On 25/10/2014 16:57, Matt Mahoney via AGI:

> No, right now the main problem is the lack of energy efficient computation.
> Many AI problems, especially vision, require enormous computation. If
> we assume that we need a human brain sized neural network, then we need
> several billion 10 petaflop computers to automate the global workforce.
> Using current technology, each computer would require several megawatts
> of power. The cost of electricity alone makes them uncompetitive with
> wages. But I don't think the problem is insurmountable. [...]

This is, I think, contrary to conventional wisdom on the topic -
which says that machine intelligence is more of a software problem
at this stage.

The world spends a lot more on software engineers than hardware
engineers. The same also goes for folks like Google - who are seriously
working on machine intelligence.

Maybe this indicates irrational behaviour - but I think it is more
likely that software really is the problem.

> Transistor features are already down to less than 100 atoms across.
> We will soon reach the physical limits of transistor size and power
> consumption, just as Moore's Law has already stalled on clock speed
> several years ago.

The 2005 clock speed plateau is more to do with our existing
computer designs, IMO. It is only on massive synchronous CPUs
that clock speeds have reached a plateau. That's not because we
can't make smaller and faster components - the progress with
networking equipment shows that we can. The problem is
synchronously operating such a large number of components in
a deterministic manner. Async chips don't have this problem.
--
__________
 |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  [email protected]  Remove lock to reply.



-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to