[rfc-i] Call for Comment: "RFC Format Requirements and Future Development"

Phillip Hallam-Baker hallam at gmail.com
Mon Mar 4 04:51:35 PST 2013


As recently as ten years ago the third fastest supercomputer offered
12 Teraflops and 12Tb of storage. Today the same can be bought for

A Raspberry Pi casts $35 and has the same performance as the
workstation class of ten years ago.

Any proposal that says we should lock ourselves in to the technology
constraints of the valve tube era of computing is stupid.

There should be an immutable principle that people who want to
contribute to the cutting edge of technology have access to recent
software and reasonably up to date hardware and those that don't
bother have to take responsibility for their personal choices rather
than forcing the rest of us to adapt to their self-imposed

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2013, at 9:59 AM, t.p. <daedulus at btconnect.com> wrote:
>> There should be an immutable requirement that any alternative format
>> MUST NOT increase the size by more than a factor of two compared to
>> ASCII text.
> <tongue position="incheek">
> Given Moore's law, would that change 18 months from now to an immutable requirement of a factor of four?
> </tongue>
> --Paul Hoffman
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

Website: http://hallambaker.com/

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list