Untitled

strawpoll.me/17605627

strawpoll.me/17605628

strawpoll.me/17605629

strawpoll.me/17605630

strawpoll.me/17605631

.

Attached: 1024TB (1PB) SSD 1024GB (1TB) RAM 1024Core (1KC) CPU.png (250x250, 1K)

someone asked me. and i get asked this a little bit. something like.

"you always ask for more with your computer and technology"

"when is it enough?'.

and. i thought about this for a long time.

and i've sort of come to a conclusion. a little bit.

is 1024gb (1tb) ssd enough for me? no. so 1024tb (1pb) ssd.

is 1024mb (1gb) ram enough for me? no. so 1024gb (1tb) ram.

is 1024core (1kc) cpu enough for me? no. so 1024c (1kc) cpu.

i think 1ghz would be enough with 1024cores. 1thz may be asking for too much.

quantum computers are cool too.

so.

> 1024TB (1PB) SSD
> 1024GB (1TB) RAM
> 1024Core (1KC) CPU

my forever computer.

also.

> 1024GHz (1THz) CPU
> QUANTUM COMP CPU

this. i guess. tho not really needed. and sorta unreasonable, and stuff ...

if i was at this basic level. then i wouldn't have a tremendous need to upgrade. upgrades from there would just be an extra bonus. or even just sorta over-provisioning.

windows 32-bit needs 16GB at least and windows 64-bit needs 20GB. gnu linux debian ubuntu needs at least 24GB. so really for each operating system you'd need about 32GB.

so long as we don't have operating systems or web-browsers or videogames or applications-programs-software whatever that go over 1TB. then we're all right.

even then. i could still fit quite a few.

but programs or videogames or whatever would still be a pain. i'd have to settle for less than 1GB~10GB~100GB or whatever.

i remember when people would uninstall videogames over 1GB because it took up too much space on their 3.5-inch hard-disk-drives. back in the 2000's. and stuff.

hopefully we get pushed along to higher technology.

for being past 2000, 2010, and approaching 2020; i was sorta hoping that we'd have a lot better technology faster.

i'm quite impatient.

i can't wait.

more on that.

then i thought about if 1ghz is good enough for me. it sorta is. if i had 1024 cores at 1ghz then i'm good. i think asking for 1024ghz or 1thz is too much. there's over-heating issues. we don't seem to be going in the direction of hertz. it's even downed for fan-less "mobile" pocket handheld things; such as cell-phones; and stuff. so core-count makes more sense; in that context. but it'd be interesting. i guess. certainly 1thz would be enough. but. 1ghz is fine too. i'm not too greedy. i guess. ... i'm not too completely insane and unrealistic; based on the evidence; as of right; now i guess.

i also thought about quantum computers. i don't care for them too much. i'd probably be all right with a normal computer. going from bits to qbits is sorta confusing to it. it's like i just sorta figure out bits and now they're throwing weird-ass qbits at me; and stuff. i wouldn't mind it tho; i guess. i'm sure if they offered quantum computers to ordinary users then they probably wouldn't care too much either. if the idea of qbits is just going from bits 0 and 1 to qbits 0 1 2 3 then it may be sorta easy. it'd be like a weird version of hex; but the binary is now... quadnary. or something. but. it's probably not that. i don't know. it's still interesting tho. ... yeah. if i had a quantum quadnary qbit computer that performed 2x, 4x, 10x, 100x, 100x, 1024x times or potentially infinitely better than normal non-quantum binary bit computer; then that'd be cool, and stuff.

now you may be saying

>well you just sorta took a tally of 1 and moved it up to a higher tally of 1

and.

yes.

yes i did.

but i didn't wanna screw and guess with a bunch of in-between numbers.

and i certainly didn't wanna jump a tally; since that's asking for too much.

so i just went to the next tally of 1 needed.

that's it.

thank you.

thank you.

likely gonna bump with tech stuff. hope you enjoy it.

Sounds like all you're interested in is bragging rights.

Not at all. It's a standard. But I have reasons.