3 ms·
Have all the skeptics in this thread somehow forgot about Moore's law?
by hellohello2 2mo ago
Have all the skeptics in this thread somehow forgot about Moore's law?
- pinkmuffinere 2mo agoWhat, how is that relevant? the transistors on a microchip double about every two years. That’s descriptive, not prescriptive, so whatever you’re trying to imply about the future is kindof a toss up — there’s no promise the parents hold. And, it doesn’t really have to do with tfa, as far as I can tell? Do you perhaps mean Murphy’s law, “whatever can go wrong will go wrong”?
- hellohello2 2mo agoThe top comment mentions a ~10^3 overhead. Am I crazy (or already old?) for thinking this is not a very large constant?
- pinkmuffinere 2mo agoOh I see, you’re arguing that computer growth will make this more attractive. I think it’s a decent argument, although personally I find it unconvincing. More compute will be allocated between all the existing options, and I suspect it will go towards faster/better inference, instead of encryption. For most use cases people just don’t care much about encryption, and when feature prioritization comes around it always gets a back seat
- hellohello2 2mo agoYes, I think it really depends on the task. Clearly we won't be willing to spend 1000x on tokens for our everyday needs. But what about for the police monitoring conversations? I'd very much like my chats to stay encrypted, but there have been laws pushing against this. Technology like this provides a real solution i.e. you can scan chats for keywords without actually reading them, and get a warrant if you find something.
- lupire 2mo agoLook at DRAM price on a Moore's Law chart.
- pamcake 2mo agoNow have you met my friend Planck Length?
- hellohello2 2mo agoHaven't seen him no ;)