World's Current oldest woman dies last week.

[quote=Toshabi]You can read about her in her last living interview [url=http://www.theonion.com/articles/worlds-oldest-woman-just-pleased-every-other-human,37625/?utm_source=Tumblr&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Default%3A1%3ADefault]by clicking here.[/url] The world's oldest living person, Japan's Misao Okawa, has died from heart failure at the age of 117. She died in a nursing home in Osaka, the city she was born in on 5 March 1898. She is survived by three children, four grandchildren and six great-grandchildren. Ms Okawa was recognised in 2013 as the world's oldest living person, as well as the world's oldest living woman, by Guinness World Records. While celebrating her birthday earlier this month, Ms Okawa said that 117 years did not seem such a long time. She also said the key to a long life was getting at least eight hours of sleep a night and eating sushi - her favourite food. She said she particularly enjoyed mackerel on vinegar-steamed rice. Her birthday celebration was shown on national television in Japan. Born to a kimono-maker, Mrs Okawa married her husband Yukio in 1919. They lived in Kobe where he ran a business. When he died in 1931. she moved back to Osaka. She lived across three centuries, seeing four emperors of Japan, six British monarchs, and 20 US presidents. Craig Glenday, the editor-in-chief of Guinness World Records, said previously of Ms Okawa: "Her impressive longevity... is an inspiration and a testament to the Japanese lifestyle." Ms Okawa's name has since been taken down for the entry for the world's oldest living person on the organisation's site. It is not yet known who now holds that record, but the site does state that the oldest living man is Sakari Momoi, also of Japan, who turned 112 in February. The oldest person who has ever lived according to Guinness was Jeanne Calment of France, who lived 122 years and 164 days. She died in August 1997. Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32142212[/quote]

[quote=Meiyjhe]RIP[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=emoriam]It's impressive and frightening to read this at the same time. She lived in three different centuries thus in a time in which the bulb used to be an insane invention and in a time in which mobile phone devices carry quad-core processors.[/quote] The time between that occurring in PCs and phone is comparatively short. Less than 10 years-short. Besides 4 cores is often overkill. 2 is in many cases still the ideal number. And anything with 8 cores is generally incredibly inefficient. Edit: as I clarified in a comment further down: the quad core is a pretty insignificant invention, especially compared to the light bulb.[/quote]

[quote=xIchi][quote=Searz][quote=emoriam]It's impressive and frightening to read this at the same time. She lived in three different centuries thus in a time in which the bulb used to be an insane invention and in a time in which mobile phone devices carry quad-core processors.[/quote] The time between that occurring in PCs and phone is comparatively short. Less than 10 years-short. Besides 4 cores is often overkill. 2 is in many cases still the ideal number. And anything with 8 cores is generally incredibly inefficient.[/quote] What emoriam was trying to say is simply that quad-core are actually being used and not as stupid as the first dual cores that were weaker than a P4. Just the fact that quad-cores are slowly becoming a norm in mobile phones shows through how many crazy invention this woman went. No need to spam this thread with ur unneeded little tech nerd talk.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=xIchi]What emoriam was trying to say is simply that quad-core are actually being used and not as stupid as the first dual cores that were weaker than a P4.[/quote] How do you know that's what he meant? [quote]Just the fact that quad-cores are slowly becoming a norm in mobile phones shows through how many crazy invention this woman went.[/quote] I'd say that the quad core is a pretty insignificant blip on the radar when discussing progress..[/quote]

[quote=xIchi]This thread is about a woman that lived for over 100 years. Emoriam took that into comparisson with the bulb to the quad-core in super small and slim smartphones. And me implying what emoriam meant only goes to the part of ''actually being used'', everything afterwards was my input. Idk, either it's because of our perception of statements, but u always seem to get everything the wrong way or try to lol.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=xIchi]And me implying what emoriam meant only goes to the part of ''actually being used'', everything afterwards was my input.[/quote] ... Not only do you fail spectacularly with your words (you [b][i]wrote[/b][/i] what you thought emoriam [b][i]implied[/b][/i]), but you also completely fail to interpret both mine and emoriam's comments. Mine is understandable, my point was unclear, but from emoriam's comment you magically extrapolated some complete and utter horseshit. [quote]Idk, either it's because of our perception of statements, but u always seem to get everything the wrong way or try to lol.[/quote] I'm just gonna let this idiotic statement stand for itself. Are you even trying?... You seriously better step up your game if you don't want me to start instantly dismissing anything you write.[/quote]

[quote=Toshabi]Damn. I don't even need to make a videogame/technology bait thread to get Searz's nipples on the go. I just make a thread, people post and do all the work for me. I should do this more often.[/quote]

[quote=xIchi][quote=Searz][quote=xIchi]And me implying what emoriam meant only goes to the part of ''actually being used'', everything afterwards was my input.[/quote] ... Not only do you fail spectacularly with your words (you [b][i]wrote[/b][/i] what you thought emoriam [b][i]implied[/b][/i]), but you also completely fail to interpret both mine and emoriam's comments. Mine is understandable, my point was unclear, but from emoriam's comment you magically extrapolated some complete and utter horseshit. [quote]Idk, either it's because of our perception of statements, but u always seem to get everything the wrong way or try to lol.[/quote] I'm just gonna let this idiotic statement stand for itself. Are you even trying?... You seriously better step up your game if you don't want me to start instantly dismissing anything you write.[/quote] Your inital post where you mentioned the time span between PC and Mobilephone of less than 10 years has no relevance to emoriam's comment (which he now also explained). So there was also no reason to drop in the talk about quad and octa cores. Honestly, I am amazed how you always manage to take posts and suddenly start a totally different discussion, cause you always have to push in some of your superficial knowledge of something you were just interested in. In short, it's like a kid that learned sth new and has to show it to everyone. Keep in mind, and I think most noticed, I always reply to your comments. It doesn't cost me any time/efford and you try way harder than me. It's amusing.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=emoriam]It's an invention personally impressing as it's something I can hardly decode (because of the high amount of performance on such little space) even though I have been born at the end of the 90s.[/quote] Well, it shouldn't be. At least not the quad-core part of it. Because something having 4 cores does not mean that it's anywhere near the performance of desktop equivalents. The fastest phones today are about as fast in raw performance as the fastest PCs about 10 years ago. And back then the CPUs only had one core. Number of cores is NOT a measure of performance. I mean GPUs oftentimes have several thousands of cores, but that's because they're specialized for more parallelized work. If you want to marvel at anything regarding smartphones then marvel at the package. It's a package with a high-quality screen with small borders, reasonable amount of compute power, the ability to establish a high-speed connecttion to a global network through a variety of radio frequencies and methods, storage capable of holding vast quantities of data, microphone, speaker, GPS with triangulation support, accelerometer, gyroscope, light sensor, proximity sensor, temperature sensors, magnetic field sensor, pressure sensor and of course two cameras one of which is usually very good for the size. And all of this fits in the palm of your hand. THAT is amazing. The fact that they have four cores? It's pretty insignificant in comparison. [quote=xIchi]I always reply to your comments. It doesn't cost me any time/efford and you try way harder than me.[/quote] You're proud of how little effort you put in? I try to write comments with actual value and logic, while you don't even fucking try... You suck. Just stop this shit.[/quote]