= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
army1987 comments on Counterfactual resiliency test for non-causal models - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (78)
Well, Moore's law is used by the semiconductor industry as a road map, so no wonder it's that accurate. Stuff I beemind tends to have an approximately linear time variation, but that's just because if I'm above the line I slack off and if I'm below the line I concentrate on it.
It's still a wonder that they manage to hit their road map goals so consistently. If Moore's Law holds because the industry works to uphold the goal, why not set the goal to be a doubling each month, while you're at it?
Clearly there must be some limits to what is possible in theory and to what makes sense economically, and it's strange that Moore's law continues to meet both constraints year after year.
Clock frequency seems to have already leveled out, Moore's law continues to hold for transistor density.
“Limits to what is possible in theory” might be waaay looser than what actually happens, and given that they are an oligopoly it might be the case that pretty much anything reasonable would “make sense economically” if they decide so.
Which still raises the question of why this is so, when it isn't true in other industries. (I don't think the medical industry would have a cure for aging by now even if they'd decided in 1950 to make a roadmap goal of having it by 2000.)