I think it is evidence that ‘simple general tools’ can be different from one another along multiple dimensions.
...we solve most problems via complex combinations of simple tools. Combinations so complex, in fact, that our main issue is usually managing the complexity, rather than including the right few tools.
This is a specific instance of complex details being removed to improve performance, where using the central correct tool was the ONLY moving part.
And thus the first team to find the last simple general tool needed might “foom” via having an enormous advantage over the entire rest of the world put together. At least if that one last tool were powerful enough. I disagree with this claim, but I agree that neither view can be easily and clearly proven wrong.
I am interpreting your disagreement here to mean that you disagree that any single simple tool will be powerful enough in practice, and not in theory. I hope you agree that if someone acquired all magic powers ever written about in fiction with no drawbacks they would be at an enormous advantage over the rest of the world combined. If that was the simple tool, it would be big enough.
Then if the question is “how big of an advantage can a single simple tool give,” and the observation is, “this single simple tool gives a bigger advantage on a wider range of tasks than we have seen with previous tools,” then I would be more concerned with bigger, faster moving simple tools in the future having different types or scales of impact.
I think it is evidence that ‘simple general tools’ can be different from one another along multiple dimensions.
This is a specific instance of complex details being removed to improve performance, where using the central correct tool was the ONLY moving part.
I am interpreting your disagreement here to mean that you disagree that any single simple tool will be powerful enough in practice, and not in theory. I hope you agree that if someone acquired all magic powers ever written about in fiction with no drawbacks they would be at an enormous advantage over the rest of the world combined. If that was the simple tool, it would be big enough.
Then if the question is “how big of an advantage can a single simple tool give,” and the observation is, “this single simple tool gives a bigger advantage on a wider range of tasks than we have seen with previous tools,” then I would be more concerned with bigger, faster moving simple tools in the future having different types or scales of impact.
I disagree with the claim that “this single simple tool gives a bigger advantage on a wider range of tasks than we have seen with previous tools.”