I want to rewrite computing from the ground up. I want to redefine

File: 1491107016134.png (397KB, 600x500px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 600x500px

>>59780141
Go ask Terry.

Start by learning how it works currently.

>>59780162
+ learn macro economics
If your work is not efficent to implement with jizz/jazz ratio it is bound to die in capitalist system

>>59780141
Learn javascript.
You definitely need to do all of that in pure javascript.

Am I the only person who feels this way?

>>59780141
That is a too big of a task for one man, you can do well with maybe one or two or three at most if you spend your entire life on it, but even if you did make the very best solution, do you really think it'll be used? if it won't you"ll have to make the current software and hardware backwards compatible, which will in turn likely make your idea shitty.

don't try to bite more than you can chew.

>>59780141

JS is the best programming langauges out there.

If you don't understand the difference between a string concat and an increment, you should just kys.

File: OP.png (366KB, 1057x930px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1057x930px

>>59780267

This.

Literally freshman's first "I change the world!!" without deeper knoledge about anything whatsoever.

I would be surprised if OP would even scratch the surface of all those topics, let alone understand why things are getting done that way..

>pic very related

>>59780267
see that's half the problem.
I need likeminded people; not only to make it work, but to use it.

I'm sure a great many people can agree that things right now are sub-optimal; but fewer think they need to be obliterated and need writing over from scratch. And fewer still would actually go through with it- and be willing to leave past works.
Backwards compatibility should be possible; but not inherent- if it were the entire technology would not have changed.

>>59780141
Have you tried installing gentoo?

>>59780295
mate I'm smart enough to know that no ground is going to get covered without some overwhelming support.
The situation isn't yet dire enough to warrant such a shift. But my concern is that when it does get dire enough, we won't be ready.

>>59780141
>I want to redefine how hardware is designed
you life is too short

>>59780311

What are you even talking about?

>>59780141
>>59780242
The problem with you fellows is that you can see a flaw in the outcome, but don't understand that there's an underlying design decision which justifies its approach.

If extreme edge cases that are logically counter intuitive aren't fixed to maintain performance, then that's completely justified. You can shit on the counter intuitive outcome but it's likely that you would then create a worse performing language which has even more flaws.

>>59780297
the industry is dominated by trends and corporations, windows is shit, filled with security issues and bugs, but since so much software is based on it, they can't change it too much or otherwise they will lose business.

as a result of said trends and standards, to move from one solution to another takes time and motivation, right now things just 'work' so it's good enough

>>59780320
I know :(
>>59780328
you know what happens when you put money into R&D but things have stopped coming out? You stop putting money there, or you gamble.
When we hit that wall, it's not going to be pretty.
>>59780348
please tell me the underlying design decision which justifies the approach of x86? Because we're already trying to not use it.

What problem is this trying to solve?

>>59780371
waste. literal overworking to compensate for earlier design flaws. Why don't executables come with parallel memory hinting instructions? There's such opportunity lost because of the organic growth of the system.

File: 300px-Gordon_-Fyodor-_Lyon.jpg (9KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 300x200px

grow up op.

just rice Arch or something.

>>59780390
>parallel memory hinting instructions?

Business, Stock market, down jones, meetings, paradigm, moving forward.

>>59780141
It would help if you weren't a dumbass to begin with.

>>59780425
let me clarify.
Two streams of data, one providing instructions to compute, the other providing hints to the processor in advance about what it will need to execute the instructions.

>>59780443
>cache is now twice as small
this
changes
everything

>>59780368

>you know what happens when you put money into R&D but things have stopped coming out? You stop putting money there, or you gamble.


I don't even know what to say..

If you look at how long technical machines were used in the past until they got enhanced/replaced, computer development was something that exploded. We made so muhc progress in the last decades, it's astonishing.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_change

You come over like someone who doesn't know anything. Like when you ask 20 y/o kids about politics they "know it all" and it's oh so simple.
But when they learn more, they learn what things already have been tried, why they didn'T work and all those many tiny things you have never thought of until you go knees deep into some topic.

So here's my piece of advice:
Pick ONE of your topics, maybe start with something easy like "I want to redefine how the internet connects.".
First do some histor< research, read some historical books like "where wizards stay up late" to really get how all those ideas came up.
Then learn about the changes, Learn about the vairous models, TCP/IP, OSI layers, DNS, Subnet-Masks, Sockets and so on. Also learn about things like ssh and https and maybe even something about Cryptography.

And if you know all that and STILL think "Hey, things could be better, I have a brilliant idea how we could make things better!"

..then I will be glad to listen.


But until then point you are just a brat to me.

>>59780453
absolutely euphoric

>>59780470

I thought you couldn't even manage something that simple..

You ask yourself:
If you can't even be arsed to put a few weeks of work into research for ONE of your many topics, how can you hope for understanding them all, let alone change them?

You might think I'm tring to put you down, but that's not it. I would be glad to see a future where people aren't mindless sheep and things are getting better.

But IMHO you're waisting your prescious time thinking about the wrong problems. Try to find something you can solve. Bite only what you can chew, like the other anon said. Otherwise you will end up as an frustrated, grumpy old man that hates the world because he couldn't manage to implement a single thing of your "great plan".

File: space_hacker.jpg (487KB, 2000x1013px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 2000x1013px

I read it a lot on here, people bemoaning the current trend of "tech", I do wonder the age of these people.
my guess is they were born in the 90's and they have less of a point of reference for how far tech has come and how good it really is, sure it not perfect but if you grew up using DOS it is easier to see the progress, if you started with windows98 well I can kind of understand feeling there is stagnation.
Personally, we are living in the future.

Probably easiest to just tear down society at this point.

>>59780584
I loved DOS tbqh.