Progress in semiconductors, or Moore's law is not dead yet

Moore's law is relentless - Jim Keller In its original formulation, Moore's law1 was about cramming more transistors in ever decreasing surfaces; by that metric Moore's law continues unabated. However that's not the most interesting thing. As much of a feat of engineering it is, most people are interested in the end-product of the semiconductor world: performance. Before moving onto that, here are some charts that show progress in the original Moore's law sense (ht Sam Zeloof for the data). Of note here…

Links (34)

Scott Alexander on high fat diets Tyler Cowen contra Tyler Cowen on Stubborn Attachments Common ownership maybe is fine Remember those old studies saying that gum disease was linked to Alzheimer's? Now a link has also been suggested for stroke and atherosclerosis. Guide to DIY biology Why conventional wisdom on education reform is wrong How did early american investors fund their ventures? How much does it cost to develop a drug? 1.3 billion USD, study claims. (Including the cost of failed research) A few r…

Links (33)

Growth and the case against randomista development How local control can accelerate housing One year, 1 lab, 16 spinouts (On the Church Lab) Fireside chat with Tyler Cowen and Tom Kalil Glial brain cells do more than thought decades ago You don't agree with Karl Popper (See also the comments) Scott reviews a review of Little Soldiers, a book on chinese preschool Fedophilia: Economists love for central banks The US is starved for talent: Paper finds very large effect (Perhaps implausibly so) on hiring an H…

Comments on 'Fully Grown'

You might remember a post I wrote in 2016, No Great Technological Stagnation where I argued various things that are worth repeating and valid today: Technology is not the same as productivity growth, and there is no great stagnation in technology; rather there are localized slowdowns, accelerations, and stagnations1, and of course TFP is more than technology. Also last year I wrote on whether WWII was good for growth, and I linked to some evidence that the rate of growth of population could be behind a stag…

The Longevity FAQ: Making of

So I just published the Longevity FAQ. This represents my first blogging foray into molecular biology. So it happens, I hadn't really studied biology since high school, so here's how -and why- I went from zero to writing a FAQ on a complex topic. Why write about it, in the first place? An original motivation is that I've said a bunch of times that I see more progress in the future coming from the life sciences rather than physics, yet my knowledge in biology was very, very lacking, not having ever seriously…

The Longevity FAQ

Inasmuch as one enjoys being alive, waiting longer until the signs of frailty and old age occur seems an appealing proposition, and so there is an entire field of research dedicated to understand the aging process. A recent summary for a popular audience is in David Sinclair's recent book Lifespan. But I wanted to provide a deeper and more concise explanation, plus communicating not only the results but also their robustness. There is also a previous Longevity FAQ from Laura Deming, but I thought something …