A better solution in my opinion would be to drop the optical filter, and handle it in post. Any re-shuffling of light that the filter does should be as easily handled by reshuffling bits in a computer program.
Afaik it doesn't work this way, just as you cannot add real optical bokeh in postprocessing - moiré is very painful to remove in post, sometimes it's even near impossible w/o too much iq loss.
If anti-aliasing is so hard to do, then how do computer games have 16x AA filters running at video game frame rates?
16x AA in a computer game is what is generally known as supersampling. It blows the image up far more and then makes it smaller again.
In the dawn of AA (2003 or so) applying 2x AA would leave you with a 50% hit to frame rates, 4x AA 75% and so on. It is only in the newer drivers and architectures that they've been able to let it be a far smaller hit on frame rates. Also bear in mind a single high end graphics card have many thousand more times processing power than a camera has available to it. In fact they are as powerful as supercomputers were not all that long ago.
As for an AA filter in the camera, yes it is still valid. Especially with the ever better lenses we are getting. Sorting out a minor hit in sharpness is far easier than a horrible moire pattern. The only time I'd want a camera without AA filter was if I was shooting strictly landscapes and nothing else which would include cityscapes etc. Maybe when cameras have found their megapixel count north of 50mpix it may be less necessary but at the moment I wouldn't want to be without it. If there was an option for software solution it would be a different matter though.