3 ms·

I wouldn't be surprised if this tech goes through some kind of export control regulation similar to what cryptography went through in the 90s. Remember the T-Sh

I wouldn't be surprised if this tech goes through some kind of export control regulation similar to what cryptography went through in the 90s. Remember the T-Shirt with the RSA source code that was classified as a munition?

ren_engineer 4y ago
seems like controlling access to GPUs would be the more likely/easier solution for governments. Not many facilities that can produce them and easy to track the huge amounts needed for this scale of computing Almost like trying to stop nuclear proliferation
- generalizations 4y ago
  After the Llama and ggml projects that came to light in the last few weeks, it's more likely they'd have to control access to CPUs as well. Good luck with that.
  - kurisufag 4y ago
    >good luck with that I don't think they need it.[0][1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processo...
  - numpad0 4y ago
    If I were “they” I’d try to control systems with >128GB RAM capacity and clustering aids e.g. 40GE and PCIe bridging cards. That should be semi doable.
- Sebb767 4y ago
  Except that the main political competitor (from the US perspective) is the country producing most of them, so this might backfire quite quickly.
  - Tossrock 4y ago
    Wrong unless you consider China and Taiwan the same country, which is a pretty hot take anywhere except China.
0xDEF 4y ago
Unlike the anti-cryptography fearmongering of the 90s the concerns about AI is coming from the experts themselves.
astrea 4y ago
I mean, most AI technologies are already considered ITAR for the sole sake of maintaining a competitive advantage. At least, that's what my last two employers have told me and I hope I didn't go through all of that training for nothing.

ren_engineer 4y ago

seems like controlling access to GPUs would be the more likely/easier solution for governments. Not many facilities that can produce them and easy to track the huge amounts needed for this scale of computing Almost like trying to stop nuclear proliferation

generalizations 4y ago
After the Llama and ggml projects that came to light in the last few weeks, it's more likely they'd have to control access to CPUs as well. Good luck with that.
- kurisufag 4y ago
  >good luck with that I don't think they need it.[0][1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processo...
- numpad0 4y ago
  If I were “they” I’d try to control systems with >128GB RAM capacity and clustering aids e.g. 40GE and PCIe bridging cards. That should be semi doable.
Sebb767 4y ago
Except that the main political competitor (from the US perspective) is the country producing most of them, so this might backfire quite quickly.
- Tossrock 4y ago
  Wrong unless you consider China and Taiwan the same country, which is a pretty hot take anywhere except China.

0xDEF 4y ago

Unlike the anti-cryptography fearmongering of the 90s the concerns about AI is coming from the experts themselves.

astrea 4y ago

I mean, most AI technologies are already considered ITAR for the sole sake of maintaining a competitive advantage. At least, that's what my last two employers have told me and I hope I didn't go through all of that training for nothing.