2021 BRN Discussion, page-21052

Hi @BarrelSitter & @chapman89

I have an observation to make on your discussion about BRN’s patents and others working in the same field like Intel.

I know you are both aware of the fact that Ai has been deployed to design chip layouts and that it has had some success in improving the efficiency of existing designs. As I see this it is because human designers were satisfied with good enough on most occasions and did not keep experimenting until the ultimate layout was achieved. A question of time, money and cost benefit.

What it means as far as I can see is that without actually changing the technology involved the Ai achieved design will be the good as it gets or the ultimate design layout. Running that layout through the computer one more time is not going to achieve any further improvement.

So herein lays the point I want to make about AKD1000 and it’s patented technology.

What if after all the patents withstand scrutiny and all the workarounds are exhausted it transpires that AKIDA technology is in fact the ultimate or as good as it can get design for a spiking convolutional neural network?

What then?

What will companies like Intel, Samsung and IBM do if not only is AKIDA technology as good as it gets but if through the cortical column work presently being undertaken it is drawing even further ahead and in every sense moving closer to AGI?

I suspect there are no absolute answers but it is interesting to contemplate.

My opinion only DYOR
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA