7 ms·

Which composable fabric am I talking about then?

refulgentis 3y ago
>> So it's only a net benefit when the work can be split up into tiny parallel chunks and then recombined with near perfect efficiently. > Hasn't that pretty much always been the case? I was talking about that, the fabric stuff is a non-sequitor, random hardware, doesn't make GPUs 2x in speed every 18 months, much less lead to a shift in everyday computing loads to GPUs. 1. Moore's Law also applies to GPUs. 2. If we could make use of 1000 cores for anything but long tail tasks, ye average CPU would have a lot more than 8 cores by now. That's what the million chickens thing is about. You can give me ultra-unobtianium fabric for "AIAs", it doesn't matter unless I have a algorithm that's massively parallelizable.
- latchkey 3y ago
  You seem stuck on the Moore's law of things and I've moved past that. To be clear, I was responding to this from the OP above: "and the coordination overhead increases exponentially too" Cross node coordination is complicated and more easily managed with composable fabrics, which is why I brought it up. -- I went back and read a bunch of your older comments here. At first, I thought it was personal but the tone that you use with me is carried across many comments that you've made to others. These also tend to be heavily downvoted. I went and looked you up a bit more, it seems you had an exit to Google and then worked there for a number of years. There is something about how you're communicating that seems brilliant, but at the same time, is missing some level of EQ. Like you're super smart, but also have some sort of ego about it all. As if you feel a deep need to somehow prove yourself as being "better" than the people around you. Saying things like this: "as if you are encountering them the first time in the thread"... is honestly, just rude. My goal here is to help educate and discuss things as best as I know how. If that isn't good enough for you, honestly, just keep it to yourself. Unlike you, I'm not putting my ego into it. If you have a personal problem with me or my background or what I'm saying, my suggestion would be to stick with the technicals and leave the ego at the door. Feel free to say whatever you want, but I won't respond to you any further.
  - refulgentis 3y ago
    I'm sorry, I'm just here to share knowledge. There's a few things you got very wrong. I'm happy to talk about my background, but...I have a weird feeling you aren't actually interested. Seems you thought I was putting you down personally so you needed to find out who I was. I don't know you from an 8 year old. You're brilliant too or whatever you need to hear. Whole thing made me cringe. It's not worth it my friend. Makes you feel good until 30 seconds after you click post. Going off on a long personal attack, claiming you did your OSINT research on your interlocutor, and they're victimizing you with their vicious claims that GPUs are limited by Moore's Law...not a good look.
    - latchkey 3y ago
      > I'm sorry, I'm just here to share knowledge. Apology accepted. Update: Weird, now you keep going after I accepted your apology. Now you're editing your comments to change things around to somehow make yourself look better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
      - refulgentis 3y ago
        Also I flagged your comment, way out of bounds for HN. Also went back, lol, you got enraged because I didnt follow your rule I was only supposed to talk about the last sentence in the post you replied to. And now I remember why I was rolling my eyes and being direct with you. You were being rude to other people, kept changing the subject, and not addressing what people were saying. I.e. you completely ignored 2 different people's analogy about chickens, replied more about hardware, then I pointed out you did that, and you tried to pop quiz me, then when I patiently explained the relevance of their two comments, you went off about how you were done talking about anything else anyone said other than one sentence and I was trying to make myself feel smart (??? You're the one doing the pop quiz!!). Bonkers behavior.

>> So it's only a net benefit when the work can be split up into tiny parallel chunks and then recombined with near perfect efficiently. > Hasn't that pretty much always been the case? I was talking about that, the fabric stuff is a non-sequitor, random hardware, doesn't make GPUs 2x in speed every 18 months, much less lead to a shift in everyday computing loads to GPUs. 1. Moore's Law also applies to GPUs. 2. If we could make use of 1000 cores for anything but long tail tasks, ye average CPU would have a lot more than 8 cores by now. That's what the million chickens thing is about. You can give me ultra-unobtianium fabric for "AIAs", it doesn't matter unless I have a algorithm that's massively parallelizable.

latchkey 3y ago
You seem stuck on the Moore's law of things and I've moved past that. To be clear, I was responding to this from the OP above: "and the coordination overhead increases exponentially too" Cross node coordination is complicated and more easily managed with composable fabrics, which is why I brought it up. -- I went back and read a bunch of your older comments here. At first, I thought it was personal but the tone that you use with me is carried across many comments that you've made to others. These also tend to be heavily downvoted. I went and looked you up a bit more, it seems you had an exit to Google and then worked there for a number of years. There is something about how you're communicating that seems brilliant, but at the same time, is missing some level of EQ. Like you're super smart, but also have some sort of ego about it all. As if you feel a deep need to somehow prove yourself as being "better" than the people around you. Saying things like this: "as if you are encountering them the first time in the thread"... is honestly, just rude. My goal here is to help educate and discuss things as best as I know how. If that isn't good enough for you, honestly, just keep it to yourself. Unlike you, I'm not putting my ego into it. If you have a personal problem with me or my background or what I'm saying, my suggestion would be to stick with the technicals and leave the ego at the door. Feel free to say whatever you want, but I won't respond to you any further.
- refulgentis 3y ago
  I'm sorry, I'm just here to share knowledge. There's a few things you got very wrong. I'm happy to talk about my background, but...I have a weird feeling you aren't actually interested. Seems you thought I was putting you down personally so you needed to find out who I was. I don't know you from an 8 year old. You're brilliant too or whatever you need to hear. Whole thing made me cringe. It's not worth it my friend. Makes you feel good until 30 seconds after you click post. Going off on a long personal attack, claiming you did your OSINT research on your interlocutor, and they're victimizing you with their vicious claims that GPUs are limited by Moore's Law...not a good look.
  - latchkey 3y ago
    > I'm sorry, I'm just here to share knowledge. Apology accepted. Update: Weird, now you keep going after I accepted your apology. Now you're editing your comments to change things around to somehow make yourself look better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    - refulgentis 3y ago
      Also I flagged your comment, way out of bounds for HN. Also went back, lol, you got enraged because I didnt follow your rule I was only supposed to talk about the last sentence in the post you replied to. And now I remember why I was rolling my eyes and being direct with you. You were being rude to other people, kept changing the subject, and not addressing what people were saying. I.e. you completely ignored 2 different people's analogy about chickens, replied more about hardware, then I pointed out you did that, and you tried to pop quiz me, then when I patiently explained the relevance of their two comments, you went off about how you were done talking about anything else anyone said other than one sentence and I was trying to make myself feel smart (??? You're the one doing the pop quiz!!). Bonkers behavior.