Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Or, in other words, for about half the time those people are expecting no AI.

Never mind the Moore's Law putting computers more capable than our brains less than 30 years away.




Moore's Law is about transistor density, not computing power, so no it won't.

We could probably already build a computer more powerful than the human brain, it would just be huge (millions of cores or something). But that wouldn't help, because the real issue is that the Von Neumann architecture fundamentally prevents scaling the kinds of computations we want to do for neural networks. We need something more neuromorphic, although probably still discrete. (I'm guessing basically just a giant DSP integrated into memory on the same core.)



Nobody thinks Moore's law will last another 30 years.


Nobody thought it would last till here


See this graph:

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/CPU-Sc...

The green line was the only one still going, and it plateaued about a year ago (you'd see that in a newer graph).


The green line is the only one that Moore's law is about. Power consumption plateauing is a good thing, clock speed was never going to be the primary driver of performance increases long-term, and instruction-level parellelism (green line) is not a measure of performance-per-clock-cycle.


Well, I think it's already dead for some good 3 or 4 years. It just didn't start stinking yet.

But that's no reason to think that it'll take more than 100 years.


There's plenty of room on the bottom.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: