> How long do you think Homo sapiens have been on Earth and how long has civilization been here? I already corrected my typo in a child comment. > We’re basic

> How long do you think Homo sapiens have been on Earth and how long has civilization been here? I already corrected my typo in a child comment. > We’re basically brute forcing the scale up here Currently, but even that will eventually hit thermodynamic and socioeconomic limits, just as single chips are. > And computer science might be older than you think. We just used to call it logic. In my opinion, two landmark theory developments were type theory and the lambda calculus. Type theory was conceived to get around Russell's paradox and others, which formal logic could not do on its own. As far as hardware, sure we had mechanical calculators in the 17th century, and Babbage's analytical engine in the 19th century, and Ada Lovelace's program, but it wasn't until the mid-20th century that computer science coalesced as its own distinct field. We didn't used to call computer science logic; it's a unification of physical advancements, logic and several other domains. > Electrons can only travel so fast. And we have no reason to believe that current models are at all optimized on a software or theoretical level, especially since, as you say yourself, we are currently just focused on brute-forcing innovation as its the more cost-effective solution for the time being. But as I said, once theoretical refinement becomes more cost-effective, we can look at the relatively short history of computer science to see just how much can be done on older hardware with better theory: >> Even if physical breakthroughs ceased or slowed down considerably, there is still a ton left on the table in terms of software optimization and theory advancement.