As I tried to comment in the other thread concerning chess: it's not just about power, it's also about quality of coding. Just one fresh opening, a novel variation or line in the mid game, a bug in the code, one position falsely assessed, and all computing power in the universe will still lose that game. To generalize this to all problems seems a bit quick. PGC
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:07 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Suppose that in 1997 you had a very difficult problem to solve, so > difficult that it would take Deep Blue, the supercomputer that beat the > best human chess player in the world, 18 years to solve, what should you > do? You'd do better to let Moore's law do all the heavy lifting and leave > Deep Blue alone and sit on your hands from 1997 until just 2 minutes ago, > because that's how long it would take the 2013 supercomputer Tianhe-2 to > solve the problem. And in 20 years your wristwatch will be more powerful > than Tianhe-2. > > John K Clark > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
