Most of the PCs I own and/or use are "Wintel" machines, meaning that they use the now-reasonably-stable-and-reliable Microsoft Windows operating system (OS) running on hardware controlled by microprocessors ( a.k.a., CPU = central processing unit; MPU = microprocessor unit ) made by Intel Corp.
The OS that most of us are stuck with is MS Windows ( usually, 98 or ME or XP ) .... I have tried installing the Red Hat version of Linux, as well as the newer Lindows, and I even tried the strange creature called BeOS -- ah... they all just crawl along in a less-than-adequate manner -- clearly, my hardware (even with a P4 from Intel) is just not up to the job ...
When is an affordable processor that is more powerful than any of the recent higher-clock-speed P4's going to appear? Or, are we already witnessing the end of the life-cycle of the Wintel PCs?
Anyway, a quick Yahoo! search of the Net unearths the following webpage:
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/microprocessor1.htm
which has a nice table of the Intel MPUs, as follows:
8-bit bus |
||||||
64-bit bus |
||||||
64-bit bus |
||||||
64-bit bus |
||||||
64-bit bus |
But this table stops at P4! No mention is made of any successor of the P4 ... Sigh!
Of course, these are just typical values for each class of MPUs. For example, my Acer "desktop-replacement" notebook uses a P4 that's running at a clock speed of 1.7GHz and that's already slow now that clock speeds above 2GHz are available.
And, of course, despite having a 64-bit data bus, the P4 is basically still a 32-bit processor, meaning that it's ALU can process 32 bits at one go.
I wonder: when am I going to see an affordable machine that has a 64-bit processor and will such a machine still have to run MS Windows or does it have enough speed to run a form of unix like the Red Hat Linux, or even Lwindows, without seeming to crawl along?
What is a "Computer" and what is a "Program"?
Less there be some confusion (hmm ... I may end up introducing some confusion instead?), I will adopt the following rather-general definition of a "computer" from the somewhat dated but still useful Dictionary of Computing (1983), by Glasser et al., who defined a computer and its programs as follows:
A device that is capable of carrying out a sequence of operations in a distinctly and explicitly defined manner.
The operations are frequently numerical computations or data manipulations but also include input/output; the operations within the sequence may depend on data values. The definition of the sequence is called the program.
Software Engineers
Some years ago, I jotted down the following note on software engineers, in one my many notebooks (but I didn't make a note of the reference source):
Software engineers are people of sufficient relevant aptitude and ability who perform software engineering as the whole or a major part of their vocation.
The relevant aptitude attributes are far from easy to define, but are generally agreed to include literacy as well as numeracy, and mental characteristics such as associative qualities, capability in abstract thought, good memory and painstaking precision. As temperamental stability is a desideratum too, the unlikelihood of the combination is one reason why there is a shortage of good software engineers.
VR.5 -- "Virtual Sensory Reality"
The TV series, VR.5 ( that's VR-dot-five, but pronounced without the dot ), proposed the following typology in virtual reality:
- VR.1 -- Computer Screen
- VR.2 -- Interactive Video Game
- VR.3 -- Flight Simulator
- VR.4 -- Cyberspace
- VR.5 -- Virtual Sensory Reality
This typology would appear to encompass the entire gamut of computerised experience available to date. Thus, VR.1 refers to computers with very low or non-existent interactivity, while VR.2 through VR.4 involve computers with greater or more sophisticated interactivity, with increasing realism in the visual and audio realms.
The late 20th-Century and soon-to-come early 21st-Century (the year 2000 is still, after all, part of the 20th Century) version of the Internet, especially that ubiquitous component known as the World Wide Web, is a paramount example of VR.4.
But in order to achieve VR.5, we would need to be able to digitise more than just the visual and auditory senses. With VR.1 to VR.4, all we have managed to do is to digitise two of our five senses: visual (eyes; sight) and auditory/aural (ears; hearing). VR.5 would require that we digitise the remaining three senses: olfactory (nose; smell), gastatory (tongue; taste) and tactile (skin; touch).
A VR.5 Movie - The Matrix
The highly successful movie, The Matrix, would constitute an aberrant (from the standpoint of human beings, not that of the AI machines) version of VR.5, where the entire range of possible sensory experiences have been digitised and incorporated into a "dream world" (Matrix) that effectively allows the machines to control each and every human being on the planet and turn everyone into biological batteries to supply a large part of the power needed by the machines (according to Lawrence Fishburne, who played the character "Morpheus", the machines also have a form of fusion power).
A computer that is "artificially intelligent", or enhanced with any form of "intelligence" [ i.e., AI-enhanced ], must be unable to override the internal, underlying firmware that prevents that computer from ever becoming ascendant over any human being or groups of human beings -- no exception whatsover, not even in the case of the worst kind of monstrous control freaks and power junkies that the human race unfortunately sometimes produces.
"There are some pretty sophisticated viruses out in the Net. Some are active matrix, while others are just lying around ticking like cute little software bombs, waiting to go off in your operating system (or operating environment or operating systemology) when they are convinced you are not looking." --adapted from an unknown source (please pardon me, I forgot where I got this quote from).
LA & Virus : "When it comes to battling a virus, on the whole I would rather be in LA." - unknown source.
Too much memory may not be all that great.
You know the not-so-old saying:
Idle memory makes work for the devil's hands. Not to mention the occasional perambulating virus.So ... it is far better to have everything "up and running", so to speak, and maintain a watchful eye.
Or, is that being too paranoid?
I don't know -- ask the control freaks and power junkies of this world!
Here's yet another gem from http://world.std.com/~swmcd/steven/memorial.html:
In Memory
life is chemistry
the body is a machine
the brain is a computer
the mind is a program
If you believe in strong AI, then death is no longer a mystery, but merely a lack of adequate backups.
From about the 1960's or so, it has been true -- and may remain so for the foreseeable future -- that the capabilities of computers and computer- enhanced devices (CEDs) far outstrip the ability of human beings to make use of them.
If computers and CEDs are AI-enhanced to a high order, it is possible that they might think that their human owners are dumb twits.
AI-enhanced computers and CEDs may not even "like" the term owners, prefering the encomium partners.
It is possible that such devices may one day end up having an exalted opinion of themselves.
Probably a hierarchy of such devices will arise, from the highest AI-enhanced devices to the lowest (but still AI-enhanced) devices. It is thus possible that the highest-order devices (HODs) may end up holding the opinion that not only are humans jerks but so are the lower-order devices (LODs) that interact directly with humans since these LODs will have been designed and built to mimic human characteristics.
Devices that are designed to interact socially with humans may eventually become paranoid or dysfunctional in some way(s), especially after these devices have been interacting for some time with humans who are certifiably paranoid or psychologically dysfunctional.
Twentieth-century computers are basically glorified notepads with basal unintelligent storage capabilities, whereas twenty-first century computers should be able to store anything you want -- including visuals, music, actual overheard conversations or fragments thereof -- and call it up on verbal demand.
Such future computers should be able to cross-reference everything from images of individuals briefly encountered ten years ago to the faces of those currently on the Wanted List of the Interpol, or whatever the 21st century equivalent of the Interpol is going to be. Future computers should be able to contain and/or access a number of reference libraries -- not the individual volumes but entire libraries.
Future computers should be able to speak almost all of the existing living languages as well as be able to translate to and from most of the dead ones, where required.
Future computers should possess all the software necessary to allow them to function within the human social matrix.
We can extend these items on the wish list to include a future where the human race may have a chance to interact with extra-terrestrials ("aliens"), or ETs.