Computers were faster when they were slower!

Jealous?

>Now it's just about getting it to work and to hell with the efficiency.
Because the only efficiency that matter is cost. When running slow incurs an additional cost, like your servers shitting itself or your database taking 15 seconds to run queries, then you optimize to maximize efficiency, the cost. It just happens to coincide with performance.

But when you're shipping some piece of shit app or client code that's mean to run a single instance, isn't real-time, doesn't have any performance requirements beyond "good enough" and you can assume the client has enough hardware resources, then you maximize time to delivery. So your team can move onto a new product, or you go back to browsing some shitstain website.

Complaining about performant code where it doesn't matter is something only retards with rotten brains do. The reason why FOSS guys working on shit like Linux care so fucking much about performance and correctness is because for the past 2 decades the kernel has basically been customized by industry paid devs specifically for industrial purposes. Most others are just pretenders or dumb "power users" (fuck off you're not) who like to watch the pretty charts. Shut up about it already, you have 16GB of RAM, even phones have like 8. I don't give a shit unless you stop using our stuff, which you won't anyway. And we don't care about those ultra poorfags who unironically buy dirt cheap chinkshit and walmart phones, the real cows are people with the money to afford good hardware to begin with. It's like how taxes work. The bottom 80% can claim to be a super majority but you can eat shit because you effectively pay no tax while the top 20% pay virtually everything

>Computers were faster when they were slower!
Computers were faster when they were slower!

Guy's entire existence is nothing but bloat.

how do i stop coming to this shithole

luke smith has prey eyes, he's a follower

>windows 95
>bloat
>uuuuhhhh... No, you have to use that other system, written in assembly, yeah, now back then we had faster computers!
unironically, delete your retarded YouTube channel and try to forget this retarded episode of your life.

Wtf are you talking about?

he has prey eyes, the soft round prey eyes of a follower

they don't think it be like it is but it GNU

It's actually true you retards.

My Thinkpad T470 was faster when it was older. Now that it's newer it has Intel mitigations and it's much slower. My old T420 is not appreciably slower any more.

worse is better :))))))))))

I love how he's basically the minimalist groyper, his smug smile gets me. Love you Luke, keep doing what you're doing.

>t. Luke Smith

Yeah this is actually the single most honest post on Jow Forums right now...

Computers were faster when they were faster

So here's the thing, you're actually agreeing with me and then calling me retarded. Assembly is taking things a little too far, but you're damn straight that's the way it should be done. Rather than being an aggressive self-righteous shitposter though, your response could have been more like this user -
See now this is a great response. He disagrees with me, but makes a polite (ish) detailed and intelligent counter-argument. This makes me think, and ultimately agree. This is a post from an intelligent well-adjusted human being. You () are clearly none of these things, and you have a lot of growing up to do.

This is why I come here, brutal honesty.

Luke Smith and his high schooler drones eternally btfod

Attached: 19129348239.jpg (1280x720, 136K)

what a bugman

I'm not agreeing with you. Obviously, something old is better optimized because hardware was shit. But it wasn't smoother experience.
I'm angry, because you're shilling your shitty channel here, we have enough trash, thank you.

Can confirm

t. doing Blender renders on my Commodore 64

with a c64 you could learn basic in a few hours and assembly in a few days and be off to the races

try that with your incel 64 bit bullshit

I watch Luke and he makes a lot of valid though annoyingly purist comments, but this one argument is boring, because it's so obvious. I mean, duh, people cared about performance back when hardware was worse, and now they can get away with stuff that's written very carelessly and with interpreted languages, because it's cheaper and requires less brain power

I had a Pentium 166 with 48 MB of RAM that booted Windows ME in 8 seconds from a shitty 4GB hard drive. It took like 1 second to launch IE and could often load web pages faster over 56k dial up than most modern sites on broadband.

Now windows 7 takes like 3 times that with 6 cores at 20x the clock speed, and 1,300x as much RAM and 2 SSDs in RAID 0.

You can tell Luke does nothing but web browsing, ricing, writing, and video games. He has no scope to base this argument on.

How can I be shilling for a channel that I don't mention, and don't even have, you literal underage spastic?

You can thank Unix for that.

This, fuck LARPers and their pseudominimal garbage.

no he doesn't

Attached: $_86-8.jpg (1024x768, 82K)

hey luke
what's your opinion on the systemd-resolved and journald code execution bugs?
or the fact that the systemd dbus interfaces are literally open to any process on the system?

slower computers were a mistake

no a better way is
>computer use was faster when they were slower

>less is more :^)

Attached: 1548832434702.png (580x388, 9K)

Give me one reason to waste my life away optimising for fags with core2 duos.

Optimization helps you to detect and avoid bugs

No, it doesn't. Writing code closest to my mathematical model does. The rest is a network of API calls and interconnects.

>Writing code closest to my mathematical model does
That also helps

Thank you so much for typing this so I don't have to. Can't imagine being such a retard to think this glorified IT dummy has even the slightest clue about modern software development

Wow, excellent argument.

He is right about reinventing the wheel, though.
Many people even professionals, are pretty much just replicating existing solutions. They are just lucky that their customers are retarded and don't know about them.

I don't think anybody's arguing against that. There are obvious reasons why everything is so shitty, but that doesn't meant that makes it not shitty.

What the fuck?! Computers were faster when they were slower.

Im jealous that computers were faster when they were slower.

can you refute it?

i didn't click the video but i could guess what it was about just reading the title

true

reminder that dozens of billions of operations per second are passing while you wait for some electron app to stop lagging

the elaboration of "worse is better" is "make it functional, rock solid, and fast". sounds good to me.

imagine how much fucking money is wasted on throwing hardware at awfully slow software and the electricity that powers it

I mean, Microsoft literally tried to convince multiple fans of theirs that swap partitions are revolutionary this past E3 so you aren't wrong

Core2duo and phenom 2 was peak CPU computing power.

Attached: siiip.jpg (470x529, 39K)

Whz aren|t there Javascript hardware accelerators?

Luke Smith is a non-STEM retard who dropped out of his academic program in linguistics to go live in the woods because no one wants to fuck a white supremacist with bad genes (went bald before the age of 26).

Latency wise sure.

Booting into DOS on my 286 takes twice as long as booting into Windows 10 on my laptop.

there are; still slow

Lies. Windows ME needed at least a Pentium 3 to not hog forever

Quite the contrary.
Premature optimization is the root of all evil. It usually leads to more convoluted and less understood code.
You should understand your problem, define it as formally as possible and then apply the best algorithm.
At the end, if you still need some extra frames, you go down the rabbit hole.

So... the average desktop usage? What's your point, do you really think he is talking about supercomputing rather?

what do you mean "new"?

He also unironically thinks he god that Uncle Ted spirit in him, while advocating everything that guy stands against.

>hurr durr computers are 10x faster but programmers are 1/10th as efficient so nothing has changed
Yeah nah. SSDs and fiber internet weren't widely available/affordable 10 years ago, now they are. Moore's Law is irrelevant. Not even gonna finish the video.

Why should anyone know that linux comes with a utility that inserts line numbers into a file instead of knowing how to implement that when needed? In his own example the friend was doing something for himself so he couldn't care less about the performance of his line inserting program as long as it gets the job done. Makes total sense. What doesn't make sense is having to know every minute detail of an operating system, which may vary in time and in variety.

He has no technical training and bases his entire world view on Jow Forums and Jow Forums memes.
What do you expect?

I wish we had an e-celeb board to contain all this cancer.

Biggest issue with modern processors is (increasingly) high overhead for process / thread creation and equally (also increasing) high input latency.
The input latency on phones / tablets is hilariously bad.
I saw some research from a company a few months back he seek to fix this horrific input lag with some experimental tablet they built.
Wish I could find the video again. I'll keep looking.

I laughed like a god damn retard when I saw that shit.

oh ok, so it's exactly what the OP says ? I don't understand how corps cutting corners and making shitslow client side applications makes the shitslow client side applications suddenly not shitslow? and what are these retards you'ing your dick off? are these trolls ?

Attached: 1550586196545-g.jpg (560x386, 39K)

>2019
>Computers faster than ever
>SSDs
>4Ghz multi-core CPUs
>Lots of RAM
>Gigabit internet connections
>Websites still slower to load than ever

I'd rather see people post this guy than the clueless sack of fat that Linustechtips hired

>high overhead for process / thread creation and equally (also increasing) high input latency.
that's not what a processor does

>everything's great now except for websites
>everything is a website now

Attached: lukesama.jpg (1280x772, 126K)

SHit like this is why I have respect for Bisqwit instead of this faggot: at least Bisqwit knows what he's talking about when he's talking about programming and computers. And if he doesn't, he makes sure to tell you he isn't an expert in that field

Attached: 1559973278978.jpg (1024x831, 104K)

ITT angry code monkeys

Programs were less bloat filled, back in the day. Now you need a beefy PC just to crunch the bloat.

Self respect and bug avoidance. All devs who do not streamline and make their code the briefest and most performance friendly code possible are complete and utter asswipes that deserve to be banned from the use of electricity.

Attached: Modern World Bloat.png (1880x2172, 180K)

todays programmers are utter shit.
the amount of cpu power and ram makes up for it.

I have a Pentium 2 LAPTOP that boots up and gets online running on a spindle faster than your modern W10 or 7 machine

When was the last time you used a modern machine?

But it is.
To support those features in the OS it requires the hardware or it is INSANELY slower.
The hardware attempting to support even more threaded capabilities has massively slowed down single-core performance and responsiveness.

Most OSes timeslice even the SYSTEM processes at 20ms slices and that's generally also based on system load.
Windows, as always, is the worst when it comes to system overload and the entire system grinding to a fucking halt, but it affects all of them, besides maybe RTOSes. I've never interacted with any to be sure how bad it is there or not.
You can fuck around with the timeslicers in all OSes (as far as I know) and it produces horribly fucky results at both ends of the spectrum.
10-20ms seems to be the sweet spot for multi-tasking on current hardware.
Fuck knows how that will vary when we get double-digit cores as commonplace.
But given the limits of silicon, something will have to give.
Byebye double-precision and half the single-precision.
Wooo weaker cores! MORE CORES!

I must agree, especially where money making is involved. It does not make sense to obsess over efficiency if it isn't necessary to accomplish the task.

HOWEVER

At least some of us are capable of recognizing bloat where we see it. Its a niche of users that can recognize it, and they will never really matter, but at least we can seek out alternatives for ourselves. But we cannot expect others to care about it. Bloat will never be eliminated but it can usually be avoided by those who want to avoid it.

That part wasn't about performance, and that's why it's the part of the video that is actually correct.
The point is not that his friend's handmade script was slow. It's that he shouldn't have written it at all, he should have looked for an existing tool which could solve his problem. You are not expected to know every single tool your OS comes with, but the first thing to do when you have an actual task to perform should be to look for an existing solution (which often exists). If you can't find one, THEN creating your own program to solve it makes sense.
In fact, this is an argument against the constant wheel reinvention typical of Jow Forums FizzBuzzers.

do you think you're in a position to talk about respect, yellow fever incel?

He's not wrong, back to

Wtf, this post is bloated.

sure. compare a 10k pc 20 years ago to a 20k pc today. 20 years ago is pure autism efficiency and contemporary performance is blown out of the roof even with bloatware

fuckign negger

I had cable internet on my pentium 200 back in 1999. Browsing the web was an order of magnitude faster than it is now. The only measurable improvement over 1999 is the quality of video streaming. But there have been no other improvements. Faster download speeds have only fostered more bloat.

Pic related is quite literally why I created Wiby.

No one cares what discord trannies think

Luke stop advertising your shitty channel here.

>web browsing was slower back then, it's just nostalgia!
Whether the overall experience was faster or not is irrelevant. No one is advocating going back to the same exact time.
However, it is undeniable that the average web page of ~15 years ago would load much faster on current hardware and connections, which are objectively better. Certainly more than today's average web page.
In fact, in my opinion, the real "bloat" is not actually in software itself: it's the web. Browsers are "bloated" merely as a consequence of having to support it.
And yes, it does matter for financial costs as well, as more overall data volume means more expenses.
Now, mind you, the situation is not black and white. As I said, software itself, in my opinion, is not really as bloated as many people here seem to believe (unless you deliberately go looking for the Electron boogeyman or use Windows 10), but the web is a different story. Having much larger web pages, which don't actually provide more actual content, is bad for both practical usage and financial costs.
Because remember: "bloat" is not merely about size. It's about the size/functionality ratio.

>Idiots were dumber when they were smarter

Attached: EF5009093E3445878A07B7EDDB6F29FC.jpg (657x527, 34K)