michael_nielsen

This all suggests it's getting much, much harder to make progress.

One response is to say "Well, it's inevitable that things get harder", and to shrug and continue on your way. But if something is requiring ~100 times the investment as formerly, it's a good idea to seriously consider whether it's possible to do better!

As far as we know there's no serious, large-scale, organized institutional response to the challenge of diminishing returns in science. And given that science is a principal driver of our civilization's progress, a high-order bit for humanity, that's a problem.

I saw the initial announcement, but don't know much more beyond that. Curious: what do you think it's doing differently? (Or do you mean that AI may ultimately make a big difference to science? I agree that may happen, & am hopeful.)

Computing (and AI) have already transformed fields beyond recogition. I'm pretty sure there's still more to gain in many other fields, though it will require far more complex modeling (e.g. in humanities) and cross field knowledge sharing.

Computing certainly has. I'm not sure about AI. What do you have in mind?