> And it is not true that computing power will continue to reduce; Moore's Law has been dead for some time now, and if incremental growth in LLMs require expone

> And it is not true that computing power will continue to reduce; Moore's Law has been dead for some time now, and if incremental growth in LLMs require exponential growth in computing power the marginal difference won't matter. I think the stronger argument here won't necessarily be Moore's Law related but a change in architecture. Things like Apple's Neural Engine, Google's TPMs, or Geohot's Tinybox. In Intel's Tick-Tock model, this is the Tock for the previous Tick of larger datasets so to speak. (Note: I don't necessarily agree, just trying to make a stronger argument than just invoking Moore's Law.)