4 ms·
The core separation was always arbitrary and overly staged to the benefit of the author's position. Peter Thiel is fond of dividing between atoms and bits, wher
by adventured 6y ago
The core separation was always arbitrary and overly staged to the benefit of the author's position. Peter Thiel is fond of dividing between atoms and bits, where he then proclaims that the only substantial progress has been in the world of bits. That's a poorly staged argument for his benefit, as in reality progress in the world of bits is progress in the world of atoms. It's all the same real world. It's a borderline mystical separation, like pretending the body and brain are not connected, or that the body has a distinct magical soul separate from the physical (and Thiel is loaded with mystical beliefs, so it makes sense that his irrationality would predictably repeat). It's a particularly amusing logic failure by Thiel because he attempts to take up a pro-science, pro-reason position. As one example, the mass global adoption of email (and numerous other similarly effective instant communication tools) over the last 20-25 years is a tangible, real thing and it involves atoms as much as a skyscraper or an automobile does. If our computing improves by ten fold, if we build giant globe-spanning systems for commerce, communication, media, entertainment, knowledge/education - that's all extraordinary progress in the world of atoms. You get a sense of Thiel's personal snobbery and bias in what he chooses to proclaim to be real progress. The very rapid advance of the GPU the past two decades, along with what it enables in the so-called world of bits (which, again, is actually the world of atoms as well), is every bit as important as many prominent world of atoms events in the 20th century, yet Thiel's position is to debase such accomplishments, because his argument is harmed by that advancement.
Building data centers is building a mill or factory. That obviously isn't to imply they employ the same number of people (which is a distinct issue of automation, efficiency, etc). Thiel & Co. like to pretend there's some magic to steel or plastic and there is nothing special (atoms tangible) about a data center - and all the technology that goes with it - linked up at the speed of light to the rest of the world. It's nothing more than a silly and arbitrary line they've drawn to the benefit of their position.
- ClumsyPilot 6y agoThis is downright silly -improvements in material science, like inventing stainless steel, immediately levels up all industries in all of civilisation, from heavy industry to street furniture to cuttlery. Faster GPU's do not directly improve life of an average Joe, they might enable some second order effect, like research or production of educational videos, etc. But the effects are much smaller and you can only equate the two if you are living in fantasy land
- Ekaros 6y agoIf we go from GPUs to CPUs and memory or even generic IC. Faster CPUs meant also more efficient and smaller CPUs meaning cheaper CPUs. Brining down the price of mobile phones and computers. And even increasing the rates of data transfer. I can't say that there has not been massive change for average Joe in last 30 years due to this...
- ClumsyPilot 6y agoTes ofcourse but imagine if that kimd of improvement happened in metallurgy, we'd have space elevators, you could have a vication on Ganymede and the concept of rare metal would cease to exist
- tuatoru 6y agoI find this argument sophomoric and that it misses the point. You are combining the infrastructure with the thing itself. Maybe emails are sent using a physical infrastructure. How many atoms would it take to send the same number of physical mails (letters on paper)? Remember to account for the atoms in the transport infrastructure, as you are doing for emails. Theil's comparison is between progress in moving information around versus progress in our ability to create physical structures - to move mass around. More importantly, though, the advent of email has not shown up in productivity statstics. Office worker productivty growth did not change observably after email became ubiquitous. Thiel perhaps believes that a x10 improvement in speed of creating physical structures would show up in productivity figures. I'm doubtful, because I think the stagnation has happened for reasons other than stagnation in our ability to move mass.