You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Wei_Dai comments on Steelmaning AI risk critiques - Less Wrong Discussion

26 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 23 July 2015 10:01AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (98)
Tags: steelmaning steelman ai_risk critiques ai

Comments (98)

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

Comment author: Wei_Dai 29 July 2015 12:26:59PM *  0 points [-]

From the article I linked to:

Studies indicate the technology, which uses low temperatures in the 4-10 kelvin range to enable information to be transmitted with minimal energy loss, could yield one-petaflop systems that use just 25 kW and 100 petaflop systems that operate at 200 kW, including the cryogenic cooler. Compare this to the current greenest system, the L-CSC supercomputer from the GSI Helmholtz Center, which achieved 5.27 gigaflops-per-watt on the most-recent Green500 list. If scaled linearly to an exaflop supercomputing system, it would consume about 190 megawatts (MW), still quite a bit short of DARPA targets, which range from 20MW to 67MW.

ETA: 100 petaflops per 200 kW equals 500 gigaflops per watt, so it's estimated to be about 100 times more energy efficient.

Comment author: V_V 29 July 2015 03:40:41PM *  -1 points [-]

Ok, I guess it depends on how big your computer is, due to the square-cube law. Bigger computers would be at an advantage.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit