In relation to John Thornhill’s article “The assurance and danger of generative AI” (Opinion, September 29) and the subsequent column “It’s time to take the risks of quantum computing seriously,” I draw a parallel between the current state of artificial intelligence and a scenario where the mind is consistently powered by a massive, megawatt energy source.
The most recent silicon foundations that enable our policymakers to function are inherently linked to and shape the AI algorithms they are presently deliberating upon.
The computational requirements for AI necessitate staggering levels of entropy, or heat, to put it informally. The operation of contemporary computers is inexorable. Moreover, disastrous processes result in disorder. Consequently, servers are compelled to fragment through utilization.
As the demand for power escalates, more energy is dissipated as heat, leading to AI regulation. Evidently, corporations such as Google, Meta, Microsoft, and others have advocated that leveraging AI to combat the global climate crisis is a commendable initiative.
Conversely, artificial intelligence (AI) procedures can be reversed by quantum computing systems.
The process has the potential to be reversed. Reversibility could mitigate the ramifications of disorder and the quantum computer’s reliance on massive power inputs. This reversible strategy is familiar to the field.
Reversible chemical reactions play a critical role in nanoscale biological systems. It is due to this feature that our brains do not incinerate within our skulls. Similarly, a developing chicken embryo enclosed within an egg does not emerge cooked and sunny side up.
Apprehensions should arise when particle devices commence executing AI functions at ambient temperatures.
