• 2 Posts
  • 89 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle










  • I know you’re joking, but I feel like answering anyway.

    I’m sure you could get it to do that if you forced that through engineering, but it wouldn’t be anywhere near as efficient as just using a CPU.

    CPUs need to be able to handle a large number of instructions quickly one after the next, and they have to do it reliably. Think of a CPU as an assembly line, there are multiple stages for each instruction, but they are setup so that work is already happening for the next instruction at each step (or clock cycle). However, if there’s a problem with one of the stages (or a collision) then you have to flush out the entire assembly line and start over on all of the work among all of the stages. This wouldn’t be noticeable at all to the user since the speed of each step/clock cycle is the speed of the CPU in GHz, and there are only a few stages.

    Just like how GPUs are excellent at specific use cases, quantum processing will be great at solving complex problems very quickly. But, compared to a CPU handling the mundane every day instructions, it would not handle this task well. It would be like having a worker on the assembly line that could do everything super quickly… but you would have to take a lot more time to verify that the worker did everything right, and there would be a lot of times that things were done wrong.

    So, yeah, you could theoretically use quantum processing for running vim… but it’s a bad idea.





  • What are some of the scary scenarios you have seen? I wouldn’t mind reading up on some good sources that would be useful to keep an eye on.

    Besides what we see in movies (unrealistic world ending scenarios), what I listed out seems to capture the realistic worst case scenarios that I have come across.

    I haven’t seen any projections that say that the atmosphere itself will become unbreathable (although we could see a lot more massive dust storms that would force people to remain inside or only go out with proper protection).


  • They definitely weren’t the first for touch screens, but I definitely agree that they pushed the smartphone industry to put a lot more work into it.

    Prior touchscreens were laggy and unpleasant. Apple just gave us a really smooth touch screen (It was good for it’s time) experience compared to what was out there and that forced other smartphone makers to get with the program.


  • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.worldWhat DID Apple innovate?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Nah, Samsung had wireless charging in 2015 with the Galaxy S6, Apple started wireless charging with the iPhone 8 in 2017.

    And wireless charging has been around long before that. Even those rechargeable toothbrushes have used it long before smartphones were a thing.

    And Microsoft released the Surface Pro with a stylus before any iPad had them and I’m sure you could go much further back for other devices that had them before that.



  • I think we need to be realistic about what will actually happen. Climate change on the scale we’re seeing isn’t going to make the planet inhabitable.

    What will happen is that it will be a more hostile environment to live in. Climate change is resulting in larger droughts/famines in areas that aren’t used to it, as well as increased storms/flooding in other areas. Forest fires will get worse. Storms will get worse, species will die off, and if we don’t have enough food to feed large cities, many will die and governments will collapse.

    It won’t be the end of the world, but the world will not be the same because of it.


  • It’s true that there isn’t evidence that he sold anything, but let’s look at what we do know:

    The whereabouts of the binder are currently unknown as it went missing during the last days of Trump’s presidency, Reuters’ source said.

    The info in the binder:

    The binder in question contained raw intelligence that the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies collected on Russia’s alleged election interference in 2016, when Trump beat his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton for the presidency, among other documents, according to Reuters who spoke with a source familiar with the matter.

    Trump would be very high on that suspect list although, in my mind, the likely conclusion of him taking it is that those documents were destroyed rather than sold.

    I would counter that, given the timeline and information, it’s unlikely that anyone else would want to take those documents.