Re: AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in part:
> On May 23, 7:11 am, Robert Redelmeier <red...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Oh, who knows.  The architects I've talked to publicly
> and privately seem to have a pretty good grasp of forest
> and trees.  They're not bean-counters, though.

You don't need to count beans, just noses:  AMD has about
18,000 employees worldwide.  There are 3.2 million people
employed at Computer & Mathematical work in the US alone.
Perspective matters.

> I can regret the direction that an industry is driven by
> competitive pressures: the big three auto-makers to large
> vehicles and the processor business to x86 monoculture.

Then regret human nature.  There are lots of layers,
stopping at any particular one is prejudice.

> The human race has not flourished to the extent that it
> has because it is socially inept as a whole.  It may not
> always be pretty, but humans get things done.

So why complain about the market?

> The drug industry is not now and never has been adequately
> regulated, and people die because of that fact.  

Are you certain?  People also die from over-regulation.
Perhaps less obvious than adverse reactions, but real:
I am allergic to penicillin and would die from an injection.
Had I been in one of the early trials, penicillin could
have been banned.  Millions would have died.


> I'd like to say that your belief in free markets is touchingly
> childlike, but it seems more like obstinately fundamentalist
> to me.  I don't care for fundamentalism of any flavor.

Even if you are polar, please do not assume that I am.
Where did I ever say markets are perfect?  Merely because I
point out the flaws in regulation does not imply that I believe
markets are perfect.  Even fanatics of property rights believe
in regulation -- legal enforcement of their property.

> and the game right now is who gets stuck with the bad paper.

It always is and has been.  How bad the paper is varies.


> [ISO 9000] Doesn't agree with what I've seen.

What have you _seen_?  Not heard, mind. 

> [GWB} I needed an outrageous counter-example.  

Why would you think GWB an outrageous counter-example?  Politics is
contentious.  If you think him uncontroversial, you should suspect
your dataset is at least incomplete and possibly havily biased.

> The end conclusion is that capitalism is a vast con game.
> It may well be.

No.  Merely because one part has certain attributes
does not mean the whole has those attributes. 

> I get tired of people talking about the Halting Problem,
> Goedel, Turing, P, and NP, and heaven only knows what else.
> There are concrete steps that can be taken to improve the
> reliability of software dramatically.  

Yes.  They why did you ignore my earlier reference to OpenBSD?
They have implemented one solution -- line-by-line review.

> Only the British think that omnipresence is necessary to fight
> crime, and they're finding that their implementation of the
> panopticon is a huge waste of money.  You don't have to watch
> everything.  You only have to watch enough to keep the honest
> people honest and hope that you can catch enough of the really
> dishonest people to make a difference.  That's a general law
> enforcement strategy, not just one for the Internet.

But you also need a lot of cooperation.  You can jail 
1% of the population.  But not 10%.


-- Robert