3 ms·

This seems trivially obvious and also "so what?". Of course non-biological materials beat out biological ones in a lot of ways. They don't get tired, they are i

This seems trivially obvious and also "so what?". Of course non-biological materials beat out biological ones in a lot of ways. They don't get tired, they are impossibly strong, whatever else. We already have machines that do the jobs of many people, with only a single human operator. Think of a simple excavator. Using it, a single human can move more dirt per hour than dozens of people with shovels possibly could. Arguably the human pilot is operating as a stand-in for the machines "brain"

matthewdgreen 2y ago
The "so what" is that we already have hundreds of examples of places where biological materials find an amazing balance within whatever energy/cost/resource-availability envelope they were evolved in -- but where artificial materials (perhaps outside that energy/resource envelope) have proven to be hugely superior. I'm just hypothesizing that there's no reason to believe that biological computation will prove to be the exception.