Slashdot Mirror
Intel Seeking Moore's Law Original Publication
ackthpt writes "Gordon Moore's famous prediction, labeled Moore's Law, was originally published in the April 19, 1965 issued of Electronics. Sometime since, he lent out his copy and it has never been returned. Intel would like an original copy of the now defunct magazine and is offering $10,000 for a copy, presumably in good condition. The story is carried on Reuters, and if you happen to have a copy (of your own, not stolen from a museum or library) you may contact Intel via eBay's WantItNow."
Better get them a copy quickly - in a year and a half, the reward goes down to 5,000$, then 2,500$ another year and a half later....
Margaret Thatcher died the other day. It was a sad day, but I like to think that she's looking up at us right now."
congrats, you've duped a message from several hours earlier
That's the last time I use old science magazines to start a fire...
When you pry it from my cold dead hands.
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
He didn't keep a copy. I guess he used a typewriter, it was written in 1965 after all.
"Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
Count me in, if you make it worth my while: Double the prize every 18 months.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
why would they want it now? isn't moore's law beginning to unravel?
Thanks to his evil brother's law (Murphy), everything that could go wrong has, and there are no copies left in existence...
10,000 for a magazine?
Really?
1) subscribe to all magazines
2) Rent a warehouse to keep them
3) ???
4) Profit!!!!
BTW how do I know if I got first post???
I wonder if whoever borrowed the copy Moore had knows that they have it? Has he tried calling his friends? ;)
For those interested, here is the original paper. While I think it was a valid observation at the time, it's unfortunately become a driving marketing factor for the industry. While processor speed may be increasing all the time, I question the demand for it. Already, computer sales are leveling off as people realize they don't really need more than a 1Ghz to surf the web, send pictures, and listen to music. Even an Intel research paper suggested Moore's Law was coming to an end based on simple technical limitations.
I guess I'm just finding it difficult to imagine what I would ever need, say, 32Ghz for, other than gaming--which would be what my ultra-hip game console would be for.
That a technology company would find its money better spent upon building the future than enshrining the most important things of its past.
But then, I'm bitter, Intel rejected me for a job long ago.
My little site.
the last few years, they lost Moore's law. But they are going to make up for their slips by sticking all the transistors they should have had into one chip, Montecito, the 1.7 billion transistor chip based on an architecture no one wants. go intel!
John 3:16 - The easiest way to a BETTER YOU.
But the price just doubled.
of your own, not stolen from a museum or library
I believe the local vernacular is "shared."
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
The Library of Congress should have it. At least in Austria every publication (magazine, book, ...) is kept in the national library at least twice(!)
...but it would cost me $20,000 just for the storage.
(Anyone remember when Computer Shopper was the size of a phone book? I had a trunk full of those until I realized I didn't need a $4000 '286 anymore.)
wow! only 7 minutes after it hit slashdot! my hats off to you, kind scammer!
When ordinary memorabilia auctions (baseballs fetching more than $10k) at much more, $10k would be a pretty small sum to pay for this original copy.
If it's a unique copy, this could be worth much more. And the price will rise as the time progresses.
--
All your magazines are belong to us.
It's a Digital Reproduction, PDF. Fooey on that!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Is it safe to do business with Intel on Ebay ?
They've got a feedback score of 0. I'm not so sure I'd want to sell to them...
"This auction is for a digital copy of the above magazine article" RTFA
My mom threw out my shoebox filled with old electrical engineering journals last year. And I'm positive I a had a mint-condition copy of the '65 Electronics.
If someone had "shared" Intel's magazine, Intel would still have it, and the other person would be in possession of a perfect copy of the one that Intel had. This is not what happened here.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I guess I'm just finding it difficult to imagine what I would ever need, say, 32Ghz for, other than gaming--which would be what my ultra-hip game console would be for. Thing is, computers are still advancing at a rate that console have a problem catching up with, due to the fact that every aspect of the hardware has to be released at once and, of course, that they can't come in pieces developed seperately and be interoperable between wildly different hardware (all for obvious reasons due to the nature of consoles; I'm really just imperfectly repeating the obvious).
So, for truely impressive games media-wise (alas, the more complex they are technically the less time is able to be spent directly on gameplay and etc, but that's another issue) computers have for quite some time been far better, and probably will remain so for quite some time hence. Consoles sometimes nowadays seem nearly comparable, at least in some cases, but then you look at the abysmal resolutions and you realize that they're cheating performance-wise.
Other than that, I enjoy my rather fast computer (far beyond any console currently available) for many things, for example quick encoding, compression, and reformatting of video and audio (usuallly for entirely legitimate purposes, oddly enough!). As media types are advancing, it's nice to have the hardware to keep up. And to be able to digitally record, edit, and redistribute a movie "filmed" (a misnomer now) by myself, at quality certainly below DVD but superior to VHS and anything concievable at a lower level of technology . . . no, I'm glad that computers are advancing at the pace that they are, and I certainly do find the use.
That being said . . . about two years ago, I became unable to really use the computer that my family was using, a state of the art machine but it was constantly under use by my other family members. Being still in high school at the time, I certainly needed a computer. Especially for chatting and browsing late at night, and at those times I wouldn't be able to make my way through my unbelievably creaky house all the way to the downstairs anyways. So I dug out an old computer of mine, a Pentium-S 100-mHz if I recall correctly, with a massive 8MB of ram or something equally woeful.
And you know what? Armed with programs made in the era it was from (which was a bit tricky to find old ones that would interoperate with the state of things nowadays, but it's possible), it performed quite adequately. I even abused it with programs that should have been far beyond it's ken, but it still trotted along fine (until one day I accidentally destroyed the HDD, but that's another story). And so this computer from the mid-ninetys was easily good enough and functional in the modern age.
In other words . . . I disagree with parent. And then, on further reflection, I completely agree. I hold two conflicting opinions.
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
I had a matchbox full of mint-condition, unfolded, bagged and carded issues of "Action Comics #1". My mother found them and threw them out!
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Buy Intel, we 0wn Moore's Law!
Subject - who
Object - whom
Not too mention the trolling anonymous cowards!
Sometimes my arms bend back.
I'm sure he has it somewhere. I read on a right-wing blog that all the fonts appearing in the article were proportional TrueType fonts which were first used in Microsoft Office very recently.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
It's not mine, so I guess I'll keep it then.
From the auction description:
This auction is for a digital copy of the above magazine article, including the issue cover and credits page. This is a MINT CONDITION copy because it has been fully restored digitally and available in Adobe PDF format. All raster graphics have been restored and saved at 300 dpi for quality reproduction.
In other words, the person is selling a copyright violation. Methinks eBay would love to know about that.
p
In Korea, long hair is for old people!
"bonch" (above) may be in for some cash.
Anonymous Coward's Law: The price doubles for every hour they don't buy it from me!
The price of a missing document doubles every two years, until it exceeds the cost of a new car.
... and it's mileage decreases by the square of its tonnage (in metric tons).
Sadly, the price of a new car goes up by n factorial every year
All figures are in Euros, of course, since the price of a Dollar decreases to n/(n+x) where n is the number of years GWB is in office and x is the trade deficit in trillions of Euros.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I wish people would stop calling Moore's Law a law. Laws don't have the word "about" in them ("transistor counts double about every 18 months"). It should be called "Moore's Observation" or "Moore's Conjecture."
In physics, do we say that force is about equal to mass times acceleration?
Sure, and I guess you believe that they will do something if you point out shilling in auction bids too....
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
I know I said I'd return it back in '66. I just wanted to read that article on wiring. I swear I'll return it soon, but there's this other article that I want to read first...
Sometime since, he lent out his copy and it has never been returned. Intel would like an original copy of the now defunct magazine and is offering $10,000 for a copy...
And they say that crime does not pay... ;-)
It'd be funny to see if someone did post an auction for the magazine and AMD and Intel got in a bidding war. Possibly even funnier if IBM came along and took it right out from under both of them.
and cover up the truth!
So, if you say that we can use it for speech recognition, robots, travelling salesman problems, 3D interfaces, and real-time cartoons, then ...
It stands to reason it will be used for:
A talking robot that projects real-time cartoons to confuse travelling salesmen who block your 3D interfaces.
Right?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I have a copy but the pages a kind of stuck together...
Am I the only person who has noticed that while computers claim to get faster, software seems to get slower?
I recall seeing amazing programs running in 16k of RAM on a 2Mhz Z80. What happened to the brilliant software designers of that era? They're sure not working on today's platforms.
I tend to believe that the drive for more memory and faster CPUs is primarily the result of the decline of quality software development. Moore's law is only of interest as long as the current crop of developers use hardware as an excuse to be lazy and uncreative.
If software ingenuity progressed anywhere near the rate of hardware, we would have infallible voice and character recognition, true A.I. and the concept of computer crashes and security problems would be a thing of the past. These goals are absolutely nowhere less practical than the hardware predictions of Moore. So what happened? Monopolization in the software arena wiped out innovation? And isn't this really why we need faster computers? And do we really need faster computers? I don't think so. We need better software.
Basically, it has been observed that any evolutionary process...
Selective perception.
But did Kurzweil publish his paper in 1965?
Could it be that Moore's Law is just a self-fullfilling prophecy which we keep perpetrating, or rather the Intel engineers.
You always point your finger at the bad guy, but what if the bad guy points his finger at you?
"Am I the only person who has noticed that while computers claim to get faster, software seems to get slower?"
Well interactive, holographic, taste-fantastic, smellerific, porn does tend to be a drain on one's resources.
Quick wikiquote check says: You don't know what you're talking about. I suppose that Al Gore invented the Internet too?
Unless I'm mistaken, we don't need any more decoding power for FLAC or other lossless codecs. That's mainly a bandwidth issue -- investing more into compression algorithms might offer returns, but another radical change in music compression (and how much you can compress) isn't likely to happen.
Thing is, you can have email, webcam, web pages, and somewhat 3D renderings. The "revolutions" will occur in how these are used (& in fairly specific areas such as gaming) rather than the raw power behind them. Unless holograms become viable for consumer electronics I think it's safe to say that the processor has passed puberty, and for a while will mature more than it will grow.
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2004/05/06/writ egreatcode.html
Some interesting facts I gleened from an article written by Tom R. Halfhill, an analyst for Microprocessor Report.
Fact #1: More's Law is not a scientific law, but and only an observation describing semiconductors pace of progress.
Fact #2: Intel cofounder Dr.Gordon E. Moore did not define Moore's law as it is understood today. He didn't even call it a "law" in the original article. Somebody else much later coined the now famous term.
Fact #3: Moore's law was never about processor clock frequency or other performance issues. Rather, it regards the economic manufacturing of component integration on integrated circuits.
Fact #4: Moore's law actually stated component integration doubles every 12 months - not 18 - and he actually ammended this prediction to 24 months. 18 months is a number seemingly drawn from a hat.
Fact #5: Moore's law is extremely inaccurate. Tom Halfhill estimates todays chips would have more than 27 trillion transistors, when in reality Intel's Prescott Pentium sports 169 million transistors.
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
I bet Max Ary has one!
d'OH. Sorry, didn't read the additional clauses yet...
i'd think it'd go in the opposite direction in accordance to Moore's law. the longer you keep it, the more worth it has (as with most of these antique type of things).
so now it's $10,000. next year it'll be $20,000, then $40,000 and so on.
HD Trailers
Let's say that I did have a copy of this magazine. I would expect to be paid for it based on Moore's Law. Its only fitting. So with that in mind, let's see how much it woiuld be:
Magazine came out 40 years ago. Moore's Law says it doubles every 18 months. That's 26.6 doublings. Let's take 26 to make it easy. So thats 2^26 of the price.
I could not find what the cover price was but let's be fair and say $0.10 (10 cents). So thats 2^26 * 10 / 100 = $6,710,886.40. Thats a good deal more than the $10,000.00 they are offering.
I think its a rip-off.
BTW: here is a link to the original article in PDF format.
Bet this
Once that one copy that Intel wants to buy is bought and paid for and delivered then there won't be anyone else who wants this mag for more than just a few dollars. Seriously you don't understand the market for collectables. Nothing is worth anything unless their is a willing buyer or the perception that there is a willing buyer. Thus after Intel pays for the one that they want, their will be no one else who wants this specific issue for that price.
Every issue is not magically made to be that price because one impatient stupid person pays too much for something.
Don't you love the smell of self-immolating grammer nazis in the morning?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
They have a copy of the paper, but they're willing to pay 10 grand for an original hard copy. Why? Do they think that the surviving digital copies have been altered? My guess is that it's some kind of weird publicity stunt. In a week they'll say, "we gave John Doe $10,000 for helping us prove that our processors beat Moore's Law." Reminds me of nVidia bragging about the same thing when they released one of their GeForce GPUs. BTW, if anyone can find a copy of the original press release, I'll gladly pay them $10,000. ;)
nuf sed
This is in the disclaimers section
Intel employees & their families ineligible.
Why? Why won't they buy from Intel employees?
Or is that all Intel employees have to pledge their first borns & magazine collections when they join the company?
...my girlfriend wants me to throw out my old computer magazines. I got to show her this. :-)
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
In particular, note the definition given here at the bottom: 5. A generalization based on consistent experience or results.
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
Can't Intel just buy a cheap copy from AMD?
Yeah, but that doesn't take into account the brick wall that is "IP" law, which is just now starting to prevent most of the previous works from being built upon.
Kurzweil, while a heck of an inventor when he was younger, is now IMO not far removed from a nut case. I really hope he hasn't actually made the case that Moore's Law is really just a subset of his own so-vague-they-can't-be-verified assertions.
Anyway, check back in 25 years and we'll see how that "singularity" is doing.
I'm stuck on the exalted plane. Damn you moving spinner!
In the 1960s, most large computers were used on a timeshare basis. In many instances, if you wanted calculations done, you bought blocks of "computer time" by the minute. Thus, twice the computing power would = half the cost. Therefore something that cost $10000 one year should only cost $5000 the next year (when the computer was twice as fast), etc.
For an 8 way opteron system, fully loaded. The catch is, Intel has to purchase the opterons for me.
The funny thing is that I'd be midly angry if it were any other post you copied, but Singularity awareness must increase by any means...
Power to the Peaceful
Moore stated that computing power would double every 18 months... his estimations were a tad slow -- introducing the new P6!!! released just 5 months after the P5 and over twice as fast *at over 4 times the cost*
Buy it now at Dell.com!
Mens et Manus
The verb is "attempts". The subject of the verb is "whoever". No additional parsing is required to determine the correct choice.
The foul is legitimate, the decision is upheld and your $0.02 is forfeited.
Next case...
It's in the news (Neal Boortz mentioned it this morning), it's on the used bookselling list I'm on, and now everybody knows about it. So who wrote [the public is being asked] the article making this great prediction that came true? Why, [the public responds] some guy, the president of Intel or some such. That's not [public still thinking] Bill Gates, is it? I know he has a LOT more than ten thousand dollars.
Tag lost or not installed.
... yet another misappropriation of a misunderestimated law. Godwin would be spinning in his grave, were he no longer alive!
Tag lost or not installed.
Quoting out of order:
Moore's Law is a perfectly valid law. You don't get absolutes in any kind of empirical study. What you get is a scatter-plot, which you can draw some line or curve through. In this case, Moore's Law is that the theoretical line has a gradient such that the number of transistors will exactly double every eighteen months, but that actual observations will be scattered either side of this line.
There are several meanings of the word law, and this is one of them. There are also the laws passed, so often enforced, and so rarely repealed by governments.
Then there are laws such as Newton's, which are considered Laws of Nature:
Actually, I believe in physics people say that force is proportional to the product of mass and acceleration.
If you use the appropriate units, The Force IS the product of...
Tag lost or not installed.
Guess it's high time I paid my first visit to the school's library...
I recall seeing amazing programs running in 16k of RAM on a 2Mhz Z80. What happened to the brilliant software designers of that era? They're sure not working on today's platforms. ...embedded platforms, and the system/toolkit libraries we all love and use. Some of that stuff is still assembly optimized. As for RAM, in games graphics, music and game state take far more than any "code" does. In business apps, the data sets do. Nobody cares if you're using 16kB or 1600KB if you're working on 10000kB of data.
As for CPU speed, most people have far more than they need. But compare the cost of a CPU to developer time - it simply doesn't work out. It is much much cheaper to allow developers to use large abstractions and system libraries (which eventually get very clean and bugfree), than it is to use slower CPUs. Again, except in embedded markets, and even that's changing.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
That depends on what grade you got in physics ...
are you serious... someone needs to fire the management fruitcake that is just throwing $10,000 to get a copy of a magazine.
It's a nice idea to get the magazine, but a $10,000 reward is still real money. I'm sure half the guys in his department that haven't seen decent raises since pre-2000 is real happy he's pissing away that budget instead of sharing it within.
check out This journal
Moores law is nothing but a commentary on the trend that was shown clearly in writing. The fact that we could 'rely' to some extent on the improvements in technology (in hindsight I guess the process that got us up to 4ghz is taken for granted) is fine, but calling this a 'law' rather than simple for accuracy: an observation, gives it more credit than it is due, and takes some of the credit from those clever guys who actually got us to 4ghz.
Read the link, click the links, it even takes the piss out of M$
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
You know, reading your post just made my day.
That's exactly the thing that I was wondering about while reading all the "whoa, it held true for so long so it must be a law" or "whoa, he must have carefully plotted a curve through a large sample of data. Engineers who understand statistics don't grow on trees." bullshit posts. Was starting to lose faith in humanity already.
I mean, gee, it's like me postulating "Moraelin upgrades his computer at least once a year" as "Moraelin's Law". Self-fulfilling prophecy, here we come.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Initially he said 12 months. So then it would be 2^40. At your 10 cents initial cost, it's 1.0995*10^11, or about 101,000,000,000 dollars.
But wait, he revised it later to say 24 months. So it's 2^20 = 1048576. At a 10 cents initial cost, it's 104,857.60$.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
moore's law was just an experiment in meme propogation. There's actually no such thing as a "transistor". We're all just running placebo processors, made out of curry (which is why they get hot).
-2A
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
before everyone gets in a huff, plz note the different terms other posters are using: processor speed vs clock speed. You can increase processor speed without increasing clockspeed (multiple execution units, larger cache, etc).
Why would you add a load of transistors that don't increase processor speed? (okay, there's register bit depth, but that can be emulated, adding transistors to do it in hardware makes it *faster*).
So yes Moore's law does directly relate to processor speed, no Moore's law does not directly relate to clock speed, processor speed is not directly related to clock speed, pay attention. God!!!
-2A
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
When expressing constant items relative to price, Moore's law says prices fall with time, remember? So your reward should be 2^-26 of the original cover price. But if you ask, Intel will probably round up to a penny to make it easier for their accounting department.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
It's the observation that for every article about "Moore's Law" some asshole will be oblivious to the fact that language is rarely so precise and insist that there's a singular, precise definition of the word "law" that makes it's usage inappropriate in "Moore's Law".
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I sit here with a copy of this issue in my hands... Damnable library journal-binding! $10,000 almost in my grasp
A talking robot that projects real-time cartoons to confuse travelling salesmen who block your 3D interfaces.
...
More likely real-time talking spam with a 3d avatar that confuses your spam filters.
Now imagine a whole bunch of pwned 32ghz PCs running that shit
Unfortunately, you're probably right, but my guess is the kids will see real-time talking cartoon/anime spam with a 3D cosplay avatar that confuses your spam filters and signs you up for AOL to "protect you against spam".
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
You are going off on a far tangent. In this, you might have the change known as "diminished value", which still has nothing at all to do with theft. Since when did "theft" have to do with how scarce something was? Never.
If you pee in the punchbowl, you have diminished its value. You have not stolen it. The only pseudo-definitions are yours with have nothing to do with stealing.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
If it was n/(n+x) then the value of the dollar would increase with n which is not true (the asymptotic value would be one 1 for n tending to infinity)
Besides,the formula is dimensionally incorrect, a couple of constants should be introduced in order to make it dimensionally consistent.