafia
supported oligarchy.

I don't think it has any good name. We knew who the Fascists were in the
1930s because they called themselves Fascists, and they competed with
the communists for control of totalitarian regimes.

Today both right and left are leaning towards totalitarianism again.

With the full support of global megabucks.


--
“Progress is precisely that which rules and regulations did not foresee,”

– Ludwig von Mises

[Lawrence D'Oliveiro]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:09:12 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Mmm. It is a rather new phenomenon - the collusion of state and big
> capital to capture markets by diktat, rather than by competition.

Nothing new about it. All it takes is weak regulatory authorities that sit
by and do nothing. Cf the 19th-century robber barons in the USA.

It takes effective and ongoing regulation to ensure that free markets
remain free.