I can bet there are superconductor/photonics/topologically different/strange memory/smaller process size prototypes around.
Right now we are getting to the limits of transistor sizes, but even a couple of years ago experimental prototypes of smaller process size were developed years before mass production.
Aside from LCS35, most cryptographic problems are about as easy with two processors that are half as fast as one processor that costs twice as much.
proof? i'm just like... where? where do you think people are making these chips and using which ovens?
> smaller process size prototypes around
no there aren't. there just aren't. you could hide this in your basement about as easily as you could hide building your own space shuttle (and launching).
You do realize we all know it's impossible to have any degree of certainty in asserting the non-existence of something, right?
“For every instance, e equals mc²”
“There is no instance where e does not equal mc².”
People should really read more hume if they're going to weigh in on philosophy of science.
I love condescension that is so petty it's laughable. As the commenters said below there are very well-understood precedents/principles that allow me to conclude "no" here eg
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
So no it's not "impossible to have any degree of certainty in asserting the non-existence of something", we actually have a whole branch of mathematics dedicated to exactly that (it's called probability and statistics).
This is precisely why I don't trust people who aver without receipts to show. Open the schools, goddammit!
Until I see some reasonable evidence that smaller process size cannot exist, i just see lazy people getting angry that someone disagrees with them. All of this "burden of proof" bullshit, aping like you're in some kind of formal debate rather than a conversation with a stranger, just screams "emotional asshole who can't deal with someone disagreeing with them and never learned how to engage in basic conflict resolution when they had the ability to engage in good faith and chose not to".
Y'all deserve all the mockery society can afford. I'm at least honest in that I see conflict is what we need more than ever if only to put people like you in your place.
There's no hiding anything here. You can find random articles about publicity stunts companies used to try based on these. Specifically when IBM was in the game, and Intel until they got butchered by incompetence.
Also, some of today's work in quantum computers uses superconducting qubits. Maybe that's in the same research stage now. No idea if it will ever become practical.
IIRC EUV development picked plasma over synchrotron because plasma projected to be cheaper, even though technically synchrotron had more benefits. Queue many, many years of solving for technical challenges for LPP and now commercialized EUV machines cost 200m, 400m for next high NA. Which is about the cost of multiple small or single medium size synchrotron facility. It's amazing plasma EUV works, but it's also a failure in the sense that it is FAR less economical than originally envisioned, which explains why particle accelerator route is still being worked on.
I remember reading the tinfoil hat theory about three-letter agencies making low-quantity high-cost chips at incredible process sizes in order to break encryption. I doubt that's still as viable today as it was before leakage currents started dominating, but it was an impressively plausible theory.