this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
24 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1384 readers
317 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
dgerard@awful.systems
24
Moore's law predicts life emerged 5 billion years before the Earth formed (archive.ph)
submitted 10 months ago by bitofhope@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It was only a matter of time that we saw a TechTake from this guy. I'm sorry to inflict Peterson on y'all, but this was too funny not to post.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dmention7@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I'm not going to inflict a JP video on myself, so maybe someone else can help me with the math. Moore's law says the number of transistors in an IC doubles every 2 years. Earth is roughly 5 billion years old, so there have been roughly 5 billion doublings since his proposed time that life emerged. 2^5,000,000,000 is an absolutely unfathomable number compared to... anything really! So what am I missing here?

And looking at it the other way, if a "law" that has existed for only a matter of decades is being extrapolated back for billions of years, and is only off by a factor of 3-ish... that's pretty fucking solid endorsement of said law!

[–] sailor_sega_saturn@awful.systems 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The authors did not use Moore's law or transistors at all. They just thought it was a nifty idea so mentioned it bunches when talking about exponential growth or something.

Also I'm not sure I totally trust these authors after glancing over the paper, they seem a little too enthralled with the idea of alien DNA versus other possibilities like "Moore's law" not applying in the first place.

Also the paper is a decade old.

[–] jonhendry@awful.systems 4 points 10 months ago

Also the paper is a decade old.

And redolent of 'emerita disease' although I don't think the authors have technically achieved that honor.