Is there an endgame for technology? like a 6inch 48 hour battery, 4k resolution, bezelless touch screen, with no bloatware, ability to customize, no branding, gorilla glass, 16gb ram, 6ghz processor smart phone is how long away? 5 years?
>>55282446
No never, we have to always strive to be better
>>55282459
hey buddy, that's right. always better
>>55282446
>6ghz
>5 years away
Processors pretty much stopped getting more hertz back around the Pentium 4 days, kid.
>>55282446
How do I get a girl like rachel McAdams /g/? I know this board slays the women, teach me your ways
>>55282938
1. Be rich
>>55282446
>no bloatware
>believing this is going to happen
Sorry
>>55282982
Were definitely getting there. Maybe not 5 years but in the next decade OP's specs will be a reality.
>>55282446
The endgame is continued planned obsolescence.
>>55282446
Future generations will look pitifully at our tech atm. Some of them will post pictures of Dell XPS laptops and call them "comfy". Kids will look at the laptops and wonder how people back then could do without having AI that will make most of the work we do on computers today redundant. Maybe someone will remember this very thread and laugh at the thought that we once thought that the endgame in tech is a fucking 4k screen and a large battery. If you knew what's to come, you would laugh as well.
I wouldn't hope for "no bloatware" though.
I really wouldn't.
stop posting that ugly cunt please
>>55282446
>6Ghz
Yeah why isn't the new 22-core hyperthreaded Xeon clocked at 4Ghz like a decade old P4? Because clearly Hz is all that matters ,right?
When I open my laptop, it can take 5-15 seconds to connect to my wifi.
When that time is always under half a second, technology will be sufficient.
>>55282938
Be confident and be yourself and if youre lucky, that girl will love you for it becauses shes likely dealt with nothing but assholes.
Hope you arent an asshole, anon.
The end game of technology is that we don't have to work for a living anymore
at this point, staring out a window is more enjoyable than using tech.
>>55282446
I think when we all have a robotic Rachel McAdams dominating us with her feet we'll have reached the endgame.
>>55282938
Basic psychology: how likely people are to end up getting close to one another depends largely on how often they see each other and have chances to talk to each other.
Get into hobby activities your ideal woman would do. If you are into dancers, start taking dance classes.
>but I'm not in shape enough to dance!
Do you think your ideal dancer woman would be into someone who isn't in shape enough to dance? What better way is there to get in good enough shape to dance than to take dance classes?
Doesn't have to be dance classes, but you get the idea. You're not going to have even a chance of dating your ideal type of woman if you only meet them once in a blue moon. Your odds go up dramatically just by putting yourself in a situation where you meet many awesome women.
>>55283969
Also be rich
>>55282446
Vr waifus
>>55283359
Bitches love assholes, tho
>>55282471
Silicon on regular conditions + regular cooling fucks up at 4 GHz tops.
>>55282446
We shed our mortal coils and ascend to a higher plane of existence where we exist as pure energy and knowledge is no longer limited by the capacity of our physical brains.
>>55283999
No, they don't.
It's more of a case that a common trait of highly confident, active, sociable and successful men is that they are also assholes.
Women like men who get their way.
>>55283978
Being rich won't do shit if you don't meet awesome women. Do you think being rich is enough to satisfy Rachel McAdams? No, she's already got enough money.
She also doesn't have to make compromises on looks/personality/money since she meets people who are at the top of all of those on a daily basis.
If you think just money is enough, then get hookers instead. It's cheaper and about what you'll get personality-wise too.
>>55284039
You need to be rich to even meet someone like that- women like that socialise at expensive places, they have rich friends.
Being rich is a minimum standard that you have to have, that's just to get to the front door.
>>55284075
But like everyone, they have to start somewhere. Not every woman like Rachel McAdams is as successful as her.
Besides, people like that care more about success than money. If you are taking home seven figures, but hate your life, that's not very appealing to anyone except people who just want a rich man, which takes us back to my point about hookers.
>>55282446
>48 hour battery
Yes, end game is 2 day battery, not just living forever
>>55284170
he was being somewhat conservative
>>55284125
>>55284039
>>55283969
I like you anon, I'll find a girl like her hopefully out of college. Just waiting it out a little.
>we're all gonna make it brahs
>>55285764
>I'll find a girl like her hopefully out of college. Just waiting it out a little.
I'm sorry to tell you this, but if you don't find a girl like her in college, you never will.
>>55284170
"Forever" is about as conservative as you should be if you're talking about the endgame goals for battery life
>>55282446
I think going beyond 4K resolution is ridiculous.
>>55282471
they are still getting faster, though.
>>55283795
>Implying the powers that be will allow this
>>55282446
>endgame
>smartphone
yes. at some point resolution, refresh rate and so on will all meet the limits of the human eye
so we'll bypass it
For some technologies, there are endgames - screens are a prime example, once the pixel density gets high enough, there simply isn't any point in going higher unless we start augmenting our eyes. For others, not so much: no matter how good CPUs get, there will always be some use-cases where getting better performance(whether on per-core, per-die or per-watt basis) will yield significant benefits no matter how far we push the technology.
>>55282459
I mean, realistically we'll eventually run into some limitation because of physics (I'm not gonna pretend that I'm a physicist).
But I totally agree that we always have to shoot higher as an ideal, and because there might not be a limit.
>>55282446
We already hit the technology endgame.
>>55289092
Fucking this.
>>55282446
> Is there an endgame for technology?
Yeah, when all the matter in the entire universe has been turned into paperclips.
>>55286789
>I'm sorry to tell you this, but if you don't find a girl like her in college, you never will.
Don't project you faggot, I'm not you
>>55288247
no were putting more of them in parallel to accomplish more simultaneous tasks.
>>55286789
It is true though. 90% of women find their partner in college.
If you don't have a gf by the end of college, good luck! Especially if you are in IT where you'll meet a girl maybe once a month, a non-attractive one as well.
for me personally i dont give a fuck. rhona mitra is the goddess
display technology won't be enough until we jack the monitor cable directly into our cyborg eyeballs who jam two thousand times more information up our reinforced optical nerve to the implanted artificial visual cortex so we can visualize images vivid enough to get a mantis shrimp to shift into green with envy
>>55289287
underrated post
>>55282446
>6ghz
Not without iii-v semiconductors. I'd say 15 years.
>>55289168
you mean if cards can exploit that.
you also mean contrast
have you ever been in a dome?
>>55282446
Chii.
>>55289987
That's why you go out and be social you /v/irgin, stop using college as an excuse
>>55291060
This. Endgame is greater than human AI.
