jacob_cannell comments on Theists are wrong; is theism? - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Will_Newsome 20 January 2011 12:18AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (533)
Tags: antitheism atheism contrarianism philosophy religion singularity

Comments (533)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: jacob_cannell 28 January 2011 04:44:16AM 1 point [-]

Thanks. Hefty read, but this one paragraph is worth quoting:

Statistical inference algorithms involve parsing large quantities of noisy (often analog) data to extract digital meaning. Statistical inference algorithms are ubiquitous and of great importance. Most of the neurons in your brain and a growing number of CPU cycles on desk-tops are spent running statistical inference algorithms to perform compression, categorization, control, optimization, prediction, planning, and learning.

I had forgot that term, statistical inference algorithms, need to remember that.

Comment author: gwern 28 January 2011 04:56:26AM *  2 points [-]

Well, there's also another quote worth quoting, and in fact the quote that is in my Mnemosyne database and which enabled me to look that thesis up so fast...

"In practice replacing digital computers with an alternative computing paradigm is a risky proposition. Alternative computing architectures, such as parallel digital computers have not tended to be commercially viable, because Moore's Law has consistently enabled conventional von Neumann architectures to render alternatives unnecessary.

Besides Moore's Law, digital computing also benefits from mature tools and expertise for optimizing performance at all levels of the system: process technology, fundamental circuits, layout and algorithms. Many engineers are simultaneously working to improve every aspect of digital technology, while alternative technologies like analog computing do not have the same kind of industry juggernaut pushing them forward."

Comment author: jacob_cannell 28 January 2011 07:29:10PM 1 point [-]

This is true in general but this particular statement appears out of date:

'Alternative computing architectures, such as parallel digital computers have not tended to be commercially viable"

That was true perhaps circa 2000, but we hit a speed/heat wall and since then everything has been going parallel.

You may see something similar happen eventually with analog computing once the market for statistical inference computation is large enough and or we approach other constraints similar to the speed/heat wall.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit