You say that, but DDR6 will double the memory bandwidth over DDR5. This means modern systems will go beyond 200GB/s memory bandwidth just for the CPU alone.
Considering PC desktops. DDR4 is 3200 MT/s max JEDEC. DDR5 is available on AMD since 3 years and is 5600. DDR6 specification is almost finished. It looks like DDR5 will double performance just right before new DDR6 DIMMs appear. Thus I'd expect DDR6 to double the bandwidth just as late when the new memory standard arrives.
AMD's CPUs don't support more than 5600 MT/s without overclocking; they're still using the same IO die from Zen 4, so their memory controller is pretty outdated. Zen 6 should introduce a new IO die with a better memory controller, but for now 6000 MT/s is the fastest reasonable memory overclock for AMD desktops.
Intel's desktop CPUs from last year support up to 5600 MT/s with regular DDR5 DIMMs, or 6400 MT/s for CUDIMMs. Speeds higher than this are achievable, but are overclocking.
If your memory modules are rated for 6400 MT/s, they are most likely advertising the speed when using an Intel XMP or AMD EXPO profile to overclock the memory (and the CPU's memory controller). The JEDEC standard profile likely is no faster than 5600 MT/s. It's also possible that you bought last year a kit of CUDIMMs rated for 6400 MT/s without overclocking, brand new to the market at that time, and of no help whatsoever with any CPU that isn't an Intel Arrow Lake.
Now that you say that, I checked in bios and looks like you're right. I have 4 sticks of "DDR5-4800-16GB @6400MHz". It was probably marketing speed, but works stable and memtest didn't find any errors.
This is a pretty weird take in a HN submission about modern agricultural practices causing drought in urban Iran. Like, the problem you're suggesting is already happening, right now, except it is water related not about food.
Afforestation, green houses, swales, center pivot irrigation and no till agriculture are highly effective methods that conserve water or let it accumulate in the local area.
Dams are highly ineffective when the goal is water conservation. Censorship and punishment are also highly ineffective methods for water conservation.
During WW2 the US leveled 1/3 of all buildings in Japan including most of the manufacturing industry. That didn't stop Japan from rebuilding and coming back stronger. The same is true of Germany, except East Germany turned out to be an abject failure.
I know this is a bit off topic, but have you ever thought about why steroids and other forms of doping are not a free lunch? Why can't we just inject an external chemical to boost our strength for free without any side effects?
If steroids worked, everyone would be constantly injecting them. It would be like drinking coffee.
And that is the reason why steroid injections are harmful. If there is a free lunch, the human body will simply produce the optimal amount of steroids on its own until the Pareto frontier is reached and a tradeoff needs to be made.
Where does the body get the materials to form the steroids? From your diet. So the primary intervention is always a healthy diet and an active lifestyle. You know, the boring things that parents drill into their children.
It's valid but "medicine" that has only upsides and no downsides isn't medicine, it's diet.
You do know that /etc/hosts is a file you can edit, right? You hopefully also know that you can create your own certificate authority or self signed certificates and add them to your CA store.
> You do know that /etc/hosts is a file you can edit, right?
Yes. What does it have to do with HTTPS?
> You hopefully also know that you can create your own certificate authority or self signed certificates and add them to your CA store.
Sorta, kinda. Does it actually work with third-party apps? Does it work with mobile systems? If not, then it's not a valid solution, because it doesn't allow me to run my stuff in my own networks without interfacing with the global Internet and social and political systems backing its cryptographic infrastructure.
Pick-up trucks aren't meant for work. Like, at all. They are inherently grocery/family vehicles.
Europeans don't use pick-up trucks even for cargo that is suitable for pickup trucks, because small flatbed trucks [0] let you open the bed from the side, making pickup trucks mostly an obsolete concept for work purposes.
I personally find it questionable when people argue that the GPL/AGPL is less free because of the code sharing requirement.
On the Rust subreddit you can see people make arguments that can essentially be paraphrased as "Get a real job".
Somehow the people selling primary energy, food and raw materials are allowed to make money, the hardware manufacturers to run the code on are allowed to make money, cloud providers to run code on are allowed to make money, people using your software in their business are allowed to make money and even people who have been hired at a company to submit patches and pull requests to contribute to your project are allowed to make money but you, the original maintainer/developer who kick-started the project and paid the initial investment? Suddenly you're no longer allowed to make money. You're expected to work a "real job" (see list above). You're supposed to spend time not working on the project to earn enough money so you can donate your time and money to work on the project to people who most likely couldn't care less about you and your sacrifice and since it is just plain business sense to minimize costs, you should do the same and stop working on the project.
The strangest part by far is that if you'd you made your code proprietary from the get go, there wouldn't be any complaints about your GPL code not being free enough. It's a surprisingly pro proprietary code stance.
I don't think it's strange at all - the "pure freedom" licenses intentionally don't have safeguards against exploitation of the system, which attracts those who want to take but not give back, which lines up well with proprietary software.
reply