If AI really scales indefinitely is an increase in efficiency even bearish for Nvidia? Wouldn't they still build more and more compute as fast as they can, because these things get smarter and better with more compute?
replyNo, SETH implies quadratic time does not mean !SETH implies !quadratic time.
replybut you're telling me.... there's a chance
replyThis but unironically.
replyput a number on your probabilities. there's a chance you have an aneurysm in the next few minutes and fail to see my comment. if so, oh well, i tried.
replySETH is a much stronger claim than ETH
replyNot relevant, because !ETH => !SETH
replyWhat is relevant is that the logic goes the other way: SETH implies quadratic, !SETH implies nothing.
Right, so a refutation of ETH would also refute SETH.
replyYes, it's one strong stronger.
replyIt's playful!
replyBut it's also not even wrong, in the Pauli sense.
That makes me wonder if "I see your CS proof, how does this affect LLMs / nvidia stonk price???" being immediately self-described as "playful" ensures criticism looks cranky.
"I see your particle physics paper (on sustainability of neutron-induced chain fission reaction in uranium), how does this affect the world politics???"
replyTurns out, it affected the global politics tremendously.