Pop Quiz

[MagsJ]

if we could make machines that are simpler, smaller, cheaper, and more precise by means of a component other than transistors, we would do so

the answer is because binary systems are simpler, smaller, cheaper, and more precise

Agree.. but they still happen to be made using transistors.

I recall an alternative being in the works..

[Pedro I Rengel]

But fine, the original answer to question 1 remains pretty much the same.

no sir
the answer is not that they are made of transistors

if we could make machines that are simpler, smaller, cheaper, and more precise by means of a component other than transistors, we would do so

the answer is because binary systems are simpler, smaller, cheaper, and more precise

Do all computers use transistors yes or no and is binary code in all cases used to manipulate them yes or no?

[phoneutria]

yeah but do you understand the difference in my answer?

to say they are made of transistors answers a "how" question, not a "why"
the use of one vs the other is the means to an end
the end is efficiency

[phoneutria]

Agree.. but they still happen to be made using transistors.

I recall an alternative being in the works..

people have been talking about quantum computing for ages

[Pedro I Rengel]

Well it's a "why" question if you look at it from the point of view of the actual computer, of the actual technology. The why is absolutely transistors.

[Pedro I Rengel]

And also that there is not even one single example of a computer that uses any non-binary technology, not a one, tells me that maybe it is not as possible as you suggest, but it also doesn't guarantee it.

[phoneutria]

ok whatever you want, makes no difference to me

[Pedro I Rengel]

Good faith requested but not bestowed?!

Anyway fine, ok, so we have question 1 then.

[phoneutria]

And also that there is not even one single example of a computer that uses any non-binary technology, not a one, tells me that maybe it is not as possible as you suggest, but it also doesn't guarantee it.

google analogue programming and you will find hundreds of examples
it is not only possible, in fact the very first computer systems were all analogue
all military ballistics shit from the 40s was done in analogue computing machines
they have just been deprecated because they are inefficient, expensive, clunky

[phoneutria]

they're called computer bugs because literal bugs would fly into these massive machines and break shit
and then it took engineers weeks to find the damn bug and fix whatever they knocked out of place

[Pedro I Rengel]

I think those are retarded enough in terms of computing power compared to what we understand as computers that we can leave them out of the category.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Heck medieval accountant people were also called computers.

That is not what I mean.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Plus like, I dunno but like, weren't all those analogue computers also binary?

Wasn't there like a rotating cylinder thing that was set in either yes or no, that they turned by hand at first? Some shit like that?

[Pedro I Rengel]

1. Why must computer designers and software engineers use binary math?

OK, to please phoneutria, we will amend the answer:

It's because the basic level of mechanical manipulation in actual computers that activates whatever dependent mechanisms are attached to a given computer consists of transistors that either allow electricity through or not. That is all they do. This allows computer designers and software engineers to manipulate them using code that substitutes "allows electricity through" for "1" and "does not allow electricity through" for "0."

[phoneutria]

well nuance matters to me
the reason we use binary is that it is better
we achieve that by means of building digital circuits

if analogue circuits were better than digital ones
that idea would have stayed in someone's garage
as some cool impractical curiosity
it happens to be the other way around
and when we come up with things that work better than transistors
we're going to keep using binary systems probably always
but they're going to replace transistors with carbon nanotubes
because they'll be faster and more energy efficient
and will allow us to build denser chips
moore's law babeh

binary is not the best method of computing there is btw
like i said, it's the most efficient when you factor in cost and complexity
quantum computing will be able to do things that binary logic can't
they'll process computations that there isn't enough machine power on earth right now to do
but a quantum computer is gonna cost like 10 billion dollars
i mean
i can't afford that

[phoneutria]

yeah please me

[phoneutria]

1. Why must computer designers and software engineers use binary math?

OK, to please phoneutria, we will amend the answer:

It's because the basic level of mechanical manipulation in actual computers that activates whatever dependent mechanisms are attached to a given computer consists of transistors that either allow electricity through or not. That is all they do. This allows computer designers and software engineers to manipulate them using code that substitutes "allows electricity through" for "1" and "does not allow electricity through" for "0."

do you understand what i am tryna say?
when they replace transistors with nanotubes
but they're still using binary logic
what does that do to your answer?
you're going to have to rewrite your textbook

[Pedro I Rengel]

OK for fuck's sake how would you answer question 1 then?

[Pedro I Rengel]

And don't be a smart ass, they do must, because it is the only method used without exception.

[Pedro I Rengel]

binary is not the best method of computing there is btw

This will be important later on.

[Pedro I Rengel]

You say they could use some other technology, but they really can't.

Even if they used carbon nanotubes, they would be using "'electricity goes through' or 'electricity does not go through'" technology. Like with the analogue ones also. So my textbook remains strong, like a bull in harvest.

[Pedro I Rengel]

IT'S WHAT THE TECHNOLOGY ALLOWS!!!!

[MagsJ]

_
Carbon Nanotubes are Nth times more toxic than asbestos and have been around since the 70s..

If it ain’t worth it, don’t do it.. or seal that SC in an airtight room, and then some.

[phoneutria]

btw i am not an expert on computer science
nor brains (wtf pedro lol)
i'm an expert builder of shit
i studied this stuff a couple of decades ago
and i'm an avid consumer of random knowledge as y'all know
but my expertise is practical
i can get shit done no matter what language you throw at me
i get your toy done
before christmas
ho ho ho

alright... question two
briefly
brains are kinda sorta similar to computers in one sense
nervous cells fire up upon reaching an action potential
but it ends there
brains are totally analogue
these potentials build up and down
the transmission of a signal from a neuron to another
doesn't necessarily mean that it will trigger that action potential
the communication between one and another is a graded potential
mediated by chemical neurotransmitters
these graded potentials go up and down
as ions pass through the cell membranes
so the excitability of the cells is wildly variable
and doesn't necessarily trigger action potentials
hence much more complicated than simply on and off

[phoneutria]

OK for fuck's sake how would you answer question 1 then?

cuz it's moar better duh