On 2016-07-26, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote:
>
> I don't know if ARM64 brings anything which 64 bit power does not. Lower
> power - not so sure about that though I have never looked into it, if
> it is a pipelined 64 bit machine with all the registers and MMU etc.
> where will the savings come from.
>
ARM64 brings along a company which knows how to build an ecosystem for
today's hobbyists in the hope that they might become tomorrow's buyers
and product recommendation experts.
That's an attribute totally missing from the Power world; I know as
I looked for some low cost boards suitable for hobbyists a few years
ago and found nothing.
Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Reply by Les Cargill●July 28, 20162016-07-28
lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com wrote:
> Den onsdag den 27. juli 2016 kl. 18.21.27 UTC+2 skrev Les Cargill:
>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>> rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I doubt it. Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>>>>> it up? Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> History disagrees with you. Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly. Usually the people who make the
>>>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders
>>>>>>>>> holding an
>>>>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your logic is very poor. History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>>>>> is no
>>>>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>>>>> billions
>>>>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>>>>> talent at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you talking about winning the lottery? Otherwise making billions of
>>>>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>>>>> be doing it, no?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
>>>> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
>>>
>>> Of course so.
>>> But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
>>> not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
>>> This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Just being basically wealthy just takes sustained effort. Luck helps a lot.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>>>>> it),
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>>>
>>> Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
>>> it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
>>> low power applications where processing speed is not too important
>>> (still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
>>> initially anyway I guess).
>>>
>>
>> There is a whale of a lot (in the soft-realtime space ) you can do
>> with RasPi/BBBlack class boards. I've yet to face trying to make one do
>> hard realtime, but a tiered architecture with one of these as a comms
>> concentrator solves a lot of problems.
>>
>
> the BBBlack has 2 extra 200MHz cpus for real time things, though I have
> no idea how well it works
>
Yeah; the PRU(s). People use them it would seem. It's a bit daunting.
I haven't yet. I'd have to, you know, buy one. :)
Den onsdag den 27. juli 2016 kl. 18.21.27 UTC+2 skrev Les Cargill:
> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> > On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
> >> rickman wrote:
> >>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
> >>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> >>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
> >>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
> >>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
> >>>>>>>>> bring
> >>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
> >>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
> >>>>>>>>> ARM's
> >>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
> >>>>>>>>> quality staff.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I doubt it. Would you pay billions for a working company and then
> >>>>>>>> mess
> >>>>>>>> it up? Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> History disagrees with you. Sometimes these things work out
> >>>>>>> splendidly,
> >>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly. Usually the people who make the
> >>>>>>> initial
> >>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
> >>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders
> >>>>>>> holding an
> >>>>>>> empty bag.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Your logic is very poor. History says things can go bad, but that
> >>>>>> is no
> >>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
> >>>>> billions
> >>>>> is not stupid - true.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
> >>>> talent at all.
> >>>
> >>> Are you talking about winning the lottery? Otherwise making billions of
> >>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
> >>> be doing it, no?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
> >> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
> >
> > Of course so.
> > But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
> > not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
> > This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
> >
>
>
> Just being basically wealthy just takes sustained effort. Luck helps a lot.
>
> >>
> >>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
> >>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
> >>>>> it),
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
> >
> > Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
> > it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
> > low power applications where processing speed is not too important
> > (still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
> > initially anyway I guess).
> >
>
> There is a whale of a lot (in the soft-realtime space ) you can do
> with RasPi/BBBlack class boards. I've yet to face trying to make one do
> hard realtime, but a tiered architecture with one of these as a comms
> concentrator solves a lot of problems.
>
> On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
>> rickman wrote:
>>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I doubt it. Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>>> it up? Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> History disagrees with you. Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly. Usually the people who make the
>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders
>>>>>>> holding an
>>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your logic is very poor. History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>>> is no
>>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>>> billions
>>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>>
>>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>>> talent at all.
>>>
>>> Are you talking about winning the lottery? Otherwise making billions of
>>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>>> be doing it, no?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
>> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
>
> Of course so.
> But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
> not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
> This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
>
Just being basically wealthy just takes sustained effort. Luck helps a lot.
>>
>>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>>> it),
>>>>
>>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>
> Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
> it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
> low power applications where processing speed is not too important
> (still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
> initially anyway I guess).
>
There is a whale of a lot (in the soft-realtime space ) you can do
with RasPi/BBBlack class boards. I've yet to face trying to make one do
hard realtime, but a tiered architecture with one of these as a comms
concentrator solves a lot of problems.
>
>>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It may not.
>>>
>>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>>
>>
>> ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
>> (aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
>> don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.
>>
>
> I don't know if ARM64 brings anything which 64 bit power does not. Lower
> power - not so sure about that though I have never looked into it, if
> it is a pipelined 64 bit machine with all the registers and MMU etc.
> where will the savings come from.
>
Agreed, but PPC is not exactly flourishing.
> Dimiter
>
>
--
Les Cargill
Reply by Dimiter_Popoff●July 26, 20162016-07-26
On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt it. Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>> it up? Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> History disagrees with you. Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly. Usually the people who make the
>>>>>> initial
>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your logic is very poor. History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>> is no
>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>> billions
>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>
>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>> talent at all.
>>
>> Are you talking about winning the lottery? Otherwise making billions of
>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>> be doing it, no?
>>
>>
>
> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
Of course so.
But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
>
>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>
>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>> it),
>>>
>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
low power applications where processing speed is not too important
(still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
initially anyway I guess).
>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may not.
>>
>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>
>
> ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
> (aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
> don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.
>
I don't know if ARM64 brings anything which 64 bit power does not. Lower
power - not so sure about that though I have never looked into it, if
it is a pipelined 64 bit machine with all the registers and MMU etc.
where will the savings come from.
Dimiter
Reply by Dimiter_Popoff●July 26, 20162016-07-26
On 26.7.2016 г. 21:08, Evgeny Filatov wrote:
> On 26.07.2016 20:51, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>> On 26.7.2016 г. 20:39, Evgeny Filatov wrote:
>>> On 26.07.2016 20:23, rickman wrote:
>>>
>>> (snip)
>>>
>>>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It may not.
>>>>
>>>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Looks like you are not into transhumanism?
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
>>>
>>> Gene
>>>
>>
>> Hi there Gene,
>>
>> even so he is right I guess, nothing lasts forever :-).
>>
>> But of course some things outlive others, some people
>> outlive others....
>>
>> I think I know how to emulate myself on a sufficiently large
>> machine running DPS - I only wish I knew where to start
>> with the _read_ part of the copying... :D .
>>
>> Dimiter
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Hi, Dimiter.
>
> I've just looked up your website. Well, that's a way to name a company! :-)
>
> Gene
>
Thanks Gene,
I made up the name way back in my 20-s (79-a was the first reference to
it IIRC), in the middle of the communistic times when talking about your
own company would be seen as a diagnosis - so I suppose I put some
humour/self irony into it then.
Ever since I have been working as hard as I can to live up to the name
though - so much about humour...
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/
Reply by Les Cargill●July 26, 20162016-07-26
rickman wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether ARM's
>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt it. Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>> mess
>>>>>> it up? Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> History disagrees with you. Sometimes these things work out
>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>> sometimes they work horribly. Usually the people who make the initial
>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is very poor. History says things can go bad, but that
>>>> is no
>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make billions
>>> is not stupid - true.
>>
>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>> talent at all.
>
> Are you talking about winning the lottery? Otherwise making billions of
> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
> be doing it, no?
>
>
Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
Really rich people treat a certain insouciance about the facts of
reality as a luxury good. There is a thing called "rational ignorance"
and they use it.
Any billionaire alive has a long history of business dumpster fires;
(s)he just happened to luck into either fewer of them or a suite of them
that were less severe. Or they bought the right land at the right price
at the right time.
I'll make an exception for people like Micheal Burry ( the "hero" of
"The Big Short" because he's an Aspie and just did the heavy lifting.
>>> Not being stupid is by far not what it takes to do what ARM did so far
>>> though. It takes some extra talent.
>>>
>>
>> But this too. Smart people do stupid things.
>
> But less often than stupid people.
>
>
Intelligence is like four-wheel drive - it just gets you stuck in deeper
mud.
>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>
>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>> it),
>>
>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>>
>> I dunno - is a Coretex A8 on a Beaglebone a large or small? Seems large
>> to me. Maybe medium?
>>
>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>
>>
>> It may not.
>
> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>
ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
(aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.
--
Les Cargill
Reply by Evgeny Filatov●July 26, 20162016-07-26
On 26.07.2016 20:51, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> On 26.7.2016 г. 20:39, Evgeny Filatov wrote:
>> On 26.07.2016 20:23, rickman wrote:
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It may not.
>>>
>>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>>
>>
>> Looks like you are not into transhumanism?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
>>
>> Gene
>>
>
> Hi there Gene,
>
> even so he is right I guess, nothing lasts forever :-).
>
> But of course some things outlive others, some people
> outlive others....
>
> I think I know how to emulate myself on a sufficiently large
> machine running DPS - I only wish I knew where to start
> with the _read_ part of the copying... :D .
>
> Dimiter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/
>
>
>
>
Hi, Dimiter.
I've just looked up your website. Well, that's a way to name a company! :-)
Gene
Reply by Dimiter_Popoff●July 26, 20162016-07-26
On 26.7.2016 г. 20:23, rickman wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether ARM's
>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt it. Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>> mess
>>>>>> it up? Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> History disagrees with you. Sometimes these things work out
>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>> sometimes they work horribly. Usually the people who make the initial
>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is very poor. History says things can go bad, but that
>>>> is no
>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make billions
>>> is not stupid - true.
>>
>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>> talent at all.
>
> Are you talking about winning the lottery? Otherwise making billions of
> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
> be doing it, no?
I suppose it takes at least being a lot more pushy than average - and
somewhat smarter than average, pushy and average is just pathetic :-).
Now I don't claim I know what it takes of course, this just looks like
some bare minimum at first thought.
Dimiter
Reply by Dimiter_Popoff●July 26, 20162016-07-26
On 26.7.2016 г. 20:39, Evgeny Filatov wrote:
> On 26.07.2016 20:23, rickman wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may not.
>>
>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>
>
> Looks like you are not into transhumanism?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
>
> Gene
>
Hi there Gene,
even so he is right I guess, nothing lasts forever :-).
But of course some things outlive others, some people
outlive others....
I think I know how to emulate myself on a sufficiently large
machine running DPS - I only wish I knew where to start
with the _read_ part of the copying... :D .
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/