4 ms·
> It's roughly comparable to spending all R&D perfecting vacuum tubes in the 1940's Vacuum tubes continued to be improved all the way up into the early 1960s,
by cr0sh 8y ago
> It's roughly comparable to spending all R&D perfecting vacuum tubes in the 1940's
Vacuum tubes continued to be improved all the way up into the early 1960s, long after transistors had taken hold:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compactron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compactron
One in particular was used mainly in television sets, all the way up into the early 1970s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuvistor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuvistor
...it competed with transistors, and was almost as small as some of its contemporary transistor cousins.
Even today, you can't rule out the vacuum tube - for some things, there isn't any substitutes:
http://www.nutsvolts.com/magazine/article/vacuum-tubes-for-the-21st-century http://www.nutsvolts.com/magazine/article/vacuum-tubes-for-t...
...and new ideas for the old technology are being investigated:
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/05/return-vacuum-tube http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/05/return-vacuum-tube
- tabtab 8y agoI didn't mean to imply that vacuum tubes stopped having uses or stopped improving. My main point is that they stopped being the primary source of electronics and digital processing innovation and progress. Even if by chance neural/deep-nets stop being the primary source of AI innovation, I'm sure people will find and make improvements in them regardless.