From this point onward, I will begin clearly outlining the sections of my responses and the articles I am talking about.
Wikipedia Article on Computer Hardware: This is a very interesting Wikipedia entry. I have never been too familiar with the anatomy of a computer. One section in particular that raises questions for me is the point of the article where the CPU of the Motherboard is described as the "brain" of the "body" (2) . The comparison to human and animal anatomy, in conjunction with our discussion in class about MIT offering its students the opportunity to "build your own laptop", made me think about the compatibility of certain parts with each other. When patients have to undergo transplants for donating an organ or receiving one, the doctors have to be absolutely sure that both bodies have compatible traits such as blood type and (I would assume) health of the organ. How can one determine if a specific output device (for instance) is compatible with a particular motherboard? Are computers more or less particular than human bodies? Overall, this metaphor of the body was the most thought provoking aspect to me (having little computer anatomy exposure).
Wikipedia Article on Moore's Law: This article took me a few tries to completely absorb its content. When accompanied with the Scientific American video, I feel that I completely grasp it. For me, the most interesting aspects of Moore's Law are it's economic component and existence as a "self-fulfilling prophecy". Since the amount of transistors that can be "inexpensively placed" increases to twice the amount every two years (1), it is clear that Gordon Moore has made an economic prophecy as well as a technological one. I found it difficult to believe that our ability to put transistors on an integrated circuit would never divert from its economic course. In other words, I wonder why the rate will never increase and sticks to Moore's precisely predicted course. Perhaps there is something I have misunderstood in the article. I look forward to reading responses.
Computer History Museum Website: I spent some time browsing the museum website and am very interested in a visit. As one can read in the literature, the Computer History Museum provides many examples and ways of illustrating the progress towars our current computers and operating systems. In such a place, one can clearly observe the inner-workings of a computer and its different sections such as the "motherboard" mentioned in the previous article. I'm particularly excited at the prospect of seeing Moore's Law in practice. In other words, I would like to see the changes in size of integrated circuits and numbers of transistors in a museum. Overall, this collection should prove to be interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Oliver,
The economic component to Moore's law was interesting to me too. The idea was simple enough, but I wondered why, if they know what the maximum transistors are capable of, they don't try to reach it immediately? or why this knowledge doesn't affect the pricing?
Then again I'm not really sure what transistors do. At the end of Wikipedia article, it was stated that transistor power doesn't necessarily correspond with computer speed. Which is what I though it was all about.
In other words, I wonder why the rate will never increase and sticks to Moore's precisely predicted course.
Hey Oliver,
I think this is wishful thinking on the part of the people in industry. I view technology as a sort of Pandora's Box, and now that the box has been opened the Powers that Be do not want to admit that the monster is out of their control. Although Moore's Law is a technological projection, it is really an esoteric glimpse at a profound shift that we probably will experience in our lifetime; we already are now, I believe.
But I think this shift may not be good for humanity. I find this sort of technology socially isolating, as well as invasive in our privacy in many ways. In certain ways, it has made us easier to be controlled by the Powers that Be. I get so tired of the rosy picture painted on IT by all these futurists and philosophers. It seems to just make people less aware, not more enlightened.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio... I don't really believe that it will stop there. I could be wrong, of course--I have no idea how a transistor works--but nobody truly understands how the universe works on the smallest sub-atomic levels. Moore's Law holds based on what we know right now. I'd be willing to bet that there will be more mind-bending developments in the future. On the other hand, I think that people will always be people and history will keep repeating itself in fundamental ways. The economic and social domination of mega-corporations like Microsoft that has recently come about in our society is not so different, in many ways, from Medieval feudalism.
Post a Comment