2 ms·
Of course, you are right. But one wonders whether things may change on much longer timescales (hundreds or even thousands of years). Certainly, there have been
by spenczar5 6y ago
Of course, you are right. But one wonders whether things may change on much longer timescales (hundreds or even thousands of years). Certainly, there have been past technologies which got entrenched in a suboptimal spot, and were later radically altered.
“The thing about cars is that everybody already knows how to ride a horse, and you can find a stable in any village in Europe. They work even on rough roads and they are much cheaper. Their “fuel” can be found basically anywhere. Cars may be nice but I can’t see them winning out.”
No claim that ternary is to cars as binary is to horses; I think the difference is way less. But its a fun way to think about the argument “we won’t change because the existing technology has too many decades behind it.”
- rcxdude 6y agoIt's not so clear ternary would actually be an improvement: at least in terms of how we can implement circuits today, ternary's radix efficiency is offset by the inefficiency of implementing ternary logic. It might work if you have a new way of constructing logic circuits where this efficiency difference doesn't appear. (see https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.06841 https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.06841)