[ilaksh]

Compute-in-memory can increase computation performance by many orders of magnitude.

The fact that most people just immediately try to find ways that these advancements can't work rather than trying to actually make them work is the reason that these things take so long to go from research to product.

And it's also an example of the type of weak cognition that will mean un-augmented humans will be irrelevant within the next quarter century.

[meragrin_]

Isn't identifying flaws an important part of getting things to work?

[ilaksh]

Sure when you get to that stage. But instead of trying to make things work, people always try to shut down ideas just because they are new. Actually the bigger the advance, the harder people try to discount the ideas.

[sroussey]

Realistic optimists are required to effect change.

Finding negatives is easy. Working through them to a positive result is gold.

[awesomeMilou]

Cybernetics isn't even close to bringing any decent advantage to a healthy human physiology over the next 25 years wtf

[ilaksh]

It doesn't need to be close because these changes don't happen linearly. Look at for example computing in 1950 vs 1975 or 1975 vs 2000.

With a new computing paradigm we should anticipate at least a 500X increase in compute per dollar over a period of 25 years. We also should anticipate quite a lot of progress in AI and brain-computer interfaces.

Obviously what I suggested is speculation, but sensible speculation in these areas based on historical trends anticipates changes that are just as radical as the ones we have seen.

"Moore's Law" came close to a wall a long time ago and has been braking hard. Compute-in-memory will allow us to speed up again.