4 ms·
I would not be so quick to say that this is an "obvious" outcome though. You could apply the same argument to computer hardware: General purpose CPUs are incre
by stravant 3y ago
I would not be so quick to say that this is an "obvious" outcome though.
You could apply the same argument to computer hardware: General purpose CPUs are incredibly wasteful compared to specialized hardware (see Bitcoin mining where ASICs are many orders of magnitude faster than even GPUs), yet on the whole the value of being able to iterate in software wins out.
- viraptor 3y agoI'm not sure that maps well. It's kind of true, but the universal use of CPUs does not have major downsides - you're missing the potential improvements, not losing anything. And we fully specialise where it makes financial sense (AES in CPUs), and half-specialise elsewhere (GPUs). On the other hand, a generic humanoid has lots of cost/complexity/maintenance/etc impact. An articulated arm with a tool for a given task can do things you can't generalise (think DaVinci robot precision vs auto construction high power - humanoid can't replace either) There's also massively higher market for CPUs (multiple per person, cheap) than for humanoid robots (tiny percentage per person, expensive), so the economy is different.