640K [RAM] ought to be enough for anybody!
replyPeople were perfectly happy with 640k ram at the time that phrase was uttered.
reply> People were perfectly happy with 640k ram at the time that phrase was uttered.
replyI'm assuming this is a sarcastic response to the person who said "640K [RAM] ought to be enough for anybody!"
Because, as somebody who was around when we had 640 K RAM, people certainly weren't happy with that amount.
Ah, the hours spent tweaking CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT to run a MS-DOS game that squeezed every last byte of those 640K, good times.
replyEMS...
replyRegardless of the time, people have always happily accepted more.
replyI’d argue most “people” haven’t actually needed more in a very long time other than to keep the same old software running. The requirements bloat of operating systems, browsers, and majority of software isn’t really a generalized “people” thing; more so the state of the industry being a form of inertial bloat.
replyThe phrase probably wasn't uttered by anyone it's attributed to: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/09/08/640k-enough/. Even "the time" is unknown.
replyAnd Bill probably _didn't_ do anything on Epstein Island...
reply[dead]
replyIt's enough for you now, but I feel like part of the mythology of our future is that we'll be continued to be employed because we'll be working on more complex problems, with smarter LLMs at our side.
replyI do think there's a decent case to be made that this will be the case for the foreseeable future, and perhaps the mythology part is beyond that.
replyAlthough as soon as I wrote 'foreseeable future' I came to the realization that this is far far far less far out than it used to be. Which might mean I simply agree with you.