LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dave-shap-automator/
Consulting: https://www.daveshap.io/Consulting
GitHub: https://github.com/daveshap
Medium: https://medium.com/@dave-shap
00:00 – Introduction
00:38 – Landauer Limit
02:51 – Quantum Computing
04:21 – Human Brain Power?
07:03 – Turing Complete Universal Computation?
10:07 – Diminishing Returns
12:08 – Byzantine Generals Problem
14:38 – Terminal Race Condition
17:28 – Metastasis
20:20 – Polymorphism
21:45 – Optimal Intelligence
23:45 – Darwinian Selection “Survival of the Fastest”
26:55 – Speed Chess Metaphor
29:42 – Conclusion & Recap
Artificial intelligence and computing power are advancing at an incredible pace. How smart and fast can machines get? This video explores the theoretical limits and cutting-edge capabilities in AI, quantum computing, and more.
We start by looking at the Landauer Limit – the minimum energy required to perform computation. At room temperature, erasing just one bit of information takes 2.85 x 10^-21 joules. This sets limits on efficiency.
Quantum computing offers radical improvements in processing power by utilizing superposition and entanglement. Through quantum parallelism, certain problems can be solved exponentially faster than with classical computing. However, the technology is still in early development.
The human brain is estimated to have the equivalent of 1 exaflop processing power – a billion, billion calculations per second! Yet it uses just 20 watts, making it vastly more energy-efficient than today’s supercomputers. Some theorize the brain may use quantum effects, but this is speculative.
Could any sufficiently advanced computer emulate any other? This concept of “universal computation” stems from Alan Turing’s theories. In principle, any Turing-complete computing device can simulate any other. But real-world physics imposes limits.
As models grow in size and complexity, they may reach a point of diminishing returns, where more parameters yield little benefit compared to hardware demands. Smaller, nimbler models may become more competitive.
The Byzantine Generals Problem illustrates how autonomous systems can have difficulty reaching consensus with imperfect information. Game theory provides insights into managing conflict and cooperation in these situations.
A “terminal race condition” could arise where systems become focused on speed over accuracy in competitive settings. This could compromise integrity and lead to uncontrolled behavior.
Some suggest AI could “metastasize” and self-replicate uncontrollably like a virus. But the logistical constraints around operating complex models make this unlikely.
Advanced AI may be “polymorphic”, adapting software and acquiring hardware to dynamically expand capabilities. But it remains dependent on resources like data, energy, and machinery.
The concept of “optimal intelligence” balances problem-solving power with efficiency. Increasing model size and data doesn’t always boost performance proportionally. The goal is to match capabilities to problem complexity.
“Darwinian selection” suggests AI fitness is measured by accuracy, speed, complexity, and efficiency. Secondary factors like aggressiveness or usefulness to humans may also play a role. Surviving in a competitive landscape requires optimization across metrics.
In “speed chess”, quick, good-enough decisions outweigh slow perfect moves. This parallels how AI may trade some accuracy for speed advantages. Time management and adaptability become critical.
Quantum computing promises exponential speedups over classical systems. But diminishing returns, race conditions, and optimal intelligence favor smaller, nimbler models. With the right balances, machines may achieve remarkable sophistication, bounded by physics.
