20-40% is way off. The actual figure is <1%.
-
-
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow
I agree it was way off. Under 1% you think? Hardcore, but I trust you.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @timsoret @Jonathan_Blow
I'm fairly confident it is < 1% for the average program.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @deadalnix @timsoret
Just missing the cache all the way out to main memory is >500x, and the way most people are taught to program is all cache misses all the time. This is before you start talking about using JSON to store your data, pulling a Chrome with std::string, or whatever.
3 replies 0 retweets 26 likes -
(For the uninitiated, here is the Chrome thing: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/chromium-dev/c/EUqoIz2iFU4/m/kPZ5ZK0K3gEJ?pli=1 …)
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
I will say, my current job has me doing a lot of programming in the FOSS / IoT kind of space, where everything is github and docker and package managers and you're really writing software by just stitching together other people's libraries. This is all new to me. And...
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @bhsharp @Jonathan_Blow and
... it's really been eye-opening. These systems seem clearly designed to make programming as accessible and fast as possible - you can build shockingly powerful stuff in a few lines of code that really just tie libs together, and even those lines of code you can copy and paste.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @bhsharp @Jonathan_Blow and
But I agree with Jon here. When you code this way it's very obvious what you've built is, to a videogame programmer (or anyone used to programming things where you have to hit very tight performance budgets) a prototype. Like mocking up a house out of boxes and scaffold. Except:
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bhsharp @Jonathan_Blow and
Then you're done, you ship the boxes and scaffold house. I ... actually don't know that I think this is bad. Or anyway: I see why it exists as it exists. It allows for the internet to exist as a highly participatory, fluid, dynamic ecosystem of software.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @bhsharp @Jonathan_Blow and
And I would be a little surprised if the power waste was meaningful compared to other reducible human power consumption (though who knows maybe I'm wrong.) It DOES mean that software is NECESSARILY buggy and insecure to a level that actually becomes its own aesthetic.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
None of what you guys are saying helps in the big picture. "Better software" or "less global warming" or whatever cannot help us answer the questions critical to humanity's survival, like, "Can lobsters get high?" and, "if they do get high, exactly how high are we talking about?"pic.twitter.com/lhsy0dri9y
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori @bhsharp and
I guess what I'm trying to say is: If it makes you happy to do your little toy projects like languages or forestry, that's fine, but don't forget that it's all on the backs of some grad student whose hands are irreparably scarred from trying to force a lobster to toke an e-cig.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @Jonathan_Blow and
A moment of humility here - your tweets really made me take a step back and think about what really matters. Thank you - sometimes it's too easy to get tied up in life's day to day quarrels and forget about the bigger picture.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.