> The "hitting a wall" / "plateau" people will continue to be loud and wrong. Just as they have been since 2018[0].

Everybody who bet against Moore's Law was wrong ... until they weren't.

And AI is the reaction to Moore's Law having broken. Nobody gave one iota of damn about trying to make programming easier until the chips couldn't double in speed anymore.

▲

twoodfin 9 hours ago | parent [-]

This is exactly backwards: Dennard scaling stopped. Moore’s Law has continued and it’s what made training and running inference on these models practical at interactive timescales.

▲

bsder 8 hours ago | parent [-]

You are technically correct. The best kind of correct.

However, most people don't know the difference between the proper Moore's Law scaling (the cost of a transistor halves every 2 years) which is still continuing (sort of) and the colloquial version (the speed of a transistor doubles every 2 years) which got broken when Dennard scaling ran out. To them, Moore's Law just broke.

Nevertheless, you are reinforcing my point. Nobody gave a damn about improving the "programming" side of things until the hardware side stopped speeding up.

And rather than try to apply some human brainpower to fix the "programming" side, they threw a hideous number of those free (except for the electricity--but we don't mention that--LOL) transistors at the wall to create a broken, buggy, unpredictable machine simulacrum of a "programmer".

(Side note: And to be fair, it looks like even the strong form of Moore's Law is finally slowing down, too)

	▲	twoodfin 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If you can turn a few dollars of electricity per hour into a junior-level programmer who never gets bored, tired, or needs breaks, that fundamentally changes the economics of information technology. And in fact, the agentic looped LLMs are executing much better than that today. They could stop advancing right now and still be revolutionary.