Comment

The concept of a general computer didn’t exist in 1927. Once it did, yes it was predicted and expected they would get smaller, more powerful, efficient, and common. There was no physics getting in the way of it.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Photonic@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Of course, every increment is predictable after you make the scientific breakthrough. Not before, though.

source
- Steve@communick.news ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  The artificial computer wasn’t so much a scientific breakthrough as a conceptual one. It didn’t require anything that didn’t already exist.
  
  The quantum computer does exist. And it’s functional principles are built on physics not engineering. It’s a fundamentally different situation.
  
  source
  - Photonic@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    The artificial computer wasn’t so much a scientific breakthrough as a conceptual one. It didn’t require anything that didn’t already exist.
    
    Neither does this. You just don’t know about it yet. And the link I provided you with shows this.
    
    The quantum computer does exist. And it’s functional principles are built on physics not engineering. It’s a fundamentally different situation.
    
    Not true. Electrical currents are physics too. And quantum computers have hardware too.
    
    in 10 human generations quantum computers still won’t be portable personal devices.
    
    What are your arguments for this? I’ve shown you that your central argument is already being addressed.
    
    source
    Steve@communick.news ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    Neither does this. You just don’t know about it yet.
    
    What exactly is this, that I don’t know about? And how does Moore’s Law apply?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments