Archive for September, 2008

Moore’s Law

September 22, 2008

Ok, so this Mooooore guy:

He is a very revolutionary thinker, has been an accurate predicter of our computer programming’s history, and furthermore predicts that the complexity, “for minimum component costs” will exponentially increase. What he’s saying (i believe) is that the size per capita of necessary circuits is becoming smaller and effectively more useful per area. Now the details of his prediction have slightly altered as time proceeds; the prediction went from a increasing by a factor biannually- to doubling every two years.

Then the following articles about Moore’s Law gets interesting (comparably).  Who doesn’t love a scandal- or rather a clash of ideas about …computers. Their are varying camps of belief about the future of semiconducter circuits and its fate in the relevance of our society. Some say it will stay on track within the frame of Moore’s Law and come to a halt in a future when circuits will be at the molecular level; you cannot go smaller than the scale of an atom. This is fine and all because its clean cut, and there is no confusion- but there are some futurists out there that want to throw a wrench in the natural order of things and say that progression might extend past “integrated-circuit technology” into new forays of scientific achievements.

Now who really knows what generation will come up with what pioneering invention? I know: nobody. Therefore the only thing i can really analyze is how Wikipedia contrasted the page of Moore’s Law, with the page on Murphy’s Law

The reason Moore’s Law is increasingly admired is because it is the optomistic counterpart of a widely accepted philosophy represented by Murphy’s Law: if something can go wrong, it will. You cannot relate these two philosophies (although i am biased because i think a lot of people who argue philosophy are delusioned because they obsess over their own thoughts and supposed brilliance) Whoever wrote this article set up the arguement in his boundaries, which are dumb. If you think only one concept can hold true, ” “Moore’s law is a violation of Murphy’s law. Everything gets better and better,” you are not thinking rationally, in the slightest. They used “Moore’s Law” to represent “progress” as a whole- things will inevitably improve upon the last model as time goes on. There’s no balance at all in this black vs white clash of philosophies, and yet nobody believes life is one way or the other. Murphy’s Law is more or less an excuse for when bad things happen, “well it was bound to happen,” yes bad things will happen, eventually, no one’s argueing that one. They are not mutually exclusive, otherwise if Moore’s Law applied to everything, life would not be as much of a pain as it is right now typing this.

Part 2: The supposed phenomenon of blogging

September 15, 2008

If this were really a phenomenon, wouldn’t it be glowing green, or bright white at least? Well, the journalist has become universal, anyone can write… well, anything. If anything, it has demerited the profession of newsman/newswoman- along with making the job of catching up on the news much harder, as blogs can be written by people even more uninformed as yourself. On the upside, all of those annoying people you know that use to force their personal lives on you now have the perfect way to do that without facing the embarrassment of people not listening: bloggin. This leads to the very popular next issue of anonymity and the effect it has on your inhibitions online. Bloggers will attest to how annoying it is to see bickering plague their forums, making it harder for actual posts worth reading to be found- the reason is that you are more likely to pick a fight with someone you don’t know or cannot physically come in contact with than in a bar face to face. Subsequently, bloggers have become readily equipped with acid-tongued responses, leaving non-bloggers behind in the name-calling department.

Jon Garfunkel, an editor on was discussing the internet and accountability off of a recent decision by the Supreme Court to, as expected, to grant the right to anonymous free speech. He says that nobody actually expects fact from blogs, as the nature of a blog is opinion based. However, when an online scandal erupted over Howard Dean’s presidential campaign possibly involving money launderers, Garfunkel checked out the origin of this information at a blog where, “13 of the top 14 contributors used pseudonyms. Anonymity lowers self-inhibitions, and lowered inhibitions on the part of very few people can disrupt the entire group.” Information is easily accepted when it is not presented with a counter argument by its side.


September 15, 2008

I am a reluctant student in U of I’s Informatics 102 course, and am here to bitterly comply with the hardships they force upon us , demands similar to that of a 400 level course. I do not blog, and have never blogged, and will not blog in the future. But hey, this has been a good outlet for my frustration; things are looking up. The reason i chose was because out of the three blogs offered in hyperlinks on the homework page, it was the most professional looking, most appealing (the others were somewhat sloppy), and i read an interesting article on the homepage. There seemed to be varying opinions featured on the homepage (on religion) and on both fronts- they seemed to be respectful and insightful.

Hello world!

September 15, 2008

Welcome to This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!