For instance, progress in hardware is arguably bottlenecked by economic demand, and would not be significantly accelerated by the advent of a hundred John von Neumann level scientists. However, deep insights into the nature of intelligence are the type of thing we should expect if we have a highly competent core group of humans working on the problem.
I’m not sure I understand the reasoning here. Does it not largely depend on what those hundred JVN-level scientists end up using their talents for? I.e., if they all happened to focus on making breakdowns in hardware (or in related areas, perhaps more theoretical/​fundamental ones), wouldn’t that mean that hardware would be considerably advanced? Or couldn’t it be that they all focus on areas fairly unrelated to either hardware or the nature of intelligence, leaving us in roughly the same position we were in before?
(These questions are more sincere than rhetorical; I may just be missing something.)
Interesting post!
I’m not sure I understand the reasoning here. Does it not largely depend on what those hundred JVN-level scientists end up using their talents for? I.e., if they all happened to focus on making breakdowns in hardware (or in related areas, perhaps more theoretical/​fundamental ones), wouldn’t that mean that hardware would be considerably advanced? Or couldn’t it be that they all focus on areas fairly unrelated to either hardware or the nature of intelligence, leaving us in roughly the same position we were in before?
(These questions are more sincere than rhetorical; I may just be missing something.)