On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Alan Grimes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Patrick McKown wrote: > >> Good idea. How do we start? >> > > =\ > > People, you're just PC users. Since 1990 or so PCs have always been > optimized for one thing: Cost. > > Classic Big-iron machines can stay up for decades at a time, at full load. > > I remember reading/hearing a story that I can't find right now about a > company that had a mainframe that they didn't want anyone monkeying with. > So they bricked it behind a wall. Years later, the company was sold and a > new company moved in... All the data ports worked, there was definitely a > computer in the building but they couldn't find it! =P > > http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/**z/hardware/index.html<http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/hardware/index.html> > > That's an interesting story, could you provide some references for it? Just because "big iron" mainframes of yesteryear had such high longevity doesn't correlate to mainframes today having comprable longevity. They certainly don't have longevity as part of their feature set. Though you do bring up a good point, that we could learn from the machines that did or do have highest longevity and work on that. In AGI societies of the future, I do envision them having a "mainframe" of sorts, similar to how there is a queen-bee in an ant-colony. But all around will be milling around various worker-class "ants". I'm considering making ants the mascot of GI-OS in fact -- analagous to how it's to have a bunch of web-crawlers, that bring back interesting information that it eats/converts into usable hspl code. You're correct in that PC's are optimized for cost, however they are also optimized for speed. It's the same with mainframes of course, they are just larger, and may be a little more inclined to higher security. Longevity Hardware however would be optimized for longevity, and environmental-sustainability, which in the long-run would translate into lower cost due to not needing to replace, and lower cost of recycling due to relative safety of materials. Likely modularity would factor in as well. Of course the customer base wouldn't be just big-business, but the general populace, and so would likely be of reasonable cost. For instance a Metal Book, costs at least twice as much as a paper one, but it has higher longevity, and is more sustainable as it doesn't require trees. It does however have a price comparable and possibly less than archival grade notebook (made of buffered cotton rag) of the same size. > -- > E T F > N H E > D E D > > Powers are not rights. > > > > > ------------------------------**------------- > AGI > Archives: > https://www.listbox.com/**member/archive/303/=now<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/**member/archive/rss/303/** > 5037279-6ef01b0b<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/5037279-6ef01b0b> > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/** > member/?&id_**secret=5037279-3358f9ad<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
