Do normal people utilize their computer's full potential? Is it worth building a library of useful documents, spreadsheets, programs, whatever; or is it too risky to rely on a computer?
I've had access to a computer most of my life, and many times I use it to keep track of things in spreadsheets, write programs to do math or macros, and organize digital photos and listen to music. I think this is a "normal" thing people do with computers.
On the other hand, I look at some other people my age and their computer is, and they either exclusively use web apps (email, social media, etc) or have super-duper rigs for video games.
So, there's people who literally could just use cheap netbooks like the Chromebook, and then there's people who use more electricity than South Africa to render busty anime girl gacha games in blistering 4K;60fps.
Am I the weird one, or are they?
Normal people use phones
Society has left us behind
It's okay though
normal people use phones
probably falls under the category of "cheap netbook" like Chromebook, but it's a handheld and expensive for what it is.
so what your saying is nobody normal uses their computer to fullest potential. awesome.
This should have been posted in /sol/.
move it to >>>/sol/ then.
Op needs to read the history of the great depression that lead to WWII so they can grasp with computers were never meant to liberate society. Weapons of war are still arms.
op here, shit.
>>4
yeah, it should probably actually be in /sol/
>>5
is it futile to try and make a computer that isn't a weapon of war? like we all have (compared to 15 years ago) supercomputers that can and do so much useless shit. Isn't seti@home & boinc a pretty good example of what you can do with all that compute power?
A weapon of war? Why do you say that?
>>7
There are soldiers out there right now beating each other to death with fifteen year old Thinkpads
>>7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bees_Army
One of many examples.
In a way, you aren't programming the computer.
The computer is programming you.
>>9
Media is used by governments to control the public. In other news, p -> q = !q -> !p.
Computers are a tool, and any tool will be used in the struggle for power. That doesn't mean there aren't other uses, or that the negatives outweigh the positives.
>>10
It's not just controlling the public–it's driving people into insanity.
You can kill someone psychologically.
how able is the government to surpress a sneakernet or like LAN P2P, like how briar works when there's no internet where messages pool up on people's phones until the recipient bumps into their bluetooth range? they'd have to play their hand pretty hard with backdoors in the OS or hardware.
>>12
They can put a stop to it by taking away your sneakers
[bombs] are a tool, and any tool will be used in the struggle for power. That doesn't mean there aren't other uses, or that the negatives outweigh the positives.
I love this fallacy. Op is asking what normal people use computers for. The majority of the world population does have computers. And if they do, they have a terminal where they see what the ISP wants them to see.
The liberation movement of computational sciences was handcuffed to the capitalists. So enjoy your dumbed terminal society.
does NOT* have computers
Normal people should not have access to computers. Computers are a dangerous tool that could ruin many lives. Only professional government-licensed programmers should be allowed to use computers. All computers should be owned by the government so that all usage can be monitored by law enforcement. It will be illegal to possess personal computers and computer science literature.
>>16
Unironically based
i'll be enjoying my thinkpad illegally.
>>16
It wouldn't be possible to enforce, unless they intend to license the distribution of computer-precursors like transistors, relays, and valves
>>18
We should go back to the good old days where scientific and engineering knowledge is only taught to the priestly class. This would ensure that the knowledge is in safe hands, and stop normal people from unwittingly destroying themselves.
We should go back to the good old days
The people that say this line, are usually so retarded, that ignorance is their best choice to peace. Otherwise being buried 100km under is actually safer.
If you want to be a Neanderthal, please spare us your delusions of grandeur.
I work mostly around artists and almost all of them use their computers for the Adobe Creative Suite. I think for them, with most of their work being legit just art, it works enough, but for sure not using their computer's full potential. Most people use computers to do homework and watch movies now. Pretty lame.
The flexibility of general purpose computers is wasted on the ignorant.
Normal users should be restricted to government-issued iPads for all their computing needs.
>>23
What needs?
Porn.
>>1
I think it was Moore who said very little classical computing is done, and most compute today is expended on data transformation e.g. decoding video
>>26
What are some examples of "classical computing"?
Is code compilation an example of "classical computing"?
>>27
No. There was no such thing as a compiler during the time of the Roman empire.
>>28
the analog computers for naval dont count?
>>27
From what I remember he distinguished between calculation/simulation and data transformation. The distinction was made in the service of his recent experiments with a parallel forth
>>29
That is a computer, not a compiler. The distinction is not entirely academic.
>>31
misread that my bad
those applying the technical engravings see bziza required for creating and assembling the mechanical objects dont count as compilers in current academica?
compīlator
A compiler, one which heaps (up) or compiles.
A plunderer, pillager.
first definition is marked as late latin in my dictionary second as classical latin
dont know looks like all those crew mates are compilatores
sure they dont all do classical computing with naval analog computers but its relevant to them
>>32
In the context of computation, a compiler is a program that transforms code from a source language to a target language. Running such a program on an analog computer does not sound practical. Running it on an abacus is total nonsense. At any rate, compilation is data transformation, which apparently does not count as classical computation, so even if you were able to do this, it would not count.
Aside: if computers can be analog, does that mean an abacus is acoustic?
>>33
You surely are acoustic.
>>33
The first known program, gcd, used sticks to perform the computation. Please reread the preface to SICP, thank you.
>>33
do you mean a program for automating the transformation of technical engravings to mechanical objects?
maybe not directly but molds are pretty practical
i wont say such a analog computer existed for spitting out the objects in line by taking material input for an antikythera mechanism let alone automatically assembled it
but yet does this consider what the scope of an classical analog computer is
ill say the problem still exists between the pilot seat and computer
Running such a program on an analog computer does not sound practical
any automation for pushing out more ships that can easily navigate for the compilers is practical at that time
even if it would take 5 different analog computers to more easily assemble an antikythera mechanism it be an improvement over using 100s of manual engineer labor
which apparently does not count as classical computation
do you mean by acemdica
acemdica considers the field of classical analog computers vary controversial even your reaction could be a latent side effect of it
is abacus acoustic
lets look at a more modern theory of percussive acoustics
a abacus can either have vibrating membranes or be considered solid bodied falling under membranophones and idiophones
now the question is for acoustics does this instrument make inharmonic or harmonic overtones
ill assume in practice due to the abacus not being designed as a instrument it cant reach the proper harmonic rising
however a abacus high quality enough in the wrong ways could possibly with the correct operator reach the proper harmonic rising to become the instrument one is used to
Sure but does it's acousticness affect it's computational structure or performance in any way?
>>37
Maybe if there's a soundness problem.
>>37
the analog computer might do some curing of geopolymers that needs certain vibrations
not sure how a abacus fit in there maybe some slot like type of cardbus for analog computers
in this case it be used as a membranophone designed for a proper harmonic rising
while there is academic accepted cases of rome using geopolymers im not sure what era that was nor if the curing process really needs a bunch of balls vibrating against the mold in a certain way
even on modern hardware something like this would be bolted in not through a slot but i dont know maintaining those balls so they can stay properly harmonic seems necessary
>>37
on a simple standalone abacus if its too inharmonic the balls are probably no longer on the sticks and off the mechanism
so it does in the case of not being a instrument
and ill have to say if the balls are less balls making it more inharmonic both the input for operating the abacus and the structure of the abacus changes
effecting both performance and computational structure if that can be linked to the state of where the balls are
sure you can say this is a side effect of being inharmonic and irrelevant to acoustics but what does many of the digestible programming languages operate too much with