Posts Tagged‘die’

Everything About Gamergate Needs to Die.

I’m fucking fed up.

Fuck Gamergate

I’m fed up with the fact that I can’t go  a week without a female gaming icon getting harassed to the point where she has to leave her house. I’m pissed off that rational discourse broke down so quickly that all anyone talks about now is the hate. I hate the fact that I, as your stereotypical male gamer, feel like I’m responsible for all this shit despite the fact that I treat every female gamer like any other gamer. I’m fucking tired of feeling like all I can do is stay silent and try to be a good member of the community so I can lead by example, just like the countless others I play games with on a daily basis. So fuck it, I’ll paint a target on my back by calling out both sides of the argument for the shit they’ve flung in the wrong directions and hopefully I’ll convince someone that everything about this whole controversy needs to die a fucking swift death.

The one thing I’m going to abstain from doing is going over what sparked this (every recount of what happened to get us to this point is so charged with bullshit swinging one way or the other) and if you’re reading this you likely have your own idea of what the fuck is going on. So instead of getting off on the wrong foot here, although I’ve already likely done that with the first paragraph, I’ll just dive into the meat of what I think needs to happen here and then you can all feel free to flame/dox/death threat me in the comments.

If you’re one of the cadre who backs the idea that Gamergate is about ethics in games journalism then there’s really one thing, and only one thing, you need to do: stop fucking using the Gamergate term. No matter how good you think you are at dodging all the hate, bullshit and utterly atrocious actions of a minority of people you’re never going to rise above the rabble that they’ve managed to generate. There’s a larger debate in there that could have some wide reaching ramifications for how games sites handle their relationships with publishers and developers and it’s one I think still needs to be had. However should you go charging in brandishing the Gamergate tag as your source of inspiration all you’re doing is giving credance to those assholes who use the same platform as a place to spread their hate.

In fact I have no fucking idea why anyone who’s actually interested in having a rational debate about these matters even hold onto the tag at this point. I mean it’s not like we can’t create a new one #fuckingEthics or something like that and use it instead, what’s the point of holding onto a term that only gets press when it runs someone from their home? We may not be responsible for the people who are peddling this bullshit but fuck me, we can decry the label as one that’s been mutilated in only perpetrating hate and continue the conversation that needs to be had somewhere else.

The anti-Gamergate crew isn’t entirely blameless in this whole shitpile though as they’ve often lumped the wider gaming community in with hatemongers. Look a minority of people causing a shitstorm in the larger group is nothing new to the world and it is not fair to anyone in that group if you tar them all with the same brush. If we’re going to ascribe that kind of thinking to everything we might as well just assume all Muslims are terrorists and start treating them all as if they were. The hard and fast fact here is that whilst yes, the hate peddlers of Gamergate identify themselves as gamers, they are not representative of the whole and it does us all a great injustice to think that.

I know anecdotes don’t mean much in the larger scale of things but I’ve always tried to be inclusive of women in the games I play with them along with supporting titles that feature strong female characters as leads. I had a look through my reviews of this year and whilst, yes, they’re primarily filled with lead male protagonists a good half of them allowed you to choose your gender with half a dozen or so featuring what I’d consider a well written female lead. However if you formed your opinion of me based on the fact that I’m an (almost) 30 year old white male who spends an inordinate amount of time playing games and all you had was the Gamergate controversy to go on you’d figure I’m just another fucking misogynist hellbent on ensuring the female race stays out of my games.

Just…fucking no, that’s not me at all.

I want to do my part to stop this kind of shit from happening but there are some larger conversations I want to continue in spite of the hate. Hell I don’t think it’s too much to ask, I consulted with my journo friends when I first started getting offered game copies for reviewing and got great lessons on full disclosure, but it seems like maybe now isn’t the right time. What needs to happen now is for everyone to put a bullet in the Gamergate tag and then anyone who brandishes afterwards can be rightly labelled the peddler of hate that they are. Then, once it’s dead and buried, we can resurrect the conversation about journalistic ethics without the bullshit. I have no fucking idea if that will work or not, it probably won’t, but one thing is clear, everything about Gamergate needs to die right fucking now.

Let’s Get Moore’s Law Straight, Ok?

Anyone who’s had a passing interest in computers has likely run up against the notion of Moore’s Law, even if they don’t know the exact name for it. Moore’s Law is a simple idea, approximately every 2 years the amount of computing power than can be bought cheaply doubles. This often takes the more common forms of “computer power doubles every 18 months” (thanks to Intel executive David House) or, for those uninitiated with the law, computers get obsoleted faster than any other product in the world. Since Gordon E. Moore first stated the idea back in 1970 it’s held on extremely well and for the most part we’ve beaten the predictions pretty handily.

Of course there’s been a lot of research into the upper limits of Moore’s Law as with anything exponential it seems impossible for it to continue on for an extended period of time. Indeed current generation processors built on the standard 22nm lithography process were originally thought to be one such barrier, because the gate leakage at that point was going to be unable to be overcome. Of course new technologies enabled this process to be used and indeed we’ve still got another 2 generations of lithography processes ahead of us before current technology suggests another barrier.

More recently however researches believe they’ve found the real upper limit after creating a transistor that consists only of a single atom:

Transistors — the basic building block of the complex electronic devices around you. Literally billions of them make up that Core i7 in your gaming rig and Moore’s law says that number will double every 18 months as they get smaller and smaller. Researchers at the University of New South Wales may have found the limit of this basic computational rule however, by creating the world’s first single atom transistor. A single phosphorus atom was placed into a silicon lattice and read with a pair of extremely tiny silicon leads that allowed them to observe both its transistor behavior and its quantum state. Presumably this spells the end of the road for Moore’s Law, as it would seem all but impossible to shrink transistors any farther. But, it could also points to a future featuring miniaturized solid-state quantum computers.

It’s true that this seems to suggest an upper limit to Moore’s Law, I mean if the transistors can’t get any smaller than how can the law be upheld? The answer is simple, the size of transistors isn’t actually a limitation of Moore’s Law, the cost of their production is.

You see most people are only familiar with the basic “computing power doubles every 18 months” version of Moore’s Law and many draw a link between that idea and the size of transistors. Indeed the size is definitely a factor as that means we can squeeze more transistors into the same space, but what this negates is the fact that modern CPU dies haven’t really increased in size at all in the past decade. Additionally new techniques like 3D CPUs (currently all the transistors on a CPU are in a single plane) have the potential to exponentially grow the number of transistors without needing the die shrinks that we currently rely on.

So whilst the fundamental limit of how small a transistor is might be a factor that affects Moore’s Law it by no means determines the upper limit; the cost of adding in those extra transistors does. Indeed every time we believe we’ve discovered yet another limit another technology gets developed or improved to the point where Moore’s Law becomes applicable again. This doesn’t negate work like that in the linked article above as discovering potential limitations like that better equips us for dealing with them. For the next decade or so though I’m very confident that Moore’s Law will hold up, and I see no reason why it won’t continue on for decades afterward.