Comment by CyberDildonics
3 days ago
Now learning something new for a few hours means we'd have to give up is squishy hard-to-measure things like "feature sets" and "engineering velocity." ?
You made up stuff I didn't say, you won't back up your claims with any sort of evidence, you keep saying things that aren't relevant, what is the point of this?
This thread is john carmack saying the world could get by with cheaper computers if software wasn't so terrible and you are basically trying to argue with zero evidence that software needs to be terrible.
Why can't you give any evidence to back up your original claim? Why can't you show a single program fragment or give a single example?
Okay let's do it this way.
It's obviously true the world could get by with cheaper computers if software was more performant.
So why don't we?
Because people spread and believe misinformation about it being difficult to avoid writing grossly inefficient software.
We know that it isn't difficult because if it was you would have had a single shred of evidence after a dozen comments of me asking for it.