David Kanter (dkanter@realworldtech.com) on 2/27/12 wrote:
---------------------------
>there
>are not many people who really deeply understand computer architecture. C't is a
>great magazine because the staff is fairly sophisticated.

The articles of AS were a big source for my discission to study microelectronics. They were the only source for new processor architecture details before I found this page. (Hans de Vries stopped in 2003)

>than macro. My feeling was that micro was well understood and the models seemed
>to work, whereas that wasn't the case for macro.

I agree, but also there is a lot of politics, conflict of interest and propaganda to it as well. Some things are understood, but get ignored because they do not support certain favored viewpoints.
I count the field to the somewhat unscientific descriptive / unmathematical sciences.
There is one big problem, unlike in longterm weather modeling which works real well, any forecast would change the true outcome. If they did have a model they would be restricted to validation by predicting the past with earlier data.
Any short-term predictions that are not obvious will never be possible as it is in the nature of the subject.

>Unfortunately, those who really
>understand economics are not often posting online.

Paul Krugman posts often.

>That's OK.
>David

thank you