http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/04/scientists-buil.html
Looks like they finally went as small as you can with a circuit. The width of one atom. Beyond this I suppose you would need to go subatomic (dunno if thats possible or not), or things such as optical processors or quantum computing.
Scott
On a side note, I have officially beat Shaun in post count. Muwahahhahaha....... :box:
Next, world domination.
I think they are getting some headway with the quantum http://www.dailytech.com/Researchers+Develop+Basic+Building+Block+for+Quantum+Computers/article11432.htm (http://www.dailytech.com/Researchers+Develop+Basic+Building+Block+for+Quantum+Computers/article11432.htm)
Post count, you say? :-D
go quantum, or go home.
and by post count i mean post count and still having a life :)
I was thinking about Moore's Law the other day and was wondering about how the issue of NP-Complete problems plays in all this. In AI there are a lot of NP-Complete problems that would speed things up. So, in the same way that reaching the smallest transistors might mean that Moore's Law has "hit its end", can we say until/if someone ever proves that P = NP then Moore's Law will "hit its end" due to software abilities as well?
I have no clue, just throwing that out there.
If a robot does the "robot" is it just dancing ?
If a robot does the robot, is it even a dance or just moving like a robot. Which in turn, is the robot even a dance, or just weird people moving weird? hmm....