4 ms·

I think you're being a bit patronizing here. It's lazy thinking to just assume everyone else is stupid except you ;) Transformers and diffusion models have alr

I think you're being a bit patronizing here. It's lazy thinking to just assume everyone else is stupid except you ;) Transformers and diffusion models have already completely changed the game and the architectures are still very primitive. They will only get better from here. The crazy part is that for the foreseeable future, the limiting factor for improvement is compute. Train the models for more epochs is all that is needed, for now. Moores law seems to be coming back for another round.

cs702 3y ago
My post was not meant to be patronizing. Sorry if it came across as such! I have no doubt that society will benefit from all that spending... but I'm much less certain about the fate of all the companies incurring all that spending!
- rafaelero 3y ago
  Even if 'regular' companies stopped demanding GPU's from NVIDIA, that demand would just transfer to cloud providers, which would keep buying those sweet H100. It's not a misguided AI strategy that is pumping the price. It's just a regular gold rush.
  - cs702 3y ago
    I never said most companies are buying GPU's from Nvidia. What I said is that they're spending money, for a variety of AI and AI-related services provided by third parties. Those third parties, in turn, are buying GPU's.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
swatcoder 3y ago
They didn't say anything like that. Anyone who's worked in tech for a few decades knows that what the OP describes happens regularly. There's nothing patronizing about sensing the pattern forming again here, and recognizing that the only sure thing is that the doe-eyed forty-niners racing to California all need pick axes and camp supplies and that the axemaker is going to get rich on their dreams no matter how things turn out. It doesn't suggest that there's no gold out that or that the game theory calculus that sends everybody chasing that gold is unsound. No individual is being called stupid. It just emphasises that a lot of people are going to make the wrong bets on AI, using more money than they really could afford to lose, and that NVidia is the only guaranteed (absurd) winner so far. There's nothing patronizing or even contentious to that.
dehrmann 3y ago
> They will only get better from here. What's not clear is if they'll get 20% better or 500% better.

cs702 3y ago

My post was not meant to be patronizing. Sorry if it came across as such! I have no doubt that society will benefit from all that spending... but I'm much less certain about the fate of all the companies incurring all that spending!

rafaelero 3y ago
Even if 'regular' companies stopped demanding GPU's from NVIDIA, that demand would just transfer to cloud providers, which would keep buying those sweet H100. It's not a misguided AI strategy that is pumping the price. It's just a regular gold rush.
- cs702 3y ago
  I never said most companies are buying GPU's from Nvidia. What I said is that they're spending money, for a variety of AI and AI-related services provided by third parties. Those third parties, in turn, are buying GPU's.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

swatcoder 3y ago

They didn't say anything like that. Anyone who's worked in tech for a few decades knows that what the OP describes happens regularly. There's nothing patronizing about sensing the pattern forming again here, and recognizing that the only sure thing is that the doe-eyed forty-niners racing to California all need pick axes and camp supplies and that the axemaker is going to get rich on their dreams no matter how things turn out. It doesn't suggest that there's no gold out that or that the game theory calculus that sends everybody chasing that gold is unsound. No individual is being called stupid. It just emphasises that a lot of people are going to make the wrong bets on AI, using more money than they really could afford to lose, and that NVidia is the only guaranteed (absurd) winner so far. There's nothing patronizing or even contentious to that.

dehrmann 3y ago

> They will only get better from here. What's not clear is if they'll get 20% better or 500% better.