☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆

  • 1.51K Posts
  • 1.38K Comments
Joined 6 years ago
cake
Cake day: January 18th, 2020

help-circle












  • Oh right, the famous laws of physics that apparently decree silicon must forever be the cheapest material. Let me check my physics textbook real quick. Yep, still says nothing about global supply chains and sixty years of trillion-dollar investment being a fundamental force of nature.

    Silicon is cheap because we made it cheap. We built the entire modern world around it. We constructed factories so complex and expensive they become national infrastructure projects. We perfected processes over many decades. That’s not physics, that’s just industrial inertia on a planetary scale.

    To claim nothing else could ever compete requires ignoring how technological progress actually works. Remember when aluminum was a precious metal for royalty? Then we figured out how to produce it at scale and now we make soda cans out of it. Solar panels, lithium batteries, and fiber optics were all once exotic and prohibitively expensive until they weren’t.

    As you yourself pointed out, germanium was literally the first transistor material. We moved to silicon because its oxide was more convenient for the fabrication tricks we were developing at the time, not because of some cosmic price tag. If we had poured the same obsessive investment into germanium or gallium arsenide, we’d be having this same smug conversation about them instead.

    Similarly, graphene isn’t too expensive because physics. It’s too expensive because we’re still learning how to make it in bulk with high quality. Give it a fraction of the focus and funding that silicon has enjoyed and watch the cost curve do the same dramatic dive. The inherent cost argument always melts away when the manufacturing muscle shows up.

    The only real law at play here is the law of economies of scale. Silicon doesn’t have a magical property that makes it uniquely cheap. It just has a sixty-year head start in the world’s most aggressive scaling campaign. If and when we decide to get serious about another material, your physical laws will look a lot more like a temporary price tag.









  • To add to that, hierarchy is absolutely necessary for any large scale organization. Math simply does not work in favor of flat organization because you end up with increasing communication overhead that scales linearly with the size of organization. The more people you have involved, the more difficult it becomes to make a decision.

    Another problem is that each individual can only have so much knowledge in their heads. It’s impossible to make meaningful decisions on subjects you’re not versed in, making your contribution on topics outside your area of expertise into noise. Hence, why effective organization requires creating groups of people who focus on specific subjects, and then creating interfaces between them that abstract over the internal details and focus on the functional aspects. And that naturally leads to the need for hierarchical organization.

    Finally, there’s a question of robustness. Hierarchies allow creating independent units that can compose together to build larger structures. Hierarchy is the structure that makes self organization and resilience possible at scale. A system needs to be resilient to shocks and able to adapt on its own. But if every single part is directly connected to every other part, any change causes chaos. As I noted above, the system ends up being overwhelmed with information.

    Organizing the system into nested subsystems creates cells that talk to each other to do their job. They don’t need to know the internal processes of other cells, and act as stable subassemblies. Each level can self-organize and maintain resilience within its own domain because it’s not bogged down by what’s happening elsewhere.

    And that’s how hierarchical structures reduce noise and delay within the system. Feedback loops needed for learning and adaptation can independently evolve within each subsystem, and a problem in one area doesn’t immediately crash the overarching system. Here, the hierarchy ends up playing the role of a shock absorber, localizing issues so the whole structure doesn’t fail.

    I think a good way to look at hierarchies as connective tissue between components of large systems. The central control exists for coordination toward a larger goal as opposed to micromanagement. Hierarchy isn’t about top down command as anarchists like to frame it. The purpose of the structure is to create the organized spaces where bottom up resilience and adaptation can actually thrive.




  • What I keep explaining to you here is that silicon is not inevitable, and that it’s obviously possible to make other substrates work and bring costs down. I’ve also explained to you why it makes no business sense for companies already invested in silicon to do that. The reason China has a big incentive is because they don’t currently have the ability to make top end chips. So, they can do moonshot projects at state level, and if one of them succeeds then they can leapfrog a whole generation of tech that way.

    You just keep repeating that silicon is the best material for the job without substantiating that in any way. Your whole argument is tautological, amounting to saying that silicon is widely used and therefore it’s the best fit.