4 ms·

We've previously tried and almost always regretted the decision. I think the tech stack needs another 12-18 months to mature (doesn't help that almost all work

by htrp 3y ago

We've previously tried and almost always regretted the decision. I think the tech stack needs another 12-18 months to mature (doesn't help that almost all work ex Google is being done in torch).

mike_d 3y ago
> I think the tech stack needs another 12-18 months to mature Google has been doing AI before any other company even thought about it. They are on the 6th generation of TPU hardware. I don't think there is any maturity issue, just an availability issue because they are all being used internally.
- htrp 3y ago
  100% agree, if I have access to the TPU team internally, it'll be very easy to use in production. If you aren't internal, the documentation, support, and even just general bug fixing is impossible to get.
  - ethbr1 3y ago
    (Has an expert team dedicated solely to optimizing for exotic hardware) = an option (Doesn't have a team like that) = stick to mass-use, commodity hardware That's generally been the trade-off since ~1970. And usually, the performance isn't worth the people-salaries. How many examples of successful hardware that isn't well-documented and doesn't have drop-in 1:1 SDK coverage vs (more popular solution) are there? It seems like a heavy-lift to even get something that does have parity in those ways adopted, given you're fighting market inertia.
- chatmasta 3y ago
  Google sells access to TPUs in its cloud platform, so you'd think they would be more open about sharing development and tooling frameworks for TPUs. It's like Borg (closed source, never used outside Google, made them no profit) vs. Kubernetes (open source, used everywhere, makes them profit).
- fnord77 3y ago
  > Google has been doing AI before any other company even thought about it This not even remotely true. SRI was working on AI in various forms long before google existed
  - TwentyPosts 3y ago
    Who or what is SRI?
    - fluidcruft 3y ago
      See http://www.sri.com http://www.sri.com
    - fnord77 3y ago
      next to NASA, probably the most innovative organization in human history https://www.sri.com/timeline-of-innovation/ https://www.sri.com/timeline-of-innovation/
danielcampos93 3y ago
I feel like I have been hearing that since V1 TPU. I think Google is the perfect solution because they are teams whose job is to take a model and TPUify it. Elsewhere there is no team, so it's no fun.
arthurdelerue 3y ago
I agree with that, and I'm not sure they'll be able to improve the stack dramatically by themselves without the open-source community being more involved.

by htrp 3y ago

We've previously tried and almost always regretted the decision. I think the tech stack needs another 12-18 months to mature (doesn't help that almost all work ex Google is being done in torch).

mike_d 3y ago

> I think the tech stack needs another 12-18 months to mature Google has been doing AI before any other company even thought about it. They are on the 6th generation of TPU hardware. I don't think there is any maturity issue, just an availability issue because they are all being used internally.

htrp 3y ago
100% agree, if I have access to the TPU team internally, it'll be very easy to use in production. If you aren't internal, the documentation, support, and even just general bug fixing is impossible to get.
- ethbr1 3y ago
  (Has an expert team dedicated solely to optimizing for exotic hardware) = an option (Doesn't have a team like that) = stick to mass-use, commodity hardware That's generally been the trade-off since ~1970. And usually, the performance isn't worth the people-salaries. How many examples of successful hardware that isn't well-documented and doesn't have drop-in 1:1 SDK coverage vs (more popular solution) are there? It seems like a heavy-lift to even get something that does have parity in those ways adopted, given you're fighting market inertia.
chatmasta 3y ago
Google sells access to TPUs in its cloud platform, so you'd think they would be more open about sharing development and tooling frameworks for TPUs. It's like Borg (closed source, never used outside Google, made them no profit) vs. Kubernetes (open source, used everywhere, makes them profit).
fnord77 3y ago
> Google has been doing AI before any other company even thought about it This not even remotely true. SRI was working on AI in various forms long before google existed
- TwentyPosts 3y ago
  Who or what is SRI?
  - fluidcruft 3y ago
    See http://www.sri.com http://www.sri.com
  - fnord77 3y ago
    next to NASA, probably the most innovative organization in human history https://www.sri.com/timeline-of-innovation/ https://www.sri.com/timeline-of-innovation/

danielcampos93 3y ago

I feel like I have been hearing that since V1 TPU. I think Google is the perfect solution because they are teams whose job is to take a model and TPUify it. Elsewhere there is no team, so it's no fun.

arthurdelerue 3y ago

I agree with that, and I'm not sure they'll be able to improve the stack dramatically by themselves without the open-source community being more involved.