I’m not too convinced by this guy’s argument: as evidence, he presents the progress made by deep learning/CNNs in the past few years. He then rightly acknowledges the difficulty of getting machines to do abstraction and reasoning, noting that we have ideas about how to approach these things but that they require much more computing power than we have now.
...Then he basically asserts that we can extrapolate the near-term availability of tons more compute power from Moore’s Law, which is where he lost me.
We’re already running into the limits of physical law in trying to move semiconductor fabrication to smaller and smaller processes, and there are very real and interesting challenges to be overcome before, I think, we can resume anything close to the exponential growth we’ve enjoyed over the last 40 years.
This guy may well think a lot about these difficulties, but not mentioning them at all made his argument sound incredibly naïve to me.
...Then he basically asserts that we can extrapolate the near-term availability of tons more compute power from Moore’s Law, which is where he lost me.
We’re already running into the limits of physical law in trying to move semiconductor fabrication to smaller and smaller processes, and there are very real and interesting challenges to be overcome before, I think, we can resume anything close to the exponential growth we’ve enjoyed over the last 40 years.
This guy may well think a lot about these difficulties, but not mentioning them at all made his argument sound incredibly naïve to me.