Slashdot Mirror
The Most Incorrect Assumptions In Computing?
Miss Muis writes "After reading once again that Moore's Law will become obsolete, I amused myself thinking back to all the predictions, absolutes and impossibles in computing that have been surpassed with ease. In the late 80s I remember it being a well regarded popular 'fact' that 100MHz was the absolute limit for the speed of a CPU. Not too many years later I remember much discussion about hard drives for personal computers being physically unable to go much higher than 1GB. Let's not forget "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers" from the chairman of IBM in 1943, and of course 'Apple is dying...' (for the past 25 years). What are your favorite beliefs-turned-on-their-heads in the history of computing?"
Gates has actually discounted that rumor several times (one of which can be found here, and I've got to say that it probably *is* untrue, as I really can't imagine anybody ever saying that.
Whenever I get a new harddrive, i invariably say "I'll never be able to fill that up" and somehow within about 2 years time I'm out buying an extra hard drive.
Download (supposed) - definition of the transfer of data from any source to another.
Download (actual) - definition of the transfer of data from an network to your machine.
Uses:
1. "I downloaded the software from the CD to my computer."
2. "I downloaded the file from the internet."
3. "I downloaded the file into my e-mail and sent it to him."
Only #2 is correct.
I had to berate my father for WEEKS before he learned the intricacies of Download vs. Upload vs. Install.
Chris
Check out this article from Ars Technica: http://www.arstechnica.com/wankerdesk/01q2/limits/ limits-1.html
Entitled "The Ultimate Limits of Computers," it deals with issues including not only Moore's law, but quantum mechanics... such as Plank's constant, Boltzmann's constant, the gravitational constang, the application of quantum mechanics to thermodynamics, and other interesting things that I barely (read: don't) understand.
----
"Those who quote others are more likely to one day be quoted" -Tom Planter
It's a known fact that Bill Gates never actually said this, or at best, that it is rephrased severely and taken out of context.
Having said that, in 1981, 640kB technically _was_ enough for most people.
I hereby nominate "640k ought to be enough for anybody" as most misquoted phrase ever.
Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet.
Status: False.
Origins: No,
Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The derisive "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs are misleading distortions of something he said (taken out of context) during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999. When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part):
During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.
Clearly, although Gore's phrasing was clumsy (and self-serving), he was not claiming that he "invented" the Internet (in the sense of having designed or implemented it), but that he was responsible for helping to create I also invented the microphone the environment (in an economic and legislative sense) that fostered the development of the Internet. Al Gore might not know nearly as much about the Internet and other technologies as his image would have us believe, and he certainly has been guilty of stretching (if not outright breaking) the truth before, but to believe that Gore seriously thought he could take credit for the "invention" of the Internet -- in the sense offered by the media -- is just silly. (To those who say the words "create" and "invent" mean the same thing: If they mean the same thing, then why have the media overwhelmingly and consistently cited Gore as having claimed he "invented" the Internet when he never used that word? The answer is that the words don't mean the same thing, but by substituting one word for the other, commentators can make Gore's claim sound [more] ridiculous.)
However, validating even the lesser claim Gore intended to make is problematic. Any statement about the "creation" or "beginning" of the Internet is difficult to evaluate, because the Internet is not a homogenous entity (it's a collection of computers, networks, protocols, standards, and application programs), nor did it all spring into being at once (the components that comprise the Internet were developed in various places at different times and are continuously being modified, improved, and expanded). Despite a spirited defense of Gore's claim by Vint Cerf (often referred to as the "father of the Internet") in which he stated "that as a Senator and now as Vice President, Gore has made it a point to be as well-informed as possible on technology and issues that surround it," many of the components of today's Internet came into being well before Gore's first term in Congress began in 1977, and it's hard to find any specific action of Gore's (such as his sponsoring a Congressional bill or championing a particular piece of legislation) that one could claim helped bring the Internet into being, much less validate Gore's statement of having taken the "initiative in creating the Internet."
It's true that Gore was popularizing the term "information superhighway" in the early 1990s (when few people outside academia or the computer/defense industries had heard of the Internet) and has introduced a few bills dealing with education and the Internet, but even though Congressman, Senator, and Vice-President Gore may always have been interested in and well-informed about information technology issues, that's a far cry from having taken an active, vital leadership role in bringing about those technologies. Even if Al Gore had never entered the political arena, we'd probably still be reading web pages via the Internet today.
Last updated: 27 September 2000
The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.htm
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,1484,00. html
-- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
640K is enough for anyone. (that one was easy)
...and also not true.
Do not read this sig.
Um... sorry. He never said that. He said he helped in the creation of the internet... which he did as some of the key people involved in Darpanet will admit to. He pushed to have Darpanet become publicly available to everyone.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
As usual, they have the full scoop. He did indeed take great initiative in creating the internet, but the statement is still awkward and self-serving.
Gore was popularizing the term "information superhighway" in the early 1990s (when few people outside academia or the computer/defense industries had heard of the Internet) and did introduce a few bills dealing with education and the Internet.
:
According to Vint Cerf (Widely known as one of the "Fathers of the Internet," Cerf is the co-designer of the TCP/IP protocols and the architecture of the Internet. )
"VP Gore was the first or surely among the first of the members of Congress to become a strong supporter of advanced networking while he served as Senator. As far back as 1986, he was holding hearings on this subject (supercomputing, fiber networks...) and asking about their promise and what could be done to realize them. Bob Kahn, with whom I worked to develop the Internet design in 1973, participated in several hearings held by then-Senator Gore and I recall that Bob introduced the term ``information infrastructure'' in one hearing in 1986. It was clear that as a Senator and now as Vice President, Gore has made it a point to be as well-informed as possible on technology and issues that surround it. As Senator, VP Gore was highly supportive of the research community's efforts to explore new networking capabilities and to extend access to supercomputers by way of NSFNET and its successors, the High Performance Computing and Communication program (which included the National Research and Education Network initiative), and as Vice President, he has been very responsive to recommendations made, for example, by the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee that endorsed additional research funding for next generation fundamental research in software and related topics. If you look at the last 30-35 years of network development, you'll find many people who have made major contributions without which the Internet would not be the vibrant, growing and exciting thing it is today. The creation of a new information infrastructure requires the willing efforts of thousands if not millions of participants and we've seen leadership from many quarters, all of it needed, to move the Internet towards increased availability and utility around the world. While it is not accurate to say that VP Gore invented Internet, he has played a powerful role in policy terms that has supported its continued growth and application, for which we should be thankful. We're fortunate to have senior level members of Congress and the Administration who embrace new technology and have the vision to see how it can be put to work for national and global benefit. "
RFC 704 (circa Sept 1975) states:
"2. Expanded Address field. The address field will be expanded to 32 bits..." "This expansion is adequate for any forseeable ARPA Network growth"
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc704.html
-Matt
Remember "Bob" from Microsoft? The predecessor to "Clippy"?
The REAL legacy of Microsoft Bob, from Wikipedia:
Microsoft Bob was a project managed by Melinda French, who later married Bill Gates to become Melinda Gates.
Carthago delenda est!
In facts, something like 3429 baud/s is the maximum *baud rate* of an analog phone line, 8000 is the maximum baud rate for a semi-digital phone line (V.90).
It is NOT a limition of DOS, it is a limitation of the original IBM PC HARDWARE. You see, in 1981, the IBM PC was built around the Intel 8088 CPU, which could address 1024k of memory. The upper 384k was reserved by the hardware for the system bios, video ram, video bios, and any other board that needed memory-mapped I/O. Even the 80286 CPU had the 1024K limitation when it ran in "real" (8086/8088) mode.
He was campaigning, folks! What do people do when they want to get elected.. well, let's see they brag about things they have accomplished in the past. So without further ado, AL GORE DID TAKE INITIATIVE IN CREATING THE INTERNET.
He fathered the bill that changed that odd, government and acedemic research network known as Arpanet into the Internet where people from all around can use it for all different sorts of purposes.
So if he wrote the bill, does that not mean he didn't take initiative in creating the Internet? Would it not be unreasonable for him to bring up this fact while he was campaigning and trying to get people to see "Hey, look what I did!"?
So please, get with it and stop political trolling. Thanks!
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
Yeah, but Bob's now the pacesetter for Internet-Is-Dying predictions. He's the go-to guy for any journalist looking for a juicy story about its imminent demise (at least when he isn't writing about it himself in his InfoWorld editorials), and he's been saying the same thing since 1995. At least he was true to his word; when his prediction of a 1996 "catastrophic collapse" proved untrue, he literally ate his own words at the WWW6 conference.
But then he predicted it again in 2000.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
A "server" in 1981 would be something like a PDP-11 or Vax on the low end. Such machines were more expensive than desktop computers, and had larger physical address spaces. Even a modest PDP-11/70 had 22 address bits.
Most people preferred to spend $2000 on a PC with a 16-bit address space rather than $10000 on a PDP-11 with a 22-bit address space.
I think that 20 address bits were plenty for 1981. The real problem was that there was no upgrade path for about 10 years after that. The Intel 8086 was 20 bits, fine. The Intel 80186 was 20 bits, okay. The Intel 80286 had "protected mode" addressing to increase the addres space, but it was nearly impossible for an operating system to context switch between "protected mode" and "real mode" (there was no instruction to do it, so an OS had to actually REBOOT THE PROCESSOR and then recover all its state on the fly).
So until the 80386 came out, there was no way to get a new system with both (a) support for old programs and (b) support for more address space. And during that 10-year dry spell, that's when all those extendad / expanded memory schemes came out, and that's when the 1 megabyte limit really hurt.
Your copy of the Snopes article is not what they posted. Anyone who actually read what you posted would have noted this glaring discontinuity.
I can appreciate the clarification on Gore's "inventing" the Internet. But I think Gore gets too high a mark here and I'd like to point out why I think so as a side note to a comment I read in Snopes' essay.
Snopes cites Vince Cerf saying "that as a Senator and now as Vice President, Gore has made it a point to be as well-informed as possible on technology and issues that surround it" but by 1999 (the copyright date on the Cerf page Snopes cites), Clinton/Gore had brought us the 1996 Telecommunications Act (which was a big step toward the media deregulation many groups across a wide political spectrum rail against today), the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act. So I come away thinking that Al Gore's legislative history deserves a more mixed review than Cerf (and Snopes) describe.
Digital Citizen
Ultimate Limits of Computers (Yeah, yeah, I know copy, paste, remove slashdot-inserted space, it works too, BUT...)
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Last year I'd have agreed with you. I had tried out various systems, with KDE 2.2 and Gnome 1.4, in addition to Fluxbox, IceWM and a handful of other window managers. It certainly wasn't pretty, and usability could've gone a long way.
My, how things have changed.
There are so many applications that do everything I needed to do on Windows, now. So you can't live without Kazaa? Download Apollon, the KDE FastTrack client. Need word processing? AbiWord/KWord are excellent pieces of work. Outlook got you down? Ximian Evolution has everything you need. Instant messaging? Gaim/Kopete. Music playing? XMMS/JuK will replace Winamp/Foobar quite handily. Graphics? The Gimp. Video/DVD playback? Xine tackles everything I throw at it. Development? KDevelop/xemacs. Web work? Quanta Plus/Bluefish. CD recording? K3b is every bit as good as Nero and is free. Web browsing? Konqueror/Mozilla/Firebird/Galeon/Epiphany. Usenet? Pan kills every similar offering on Windows.
Additionally, KDE supplies me with various features that Windows can't match. I want to save an image from a website directly to my webspace, via either FTP or WebDAV? Right-click, "Save As," click "FTP" and Save.
In addition, I paid $0 for all of the software on my computer, have ready access to the source code if I'd like to add a feature, and am not raped by vendor lock-in. I also am not subject to the ~30 holes in Internet Explorer this year, or worms like Blaster, Slammer or Welchia.
There are really only a handful of things Linux isn't better at right now, and those are very, very steadily improving. The first and most obvious would be gaming, and even though older games like Starcraft and Diablo 2 run very well under Wine, newer games like Unreal Tournament 2003 are being released natively for Linux, there's still nowhere near the selection. I concede that; it's all about choosing the right tool for the job. The second is video editing, which really isn't very good on PC either with the sole exception of Adobe Premiere. I don't touch either of these things often, so it's not a tremendous deal for me.
I wouldn't say it's good enough for Joe User right now, though. Package management and software installation still needs to be simplified for the average user (.deb should be the de facto standard, IMHO). Installation could be less painful if you don't know what you're doing. GTK+ needs a better file selector, admittedly, though I hold the opinion that GTK+ is generally worse than Qt to begin with, so I don't have trouble finding Qt-based replacements.
My older brother, who has barely touched a computer in his life, can work at my KDE setup with ease. I consider this a small victory.
Duh! The Church-Turing thesis proves "computational equivalence" of algorithmic machines of a certain standard. To validate your incorrect claim, you have to first prove that we are error-free, insight-free algorithmic machines. Error-free means no inferential errors (some humans make them), and Insight-free means no trans-rational mechanisms are involved in the inference: like drugs, madness, religion, fear, inspiration, individual experience (many humans' logics are trans-rational, maybe mine).
We are no more computers than we were when Descartes conjectured that a thinking machine could be constructed by hydraulics, so impressed were the folk of the day with the achievments of that technology!
The original estimate was off since the minimum feature size is not the same as the smallest dimension in the transistor gate. The limit is actually set by the gate width which can't go less than about 5 nm without the probability of quantum tunnelling occuring going above an acceptable limit (some leakage is OK but there is a point where it is not possible to distinguish the on state from the off...
We have two more halvings of the minimum feature size before production silicon reaches state of the art and two more halvings after that before the show is all over folks.
The doubling density each year rule corresponds to a halving of minimum feature size each 2 years. Intel say this is extending to 3 years (Bush recession, war on terror etc.) and the show is over completely by about 2015 at the latest.
There will be cleanup work for some time but if you think about what you end up with at the end point it is quite interesting. You can fit 64 times the current number of transistors onto a chip. So you can comfortably fit your current state of the art Quad-Pentium processor with 4Gb of RAM all onto the same chip. So cut away the external memory bus completely and in its place add a couple of laser diodes on each edge and some receivers and you have a processing unit that communicates to its peripherals and any neighbors by means of optical couplings. It does not need special cooling either because only a small part of the chip area is CPU, the rest is memory.
Instead of adding memory to this type of system you add more processor/memory units. You cound easily fit four, sixteen into a comodity PC box. The optical couplings mean that memory paging etc can be handled by making a request to a neighboring processor that stores that information.
Big supercomputers are built by simply lashing a few hundred standard boards together.
Back to the future, I was building these systems 20 years ago. Only then we called them transputers and they only had 4Kb of RAM
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/