Prediction 70
Duration 50 years (02002-02052)
Predictor
Sheldon Renan
Challenger
TBA
Add your voice to a conversation with the bettors:
Bookmark this bet, and share it with friends:
Moore's Law, Gordon Moore's visionary prediction of continued exponential growth in semi-conductor performance, has provided the engine for innovation and the constantly increasing (and accelerating) power and resources at continually decreasing costs provided by techhnology. Moore admits that Moore's Law has turned out to be more accurate, longer lasting and deeper in impact than he ever imagined. In fact, it has been Intel engineers, frustrated by an inability to see clearly more than 8 to 10 years into the future of their own technology, who have been the most conservative in estimating the lifespan of Moore's Law and partyly because they have been the most conservative in defining Moore's Law. They continue to focus on increasing the transistor count on silicon as the main driver of Moore's Law and thus announce that Moore's Law may slow or even stop by the end of the next decade, as transisters approach sub-atomic sizes. Moore's Law, however, was never a physical law. It began as an observation, that became a prediction, that has now been dismissed as a "self-fulfilling prophecy". However you choose to describe it, Moore's Law has always functioned as a expression of breathtaking (almost rash) optimism and as a pacesetting mechanism informed by scientific observation, commercial competitiveness and human ingenuity that we can and should have the ability to improve our power to provide capability and opportunity for humankind, continually and exponentially thus continuing to provide better, more efficient and less costly technologies. This continued (and in fact unstoppabl) flow of increased performance, power and new value has transformed vast The world has broadened its definition of Moore's Law as our understanding of physics, materials and complexity deepens and becomes more intimate. Recently Intel suggested that an "Expanded Moore's Law" is no longer driven solely by transitor count but by the combination of three factors. The first is the traditional increasing the count of components we can put on a chip. The second is increasing the complexity of components we can put on a chip. The third is increasing the convergence of technologies we implement on a chip. Intel and its competitors continue to leverage and balance these factors as needed to continue producing the by-now-expected-and-required doubling of performance every new generation of technology. (Those who go back and read Moore's original article that appeared in the April, 1965 issue of Electronics magazine will notice that Moore always used the word components, and even today tends to talk about increasing the complexity of components, rather than focusing solely on the number of transistors on a chip.) At a certain point, you can choose to define a chip as a network all on its own, and as such subject to Metcalfe's Law. Metcalfe's Law may in fact prove to be one of the most important enablers of the continued growth of semi-conductor performance. (I use the term M (squared), Moore times Metcalfe, to represent this additional factor.) Many scientists, including those who attended a recent science summit at DARPA, believe the exponential increase in benefits defined by Moore's Law will neither cease nor slow in the foreseeable future. The source of those benefits may alter, but the value of Moore's Law has now as Moore originally hoped when he first made his famous observation begun an unstoppable expansion beyond traditional computational spaces that will eventually assure new capabilities, as well as increased performance, lower cost, and greater connectivity for vitually every traditional device and services eventually universal availability of transformatory improvements. It is Moore's Law (arguably in combination with Metcalfe's Law) which is helping us invent and extend our future. We need it to keep going. And for the reasons described above, I believe it will -- certainly for the next five decades. This is the basis and the passion behind my bet.
Sign in to challenge Sheldon Renan to a bet on this prediction!
Moore's Law, which has defined a doubling of price/performance/value produced by semi-conductors every 12 to 18 months since 1966, will continue to deliver its exponential benefits for at least another five decades, without stopping or slowing.
I'm not sure the 'bet summary' text is sufficiently clear and accurate.
First point, is that 'price' didn't come into the bet details at all. And if it had, surely prices are halving - not doubling?
Second "price / performance / value" is redundant as
"price per performance = value for money"
To nick a definition from an online dictionary ...
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=Moore%27s%20Law
The observation that the logic density of silicon integrated circuits has closely followed the curve (bits per square inch) = 2^(t - 1962) where t is time in years; that is, the amount of information storable on a given amount of silicon has roughly doubled every year since the technology was invented. This relation, first uttered in 1964 by semiconductor engineer Gordon Moore (who co-founded Intel four years later) held until the late 1970s, at which point the doubling period slowed to 18 months. The doubling period remained at that value through time of writing (late 1999).
As the limits imposed by physics are just beginning to slow the progress of this law, a knew "new" phenomenon will overtake it (which i, and perhaps others invented/discovered) which is the evolutionary power of the intention relevance quotient, a post freedom sickness era lucidity (virtue) mind set that brings evolutionary efficiency to science and to the forefront of both the news and R and D investment.
This is the International Physical Immortality Project as I first saw it about a decade ago, now shortened slightly to Mortality Resolution International.
Further, I saw/(see) children (indigos) organizing against (for) [the adults that created them to die] and by that coordination of higher intent, insert itself into the core of all goverment, business, military, religious, educational and business activities to clean it all.
1. Computer speed has been doubling every 18 months (Moore’s 1st Law), but the cost of fabrication plants (fabs) has been doubling every 3 years (Moore’s 2nd Law). The accelerating cost of fabs comes from miniaturization itself, so just as Moore’s 1st law continues across different computational methods, so will Moore’s 2nd law. We can see this by looking at the astronomical expense of the extreme UV technology the industry is developing now or at the difficulty in purifying nanotubes.
2. Most computers are used for fairly mundane tasks like e-mail, internet surfing and word processing. These markets are saturated and have no need for more computer speed. The remaining applications that need more speed are dwindling. Even supercomputing is sacrificing speed for efficiency.
3. The combination of points 1 and 2 mean that sometime in the next 3 years, it will cost more to make a chip than you can sell it for and Moore’s Law ends. In fact Moore's Law may have already ended, the semiconductor industry just doesn't want to admit it.
This is not sooth-saying. If you look at Intel over the past 20 years, every generation of chip has resulted in a lower return on investment. That is why I am confident it ends in 3 years because it is absolutely predictable from current trends in the industry. If Rome ended, so will Moore.
I'd argue that Moore's law, as least as applied to Intel, has failed already. The new pentium 4 chips do not run our benchmarks proportionally faster than the pentium 3's did, in other words, a p4-1.4ghz recently took 8 seconds to run a benchmark that a p3-800 takes 10 seconds to run. If it had scaled, it would have been more like 5-6 seconds. For anyone interested, the benchmark in question was written by us to be totally compute bound (not memory acess bound, which is another problem with Intel platform lately) and finds all the prime numbers less than some limit you type in. I'd disagree with the post that says there is no use for more speed in computing. Quantity has a quality all its own and new things become possible or practical. No one thought about doing audio processing on the original IBM PC, for instance, and no one wrote code to do it. Now that is a big business to name just one trivial example.
"I'd disagree with the post that says there is no use for more speed in computing. Quantity has a quality all its own and new things become possible or practical."
Or to put it another way "Applications expand to require the available processing power". There's one I expect to remain true for longer than Moore's law has ^^
Computer performance won't continue to track Moore's law for more than
a decade.
The first reason is economic: commodity processors are already
sufficient for most end-user applications and will become fast enough
for the vast majority of consumers, even allowing for a great deal of
software bloat, within a decade. Although scientific applications will
always demand more power, they alone will not be enough to drive
progress. This trend is already evident in the decline of
supercomputers.
Projecting Moore's law out 5 decades suggests that processors will get
8 billion times faster. This is simply beyond the range of physical
plausibility for several reasons. The most unavoidable is power
consumption. It is impossible, I claim, to ever build a switching
device that operates reliably while switching less than a several tens
of electrons per cycle, and thus consuming less than several
attojoules per operation. A hypothetical processor 8 billion times
faster than today's and requiring at least thousands of switches per
operation would thus require a million or more watts of power, so that
no consumer could afford to run one.
The mere fact of Moore's law having held for the last 3-4 decades is
not sufficient to project it ahead for more than a decade. The market
for computers has also risen exponentially during that time, but will
soon approach an asymptote as the consumer market is saturated. It's
yet another example of exponential growth during the infancy of a
technology, eventually levelling out as various technological limits
and economic are approached.
Computer technology is approaching maturity. To define what I mean by
maturity, let me make an analogy to another mature industry. I claim
that 2000 in the computer & communications industry will be roughly
equivalent to 1970 in the aerospace industry. Recall that in 1970, the
Boeing 747 was the premiere passenger airplane, the SR-71 was the
fastest aircraft, and we could land men on the moon. The great leaps
the industry had made in the last few decades were not to be repeated;
thus we still fly in 747s, the SR-71 still holds the speed record, and
we have not gotten men any farther than the moon.
Notwithstanding Norstramus' (sp?) alleged prophetic insight (and, of course, biblical believes), no rational prediction on any human/societal behavior/pattern has held out for 50 years. We simply lack the rational tool to predict anything about such complex systems. So this bet is, IMO, completely irrational -- it means nothing even if it turns out to be true. Well, except the money part.
But I guess it's just a bet.
More to the topic. I'd be very surprised if state-of-the-art computing technology is based on any "chip" as we know it, or even binary logic at all, in 50 yrs. (Mass commercialization depends on many factors and is of much less rational dynamics overall, thus harder to predict.) The combination of molecular computing, quantum computing, and nano-technology will likely have demolished the current paradigm. Life-like AI, i.e., passing Turin test, is quite possible.
The fundamental barrier for realizing AI is not hardware or software as we know it. It's the underlying math -- Boolean logic. Reliable and precise, yet intrinsically incapable of learning -- simply because 100% reliability and precision are contradictory to the human (or biological intelligence) concept and process of "learning".
If we shift the computing platform to molecules or other miscroscopic entities, however, there's an instrinsic degree of uncertainty. This could be as fundamental as Heisenburg's Principle, or as technical as the impracticality of precise control at macromolecular scale. The only way "quantum/melecular computing+nano-technology" could work is like this: we design the nano-circuits and manufacture massive number of those circuit boards, with <100% correctness, pour them into a media such that they will have a TENDENCY (not 100%) to form larger scale, pre-designed patterns. In a way, this is quite similar to the chemical process of making polymers.
Imagine this chunk of jelly-like bio-rubber.
Of course, you can't connect anything precisely to any particular "partical". You can, however, have certain regions of this chunk to perform a certain function, say, pattern recognition, memory, logical processing.
Solder on two webcams, two microphones, a speaker. You get the idea.
Other interesting sutff, like persperation and sexual drive, can be added later on.
To argue Nostradamus's rantings in support of this issue is not a way to win an argument. Nobody can prove or disprove Nostradamus, just like nobody can prove God.
Most of this discussion seems to follow the premise that computers in future decades will utilize existing technology. However, there are a number of theoretical technologies that may well make an unforseeable impact on the future computing speed- advances such as quantum computers or computer chips built of individual molecules.
Theoretically in 10 years someone might build a computer that's a billion times faster than anything that exists today, destroying the need to build anything faster for decades. If we made such a jump but didn't improve upon it for 50 years, would that satisfy the conditions of the bet?
"[...] a computer that's a billion times faster than anything that exists today, destroying the need to build anything faster for decades. If we made such a jump but didn't improve upon it for 50 years, would that satisfy the conditions of the bet?"
I think that's relatively unlikely, particularly the second part. I can imagine a computer a 'billion times faster', but not a period of 50 years with no 'improvements'. The guys at marketing would never stand for it.
"Is your sim universe sluggish? Need to fine tune your back-up personality matrix - but you're just a googleplex short of memory? You need new, improved, ultimate quantum computer plus!"
Now as to your question, I would tend to think that a graph would be clearly different from exponential (in the initial jump, and the 50 year flat zone) so I would tend to say it counts as 'Moore's Law broken' even if for all that period it was above the power that computers would have reached based on extrapolation from current value via '12 to 18 months doubling'.
This bet specifically says that Moore's Law:
"will continue to deliver its exponential benefits for at least another five decades, without stopping or slowing"
*If* we take this literally, then it becomes important to qualify the word "benefits".
In general circumstances, would one say that Moore's Law had been fulfilled, or not, if faster processors were produced . . . but only in the lab, and not sold commercially? Or sold commercially, but only in very small numbers, for very specialized applications?
If "benefit" is the issue, then the question becomes one of to *whom* the development of faster processors is beneficial.
Most people I know who talk about Moore's Law mean it to apply to personal computers in general. In other words, they mean a regular progression in computational power in something like one of these two things:
(1) the fastest chip used in a machine that's sold as a household or typical desktop PC; or
(2) the most common chip used in such machines.
So if the top-of-the-line machine a homeowner can get from Dell has an Athlon or Pentium III, then that would be the chip in question -- the chip vital to the notion wrapped up in this bet.
If so, then I'd say that Moore's Law has already failed.
I know and regularly communicate with literally hundreds of PC users, many of whom -- being PC users -- talk about the hardware of their machines from time to time. It has literally been years since I can remember anyone -- *anyone* -- complaining that they needed a faster processor.
I certainly don't. I've had the same AMD K6 400mhz processor for years, and it's still more than fast enough for everything I use my computer for, including the manipulation of large JPEG files. I know a few people who regularly manipulate large video files, including two people who teach university classes on multimedia, and neither of them say they need faster processors than the Pentium III's they have.
Even the people I know who are professionals in the computer gaming industry don't have any real interest in new PC processors. They're interested in memory and video enhancements, bandwidth, and peripherals.
These days, people talk about bandwidth, disk-burning speed, storage space. From the early 80's until maybe 1998, it was mostly about processor speed. But there hasn't been any new "killer app" that's made faster and faster processor speed really *beneficial*, lately.
I'd say we need a (dreaded word that it is) paradigmatic shift before processing power becomes a focus again -- a new killer app, a shift to a different kind of operating system or different kind of hardware. The trouble is that such a shift might also change the focus from more power to better efficiency (some analysts think this particular shift is already occurring), or low cost, etc.
And so, I'd say, Moore's Law has already failed us, if we're talking about exponential benefits. It was probably dead and cold two years ago.
This quote is from a Tribune Media Services piece, an interview in the LA Times, Alex Pham interviewing Hector de Jesus Ruiz, the new head of AMD. The release date was October 1, 2002.
Ruiz stressed processor backward compatibility, flash memory, and connectivity as being important for the foreseeable future. He said:
"I think Moore's law (that the cost of computing power falls steadily over time) is irrelevant. I don't think it's applicable anymore. What's applicable is Metcalf's law (which says the utility of a device increases exponentially with the number of other devices connected to it)."
I'd imagine the parenthetical bits were added by the news people, and not Ruiz.
I had just bought my spiffy new computer. Every few years I buy a new one and I think it has everything I will ever need. (My last one had 'voice recognition', which I never really used.) I was feeling pretty confident that my video card would be up to whatever graphics I threw at it.
Then I saw an article about a new device, for a triffling $45,000 I could add a three dimensional snow-globe-like device to my computer that would let my computer project
3-D images in the thing. Not being a computer scientist I wondered how much more RAM that would take to run.
I know some algorhythm will handle a lot of the load, but still, it has to be immense. Of course there are 3-D medical 'printers' that use polymers and lasers to create three dimensional pieces used in surgery as well.
Then you get into what sci-fi writers imagine. Take the Star Trek holo decks as an idea I'm not talking about solid holograms, just projected images around you. How much computing power will that take? What if you want the characters to interact like real people? What if you want to add biofeedback to the whole thing? I don't know.
My father, a programmer, once showed my a pixel picture of Hop-Along Cassidy. He said it was amazing what technology could do, but he also said there was a limit to how far it could go. Things could only get so small, you would only get so much resolution. I don't think he's the sort who has seen Lara Croft, but he's watched Schrek with the grandkids. I don't know, I just find it hard to believe that creative people won't keep pushing for more and more speed and memory. As for whether the technology will actually be there, I'm not sure, but when I look at Lara Croft I sort of suspect it will.
The PC I'm using now is one I bought four years ago for less than $600. It cost me less than a comparable system because I bought the parts and put it together myself, and I re-used a monitor I already had. The components I used mostly weren't quite cutting-edge at the time.
That PC still exceeds my needs. I no longer play current games on my PC, and I don't manipulate video. And my machine is faster than I need it to be and has more storage than I strictly need. I'd like a flat-screen monitor, and may get one, but otherwise I don't see any upgrades in the next year.
The point, I think, is that "demand" is a market concept rather than an objective state. When I played the latest games on my PC, I needed some kind of upgrade about every three months.
As for "what sci-fi writers imagine", you have to keep some things in mind. Frex, not all SF writers have similar visions of the future, and very few of them are really trying hard to come up with realistic futures.
For most, the plot drives the setting. In other words, if a Holodeck is handy for the story you want to tell, then you put a Holodeck in your future, whether it's realistic at all or not. Personally, I don't expect that kind of display any time soon; I think there will be much easier solutions to the same desire for an immersive interface.
It's true that creative people will keep pushing the technology, but I think the technology will move in strange ways. For one thing, I think it's very likely that new processor technologies will soon largely replace the silicon transistor systems now in use. If that happens soon, then Moore's Law may stay happy. If it happens a little later, then the Law may stagnate for a bit.
The point, I think, is that "demand" is a market concept rather than an objective state. When I played the latest games on my PC, I needed some kind of upgrade about every three months.
It works like this.
Hardware 'demanded' is that required to run the latest software (and a tad more).
Software 'advances' are those that require (just under) the latest hardware.
Thus the "snake that eats itself" continues along its merry way.
By not using the latest software / hardware you are 'Un-American', a threat to the forces of consumerism, and the M$ thought police will be calling soon.
Well, that's just the thing, and it's part and parcel of the issue of the 'new killer app'.
In recent years, the industry has wanted people to believe that manipulating video is the new killer app . . . but that's more because it requires lots of hardware upgrades than because of any actual popular demand.
This is the whole problem in a nutshell: The actual, useful programs I use -- web browsers and word processors and PIMs -- used to be developing progressively. They were really getting better -- more useful -- and I needed hardware upgrades to run the new, improved versions.
But the PIM I use now, the overall best PIM I've ever seen, is ten years old. The browser I use hasn't been changed much in years and would run fine on an even older machine than the one I have.
And the main word processor I use, an MS product, is actually substantially less useful than prior versions. I personally think it peaked about three major versions ago, and it's been going downhill ever since. These days, I'm slowly switching to a freeware word processor that's a lot more useful.
For games, I have consoles, dedicated machines that easily outclass any PC I've ever owned for reliability, ease of use, and overall satisfaction -- not to mention price/performance.
I don't see any real killer app coming along until we have really useful 'agents', semi-autonomous software that (A) adapts itself to what the user says he or she wants and (B) can figure out how to perform many tasks on its own.
Agents have been 'coming real soon' for almost ten years now, but the AI and interoperability still aren't quite there. I think it'll be another five to ten years, but the time required depends, in large part, on the computing environment(s) that are most popular. I think a greater move to open-source would probably help.
Good agents would very likely require lots of processor power and memory. That's the next real killer app that I see altering the playing field for PCs.
It's entirely possible, of course, that there are other things coming that I haven't seen or have overlooked, but that's how it looks from here.
The era of 'kill apps' _may_ have ended, but pressure to upgrade continues.
First, there is the 'licensing pressure'. If you are a company in the 'XP Zone' you don't really have much choice about upgrading because you probably have your software on a subscription basis.
Secondly there is the 'foot in the door' effect. Companies cease supporting old software and as soon as you have to change your computer / add other modern software / upgrade the OS etc., there is every chance incompatibilities will turn up with your 'old faithful' SW. E.g. Maybe your printer dies, and you find all the printers available need USB and Windows XP. We may not be there yet, but it's getting that way.
Secondly there is 'peer pressure'. It's not enough to be able to do stuff _you_ need to do, there will be pressure to be able to open recent files from other people, and to send files in a format easy for other people to use.
Finally, one person's "feature" is another person's "necessity". I'm seriously considering upgrading to Windows XP, not because I think it's a brilliant system, but because it handles Japanese characters in file-names, and because it's difficult & expensive to get hold of Japanese Windows 98. I doubt that one Westerner in 1000 is bothered by _that_ feature, but for a much greater percentage there will be _something_ to tempt them into the fold.
Even if none of these apply to you personally, they apply to enough people that the upgrade SW / upgrade HW cycle will continue, all be it probably at a reduced rate.
I don't know that the era of killer apps has ended, but I think we're in a serious downturn, there. I do agree that there's still some pressure for consumers to upgrade, but I think that, because of the lack of killer apps, that pressure is fairly minimal at the moment.
Corporate upgrade cycles do continue. They're often pretty dumb, but IT has never really come up with a good way to manage information services for large companies. They have tools and techniques, yes, but I don't know anyone who doesn't think there's a ridiculous amount of waste involved. That's not the IT people's fault, though; it's the result of a paradigm change (the computerized office) still in search of a good paradigm.
The "foot in the door" syndrome you describe is also absolutely real . . . but these days I find it's backfiring a lot. I know a lot more people who refuse to upgrade much because of the lack of backward compatibility than people who upgrade because the things they want don't work with the hardware and software they have.
A hell of a lot of people I know, frex, refuse to upgrade past Windows 98 because they've been burned by MS too often before. And I know a lot of people who use Netscape 4 because they don't trust the newer versions.
It seems to me, too, that a lot of people have this feeling that something big is going to come along soon and make a lot of what's hot-and-new now obsolete in a hurry, and they're reluctant to move forward until this new thing -- whatever it is -- appears. I think that this attitude comes from a lack of substantial revolution in the industry of late. Stagnation or not, there's always plenty of hype, but after a while a lot of consumers become wary.
I haven't seen any "peer pressure" issues lately, although I am trying to think of a good recent example. Backward compatibility hasn't been that bad.
As for the feature / necessity issue, I'd never dream of arguing against that point, but feature churn is so vicious in the software industry that, again, I know at least as many people who are sticking with older software because the newer software doesn't have the same features (or doesn't handle them as well -- keyboard support, say).
So while there certainly are reasons why people will keep upgrading, the overall rate of upgrade-fever seems to have dropped off a good deal, and I don't think it's too mysterious. I do think the PC heyday of the late-80's and 90's was a bubble, where even companies that really didn't know what they were doing were able to do well because the market was unrealistically strong.
Now and in recent years, those companies have had to try harder to make their products relevant . . . and it's turned out that many of them just aren't that good at it after all. Which, again, really isn't so surprising.
I can't even get the SIMS to do everthing I want. If I load in too many extra objects it crashes. I think more and more power will be needed for artists as they expand into digital art. Compared with how quickly I can view things on SIMS when I build a house most home architecture programs are lagging, (although the have many much more sophisticated features SIMS doesn't). The government is currently digitizing national landmarks in case of another terrorist attack. I still think the search for AI and larger, more realistic representations of real world objects and phenomina will drive Moore's law on, at least from the demand point of view.
Games have traditionally been the major class of killer apps for home users, so your choice of The Sims is quite apt. I have no idea if PC processing power demand will continue to be vigorously game-driven in the future.
My personal experience with home architecture programs suggests that they're extremely buggy; it may not be fair to blame the processor, although processors are often called to make up for slow code.
Government projects and high-end research strike me as sufficiently specialized that they probably don't affect Moore's Law directly.
While I agree with the technological possibility of this phenomena, I do not believe that the economics to drive it exist. I believe that there is a certain amount of functionality that people are capable of integrating into their lives, and, when combined with a pricepoint (say $99 in the US) that they are willing to pay for a gadget, will force a plateau in consumer demand for increased functionality. The slowdown in PC and cellphone replacement are an early sign that we are nearing this plateau. Distributed functionality of lower order will be the driver of the future.
Although advances in Quantam computing may well offer huge speed advances it cannot be directly compared to Silicon computing, they are different paradigms. Anyway, Moore was talking about semiconductors.
Second point, if Moores law is to continue then by 2030 a computer chip will be equivalent to a small nuclear plant. This is clearly not going to happen.
A very cogent argument can be made that Moore's law, if one rigorously defines it, slipped into the good night some time ago. Pardon the (gasp!) blasephemy, but Moore's law is really more of a testement to the power of MARKETING than it is to ENGINEERING.
The most cogent discussion I've come across on the subject can be found here: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/
Here is the abstract:
The Lives and Death of Moore's Law by Ilkka Tuomi
"Moore's Law has been an important benchmark for developments in microelectronics and information processing for over three decades. During this time, its applications and interpretations have proliferated and expanded, often far beyond the validity of the original assumptions made by Moore. Technical considerations of optimal chip manufacturing costs have been expanded to processor performance, economics of computing, and social development. It is therefore useful to review the various interpretations of Moore's Law and empirical evidence that could support them.
Such an analysis reveals that semiconductor technology has evolved during the last four decades under very special economic conditions. In particular, the rapid development of microelectronics implies that economic and social demand has played a limited role in this industry. Contrary to popular claims, it appears that the common versions of Moore's Law have not been valid during the last decades. As semiconductors are becoming important in economy and society, Moore's Law is now becoming an increasingly misleading predictor of future developments."
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/
Moore's Law has no real foundation in physical or social theory - it is simply an observation of what is happening in the evolution of microcomputers (boy, did I just reveal my age there).
That being said, it's entirely probable that Moore's Law will remain intact ON AVERAGE over the 21st century, because we have so many potential alternatives to packing the transistors and traces closer together on a silicon or gallium arsenide chip that we've not begun to use yet:
- biological computers
- nanomechanical computer components - certainly you could make the ultimate in static RAM that way
- quantum devices - there are hints that it may be possible to get tremendous performance out of devices that use quantum nonlocality mechanisms
- optical logic devices
- superconducting components (although size might be a problem THERE for years to come, owing to field collapse issues in densely packed superconductors)
I remember being convinced in the late 1980s that the technical problems the industry was having in reducing die size would halt the progress of Moore's Law at about the 60 MHz Pentium level.
Of course, I made the mistake of believing industry experts, who in general are experts in what CAN'T be done - the same sort of people who in the 1950s were saying that the worldwide demand for computers would top out at five, maybe ten units. I've got more than five computers in my kitchen, if you count the controller chips in my microwave oven, electric range, refrigerator, cordless phone and the laptop I'm writing this on right now.
To sum up, over the next century, Moore Law will be borne out (at least) on the average, but there will be periods, perhaps as long as a decade, where it will stall out from lack of the needed technical advances or simply lack of demand (hence, economic feasibility). Even now, seriously, how many of you reading this NEED a personal computer that runs at 4 gigahertz? I get along pretty well with my 150 MHz Pentium laptop.
I think that games, entertainment and other cultural applications (like the US government digitizing our landmarks in case someone pulls another 9/11) will drive Moore's Law - as far as the economy and computer technology will allow.
My point - I'd love to have enough processing capability and storage to do a number of things I can't do right now - like digitizing every book and recording I own onto a single hard drive or other digital storage medium - 160 Gb ought to do it - for portability and as a means of archival - but I can't afford to. Lots of people worldwide are in the same boat.
For Moore's Law to continue as it has since the 1980s, the world would have to have the same economic dynamics it has between say, 1982 and 1999. If not, no one will be able to buy those 8 GHz processors Moore's Law predicts we'll have in mid-2005. Certainly, most of us won't have the leisure time to play games that NEED that much throughput.
In the best of all possible worlds, there will be an economic slowdown every two to four years. Or we could repeat the mistake we made all through the 1990s and make debt so cheap that it triggers a boom in investment, Dutch Tulip Mania sets in at the stock market as stocks begin to sell for much more than their actual value - and we have a two-to-four year recession when the house of cards falls apart - as it must when such an imbalance exists. Was anyone seriously expecting the post-1994 boom to last much past 2000?
People old enough to remember life before VCRs can tell you that buying one when they became affordable in the early '80s was apt to draw a knowing chuckle from the clerk, maybe one's friends... because so many people were buying the things to watch adult movies on.
Of course many of us were doing nothing of the kind, we were just recording programs so we could watch them at our leisure. Then video stores began renting REGULAR movies for home viewing - but the public perception - reinforced by wisecracks in TV situation comedies - was "VCR=porno." And the less said about camcorders, the better.
VGA displays on computers may have been driven by the same imperative - the better to see Danni's Hard Drive on.
The Internet - do I even have to talk about that?
If Moore's Law is to survive, new and innovative methods of using computers as erotica delivery devices must be created.* Virtual Reality is one possibility, because VR sure hogs bandwidth throughout a computer system.
The mechanics of VRing an intimate encounter (what Nicholas Negroponte of the MIT Media Lab called "dildonics") are already being explored. Since this is presumably a "G" rated site, I won't elaborate except to say that if Intel has the horses, the smut industry has the courses.
Of course, we could all grow up this century and settle for normal sex lives... in which case, sell your Intel stock, people!
*just a joke, folks. I don't really advocate smut - but it wouldn't surprise me to learn ten years from now that not only can marriages be performed online (as they now can in Russia) but consummated that way as well. Would that be grounds for an annulment?
I personally use a 150 MHz Pentium laptop given to me by one of my sons. I use Windows 95 as an OS, and almost all of my applications were written specifically to work and play well with Win 95.
Windows 95 came with the system, but I decided that even an upgrade to Win 98 would be more than my system could handle, so I downloaded every service pack and system upgrade made for Win 95 and made my system as bulletproof as possible.
Result? I'm using that laptop to write this post, and to do all of my other Internet-related activities. Word2000 also came with the system and runs perfectly, as do all the other apps I run routinely.
Lee Felsenstein, the guy who designed the Osborne I computer, was very concerned in the '70s and '80s about people being able to do what I and others in this discussion board, and probably a few million others are doing - improvising, using cast-off computer gear from businesses and compulsive upgraders to live outside the mainstream. I think that we've taken care of that issue. :-)
Moores's law can not continue to hold for the forseeable furture, this is due to Quantum mechanics. As transistors on chips become smaller and smaller they will enter the regime of Quantum mechanics. This will mean that quantum phenomenom will come into play and if the tranistors are still being designed with only classical physical laws in mind they will simply not work or work in a way that is unpredictable. The only way to procede is to design the chips with quantum mechanics in mind. This by definition is quantum computing.
Quantum computing is being studied by many groups around the world and has many techincal and theoretical problems to overcome. If we finally succed in building a quantum computer (some say this will never happen) then the technical aspects of quantum mechanics will mean that for n qubits (the quantum bit of information) the computer will be able to carry out 2^n calculations simultaniosly.
So if quantum computers can not be built then Moore's law can not hold for much longer than the next 20 years at the maximum as the scale of the transistors will enter the quantum regime. If we can build quantum computers (which if it is not fundermentaly impossible should be done within the 50 years of this bet) Moore's law will be broken as the progress will no longer to exponential but will follow a power law.
Moore's law will be good until computers use optical based transistors and, I hope, it'll be soon.
Note the bet states "without stopping or slowing down". All it takes is a shift in corporate focus or funding for the microchip acceleration curve to "slow down" temporarily. I'd be so bold as to say it already happened, but such a minor blip was ignored.
But more to the spirit of the orginal bet, it's highly unlikely that the next 50 years of CPU development will look anything like the first 50. If any other industry gives any indication, the point of economic diminishing returns decreases the human desire to keep pushing the curve. Some other measure will simply become more important, and it will likely be tied to energy efficiency as the global impact of the "electronic lifestyle" continues to strain the electrical grid.
Yes! It will! I have seen the future and by 2020, computer processing speeds will indeed be several orders of magnitude greater than today. Desktop equivalent, Terra-Flop machines, injectable into the blood stream or elsewhere for direct human brain interface, made of carbon conductors in protoplasmic containers. Imagine the high and the glory of Wikipedia information delivered in almost real time right to your thought centers for incorporation into your acceptance speech at the republicrat national convention in 2024 ...
Anyone who bets against you on this one, IMHO, is nuts.
The rate of scientific progress is not only being maintained, but accelerating, and computers are where a large portion of our brighest minds choose to spend their lives, so I think the only way this one could not come true is if we stopped caring about making better computers because we ran out of things to calculate, and if you've ever spent time around nerds you'd know that's not bloody likely.
In retrospect, Moore's Law has relied on dimensions shrinking every 18months/2 years to achieve this cost/value curve. This has been driven by consistent improvements of optical lithography the semiconductor printing technology. The easy (or at least relatively easy) ride is now over. Printing technology is right at the limits of the theoretical limits of feature size for a given wavelength. This means a switch to techniques such as double patterning where denser patterns can be achieved by interleaving two such coarser pitch structures - here the processing costs per layer double; or switching to new relatively immature non optical technologies - Extreme UV (really soft X rays), Direct Write by Electron Beam or Nano-Imprinting. While eventually any of these technologies may bear fruit, it seems certain that either cost/value or the rate at which it has been improving in the past is set for an adjustment.
They already have 3-D printers. They are talking about home models hitting stores in the next couple years. Digitize something, send it. They really can already do this in the business world. (Of course, it's just a copy.) Wired Magazine had an article on printable batteries. As for moving the real thing, IBM can 'Teleport' molecules at this point. The original molecule stays where it was, but the molecule on the other side of the room gains bedroom furniture the quantum state of the original (whose quantum state is disrupted in the proccess), making the target molecule more 'original' than the original.
water pumps for your home , find water pumps,auto water pumps. A jet pump is a type of impeller-diffuser pump.
OEM Manufacturer of switching power supply,Switching Power Supply Design Thermocouple wire,laptop power inverter,power inverter walmart, temperature sensor manufacturer.
The china auto parts manufacturers,sourcing china auto parts manufacturers
punch press, turret punch press, punch press operator
wow gold, information of wow gold, cheap wow gold at wowgold-shopping.com.
Filling Machine manufacturer， filling machine supplier, cheap filing machine in China. sheet metal fabrication firm is specialized
in precision sheet metal fabrication. The laminate flooring guide the laminate flooring you can find, good aminate flooring for our customers.
hand, hydraulic crimping tool and other kinds hole digger, one products of Our factory has all kinds of hydraulic tools.
wholesale jewelry , supply vast kinds of styles handmade jewelry,mainly engage in handmade jewelry wholesale handmade jewelry,such as wholesale pearl wholesale crystalwholesale gemstone,wholesale costume jewelry,also wholesale fashion jewelry like wholesale swarovski crystal,wholesale beads,wholesaleturquoise,wholesale coral,wholesale costume jewelry ,shell jewelrycostume jewelry and discount jewelry, jewelry wholesale, just on AYpearl jewelry store.
Moore's Law shows no sign of slowing down. If anything, the specs for the latest super-computers indicate that it's increasing faster than ever. I'm simply astonished by those who say there's "no need" for chip speeds to improve. Take the games industry, for example, which is now easily as popular as cinema and continues to grow - driven in large part by the demand for better, more powerful, more realistic graphics, physics and visual effects.
Other factors driving Moore's Law include the need for scientists to construct larger, more accurate simulations, e.g. climate patterns, weather, astronomy and countless other processes.
Over the coming decades there will be demand from a whole host of other applications including VR, AI, nanotech, real-time MRI brain scanning, quantum physics and so on. I repeat: it's simply astonishing that anyone could suggest there's "no need" for faster computers. They are central to the development of humanity's future.
People keep talking about More Than Download Downloadic not handling crashes or rether evoding them Download software, freeware, shareware. Look at it this way. There is a set number of ways a pilot can move the airplane ( rudder, flaps etc. ) And we know what the controls will do. i see Human Health that this info could not be put in a computer and in the case of a mishap it could go threw all its opions.
Thanks for your useful info, I think it’s a good topic. So would you like the info about the Air jordan shoes
Tiffany Jewelry
ugg Gypsy
wholesale electronics
Cardy ugg boots
Michael jordan shoes
Classic tall ugg boots
UGG Slippers
Classic short ugg boots
gucci shoes
prada shoes
dior shoes
Gucci Classics handbag
Gucci Cruise handbag
Gucci Fall Winter handbag
Gucci Bags
Gucci Wallet
Other factors driving Moore's Law include the need for scientists to construct larger, more accurate simulations, e.g. climate patterns, weather, astronomy and countless other processes. film izlenetlogsohbetchattoplistcanlı sohbet
Just, between the level area in the chi hair tools mountains, evenly increased an orphaned grave, what lies down was once promised that this life was my bride originally “the cheap ugg boots sister-in-law”, then became my lover the chi flat irons girl. long past events like buy ugg boots passing scene, world this world, only my heart like zhi water, what is chi hair straightener invariable has loved that section of sentiments.
The pace of progress of Iraqi oil production is likely to be disappointing.
If the market comes to believe that Iraq has an additional 25% of the world's oil production and can extract it at $2/barrel, then the price of oil will likely not be $100, but much lower. Lastly, the effect of economic growth of currency is complicated and the large swing in value that is predicted, absent an artificial peg, is unlikely.sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
canlı sohbet
canlı sohbet
liseli kızlar
okey oyna
okey
okey indir
okey oyna
kızlar
sohbet siteleri
Okey Oyna
kızlar
okey oyna
film izle
Okey Oyna
fotoğraf
foto
manzara
fotoğrafçılık
siyah beyaz
The pace of progress of Iraqi oil production is likely to be disappointing.
If the market comes to believe that Iraq has an additional 25% of the world's oil production and can extract it at $2/barrel, then the price of oil will likely not be $100, but much lower. Lastly, the effect of economic growth of currency is complicated and the large swing in value that is predicted, absent an artificial peg, is unlikely.sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
canlı sohbet
canlı sohbet
liseli kızlar
okey oyna
okey
okey indir
okey oyna
kızlar
sohbet siteleri
Okey Oyna
kızlar
okey oyna
film izle
Okey Oyna
fotoğraf
foto
manzara
fotoğrafçılık
siyah beyaz
اراضي للبيع - ايجار فلل - خرائط بنايات - بنايات - بنايات للبيع - بيع اراضي - بيع شقق - بيع عقارات - بيوت الأردن - بيوت بالتقسيط - بيوت جاهزة - بيوت جدة - بيوت شقق - بيوت للبيع - تاجير منازل - تصاميم - تصاميم بيوت - تصاميم جاهزة - تصاميم شقق - تصاميم فلل - تصاميم هندسية - تصاميم هندسية - تصاميم و واجهات - تصميم اراضي - تصميم خرائط - تصميم شقة - تصميم شقق - تصميم فلل - تصميم مباني - تصميم ممتلكات - تمليك بيوت - تمليك شقق - تمليك فلل -
Adobe Photoshop
Windows XP
Microsoft Office
Metallic UGG Boots
Mini UGG Boots
ugg boots
Nike SB
Cheap Jordan shoes
I must say all these materials are very helpful for writing academic papers and sample papers as well.
For people who are ready for outing in the summer, sunglasses are always the must-have accessory.
buy prescription sunglasses from glassesshop.com
all men and women like prescription sunglass
choose discount prescription sunglasses with good service
prescription sport sunglasses can protect you when doing sports
Where to buy prescription sunglasses?
Online prescription sunglasses store.
Best services and quality-prescription sunglasses uk
Online prescription sunglass store
Online designer prescription sunglasses
cheap eyeglasses online
cheap prescription glasses
eyeglass frames
glasses
glasses frame
glasses frames
rimless eyeglass frames
eyeglasses for kids
flexible eyeglasses
metal eyeglasses
Tiffany Jewellery is the best online United Kingdom jewelry stores where you can buy the cheapest Tiffany & Co silver jewelry. Our huge selection of Tiffany
Tiffany
Tiffany Bracelet
provides the best Tiffany & Co jewelry, including Necklaces, Pendants, Bracelets, Earrings, Rings at the lowest prices,
Tiffany Earring
Tiffany Necklace
Tiffany Rings
links of london
iPhone and others cell phoen accessories oem china keypads I believe Dave is vital to my college success thus far the nokia covers are now accepting entries for the second annual cell phone keypads. The heat recognizes college journalists cell phone covers reporting in their college print, television or online,radio, so onNokia Cell Phone Nokia 6085 Case, Cables, Nokia cell phone housing Buy Nokia cell phone accessories like Nokia batteries, cases, faceplates more at discounted prices only at Wireless nokia keypads the #1lg keypads phone nokia nokia faceplates college journalists which demonstrate outstanding samsung keypads reporting in their college print, television or online,radio, Sony Ericsson keypads supportive adviser I have had. oem china keypads Because he cares Sony Ericsson covers Give your phone different varieties of styles and motorola keypads. our cell phone keypads are easy to install and won’t take up too samsung covers of your time. Choose motorola covers from the range of mobile buttons and keypads afforded on our site.lg covers are certain you will certainly find something suiting your needs and taste. We say with confidence keypads a
However these companies still have a monopoly in the telephone marketplace which generates 100 billion dollars annually. Remember that the highest penetration of any communication service in U.S. households is the plain 'ol phone. They could not invest another red cent in indir
full oyun
indir
sikiş izle
any future services and still be fine. Until emergency 911, universal lifeline, owning the "last mile" and quality are not factors they will monopalize. They would have to blow themselves up for you to win this bet.
Media outlets didn't sensationalize the story? In the United States it was on most channels constantly even though there had been less than 20 confirmed deaths or cases, and details were never given whether or not there were other factors involved. This story was as sensationalized as you could get, given the fact that there are more deaths in this country due to our open Southwestern borders on a monthly basis than there was due to he swine flu. And I guess unless you lived on a U.S. border in a border state you would have absolutely no concept of what is actually going on there. And they do quarantine animals in England for over 12 months in order to protect the animal populations there. What a spin. Do you happen to work for the mainstream media?see online :
توبيكات
العاب
يوتيوب
مركز تحميل
المبدعين
Due to the grooves being cut into microchips at an atomic level, there is not much more that can be done with this technique. So I don't think it will hold true, even if another technique can be developed it will lag behind in the early stages. Rob
Tüm insanlar çalışma saatlerinden dolayı televizyon kanallarında yayınlanan dizileri izleyememektedir. Fakat bunun çaresi yok değil.
bilgisayarınız başına kurulun ve dizi-sitesi.com adresine girerek, günün dizilerini kesintisiz ve reklamsız olarak izleyebilirsiniz.
Tabii biz erkekler olarak diziler arasında ortalığı kasıp kavuran kurtlar vadisi pusu'yu bu site de 1. bölümden itabaren son bölüme kadar tüm bölümlerini HD kalitesinde izleyebilme imkanınıza sahip oluyoruz.
Gelelim bayanlara, bayanlarda aşk-ı memnu adlı dizinin tüm bölümlerini kesintisiz olarak izleyebilirler. Ama bayanlar mümkünse 3 kişi izlemesin :)
Neden bayanlar 3 kişi izlemesin dedik ?
dizi hakkında dedikodu yapmaktan dizi izleyemiyorlar da ondan :D
sundance II ugg boots nightfall ugg boots ultra short ugg boots classic mini ugg boots
ugg classic tall boots ugg classic short boots ugg classic mini boots ugg ultra tall boots ugg ultra short boots ugg classic cardy boots ugg classic tall metallic ugg sundance II boots ugg nightfall boots
tiffany jewellery tiffany silver tiffany tiffany jewelry
jordan shoes nike shoes wholesale jordan shoes wholesale nike shoes
jordan shoes
basketball shoes
jordan shoes air jordan shoes air jordan cheap jordan shoes jordans shoes cheap jordans, cheap air jordans nike air jordan shoes cheap air jordan shoes buy jordan shoes
nike shoes nike air nike air shoes
jordan shoes cheap jordan shoes cheap nike shoes
jordan shoes michael jordan shoes
classic cardy ugg boots classic tall ugg boots classic short ugg boots ultra tall ugg boots tall metallic ugg boots
Thanks for sharing this great article! That is very interesting Smile I love reading and I am always searching for informative information like this
------------------------------
Stop Dreaming Start Action
Rusli Zainal Sang Visioner
Bisnis Online
As the limits imposed by physics are just beginning to slow the progress of this law, a knew "new" phenomenon will overtake it (which i, and perhaps others invented/discovered) which is the evolutionary power of the intention relevance quotient, a post freedom sickness era lucidity (virtue) mind set that brings evolutionary efficiency to science and to the forefront of both the news and R and D investment.
This is the International Physical Immortality Project as I first saw it about a decade ago, now shortened slightly to Mortality Resolution International.
Further, I saw/(see) children (indigos) organizing against (for) [the adults that created them to die] and by that coordination of higher intent, insert itself into the core of all goverment, business, military, religious, educational and business activities to clean it all.
sikiş
porno izle
porno izle
porno izle
thank you very good
mirc
mirc indir
ilahi
mirc inndir
mirc yükle
mırc
türkçe mirc
mirc download
kameralı mirc
kaçak
kaçak script
kelebek
kelebek indir
kelebek script indir
indir
sohbet
chat
cinsel sohbet
cinsel chat
canlı sohbet
canlı chat
chat sex
cet sex
cetsex
canlı sex
çet sex
chat sohbet
sohbet sitesi
chat sitesi
film indir
divx film indir
divx indir
film izle
dizi izle
mp4 film indir
limewire indir
limewire
hello very good nice galery I congratulate
christian louboutin sandal discount
discount christian louboutin sandal
cheap christian louboutin sandal
christian louboutin sandal cheap
christian louboutin sandal on sale
christian louboutin wedding sandal
Please sign in to comment.