shminux comments on For FAI: Is "Molecular Nanotechnology" putting our best foot forward? - Less Wrong

48 Post author: leplen 22 June 2013 04:44AM

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

Comments (117)

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

Comment author: pcm 25 June 2013 09:39:18PM 0 points [-]

Drexler gets the physics right. It's harder to evaluate the engineering effort needed. Eliezer's claims about how easy it would be for an FAI to build MNT go well beyond what Drexler has claimed.

I'm fairly sure I know more about MNT than Eliezer (I tried to make a career of it around 1997-2003), and I'm convinced it would take an FAI longer than Eliezer expects unless the FAI has very powerful quantum computers.

Comment author: shminux 25 June 2013 10:27:25PM *  3 points [-]

unless the FAI has very powerful quantum computers.

Why do you expect this to help? What nanotech computations would a "very powerful quantum computer" accomplish so much faster than a classical computer? Or do you mean something like an "analog" quantum computer, also known as a "quantum simulator", which solves the Schrodinger equation by simulating the Hamiltonian and its evolution, rather than the "ordinary" digital quantum computer, which speeds up numerical algorithms?

Comment author: pcm 26 June 2013 04:42:39PM 1 point [-]

Anything that makes the Schrodinger equation tractable would make me much less confident of my analysis.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 26 June 2013 04:46:10PM 5 points [-]

How did natural selection solve this problem without quantum computers or even intelligence, and why can't an AI exploit the same regularity even faster?

Comment author: pcm 26 June 2013 05:13:57PM 2 points [-]

Natural selection used trial and error. An AI would do that faster and with fewer errors.

Comment author: shminux 26 June 2013 05:20:23PM 0 points [-]

Offhand, I would expect analog quantum simulators to come before digital quantum computers, given how they are already naturally everywhere, anyway, just not in a well-controlled way. Sort of like birds were a living proof that "heavier-than-air flying machines" are possible. This year-old Nature review seems to show a number of promising directions.