4 ms·

Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net

25 points by bilsbie 2y ago

thesuperbigfrog 2y ago
"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? How would such a magical neural net computer be trained? Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer? How would the neural net being trained distinguish between good, wanted input/output combinations versus bad, error input/output combinations? How would you program such a computer or load new software onto it? If the whole thing is a single neural net, wouldn't the neural net need to be replaced in order to add new functionality or correct errors/bugs? How would user data be persisted while upgrading the applications?
- porphyra 2y ago
  Theoretically the network could be trained on the raw input and output voltages of the camera and display serial interface and so on. But yes, it's a magical fantasy computer.
- dojomouse 2y ago
  I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists. The questions you pose are interesting ones, for the sake of the experiment I think at least: - Programming - Loading new software - Adding new functionality - Persisting user data Could all at least in principle be achieved without changing the network architecture, but rather just providing the relevant data at the inputs (eg the full bit stream of the install file of the new software being installed) and having that lead to adjustments in activations (not weights or architecture) across the network which lead to any future inputs to the network resulting in the outputs that would be expected in the presence of the new software. Same deal for the other examples. As to whether this is practical or achievable at present - not even remotely close in my view. But it’s still an interesting idea, even if just to think about why it wouldnt work and what that implies for future development direction of multimodal networks etc.
  - Someone 2y ago
    > I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists. I think this kind of computer exists and is called ”brain”.
    - thesuperbigfrog 2y ago
      >> I think this kind of computer exists and is called ”brain”. True, but there are ethical and rights considerations unless you are building / growing an artifical brain. You can't just grab a human or sufficiently-suitable animal brain and turn them into your personal mentat (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Organizations_of_the_Dune_universe&diffonly=true#Mentats https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Organizations_of_...) or computing servitor (https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Servitor https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Servitor) to do your computing for you. (At least, not ethically.) Where would you get a brain to train? Also, it's not easy to train human / animal brains in their natural state as any parent / animal trainer can attest.
- lagrange77 2y ago
  > How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? Why do you single out drivers? If the whole I/O behaviour of the computer would be performed by the NN, why not drivers? > Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer? Yes and that bit sounds to be relatively easy to automate. > How would the neural net being trained distinguish between good, wanted input/output combinations versus bad, error input/output combinations? I guess you would put that information into the dataset. In supervised learning it's called labels.
  - thesuperbigfrog 2y ago
    >> You put that information into the dataset. In supervised learning it's called labels. I was assuming that the "general purpose computing" training dataset would be so unfathomably large that unsupervised learning would be a necessity. Who is going to label the "general purpose computing" training dataset and how would it be persisted?
    - lagrange77 2y ago
      > Who is going to label the "general purpose computing" training dataset That's what i imagined to be easy to automate. We have tons of inputs* and real computers, that will output what real computers would output. * and hopefully the knowledge to come up with a set of inputs that (together with an actual general purpose computer) contains the essence of what general purpose computing is.
- boznz 2y ago
  It is not magical if it is allowed by the laws of physics
  - weare138 2y ago
    That's why I'm introducing my new Quantum Heisenberg computer. It works until you observe it.
    - dzhiurgis 2y ago
      Sounds like most of my code :(
- yellowapple 2y ago
  > How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? That's my impression, yeah: the neural net would learn to associate input signals with output signals. If this could ever be made to work then it'd have some pretty neat implications for human prosthetics. > How would such a magical neural net computer be trained? You'd need some way to praise or scold the thing. Probably a debug line or something to encode pass v. fail. > How would you program such a computer or load new software onto it? If the whole thing is a single neural net, wouldn't the neural net need to be replaced in order to add new functionality or correct errors/bugs? I think you answered your own question: swap out the entire neural net (which would probably entail a hardware swap unless you're able to train a neural net to replace itself). > How would user data be persisted while upgrading the applications? Train the neural net to interface with a hard drive?
johnea 2y ago
I'm sure it's good for some things, but... I wouldn't want the automatic braking system in my car using this... 8-/
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
lagrange77 2y ago
Reminds me of Bio-neural gel packs. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Bio-neural_circuitry https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Bio-neural_circuitry
bob1029 2y ago
If we are talking about a single neural network that can do everything in real-time, then the only viable path I am aware of is spiking neural networks. When you are working with I/O, you need to be very sensitive to time domain considerations. Training a periodic timer (i.e. polling for a response) into the current crop of transformer models does not seem feasible outside of clunky agentic approaches that invoke some external tool.
richrichie 2y ago
This describes humans, cats, dogs, … Just like humans our source some tasks to classical computers, this computer will have to outsource tasks to classical computers.
drzzhan 2y ago
This reminds me of people in the past comparing computers as another brain because circuit network is similar to brain. I guess it is not impossible to construct one neural net. But how to train them, modify them (to add more programs), maintain them (security purpose), and make sure they are correct will be impossible in the near future (in my view). It would be crazy to see a madlad tunes every neuron to make a proof of concept though.
petermcneeley 2y ago
Is this the same guy that said self driving cars should also just be a single neural net?
pyinstallwoes 2y ago
So a human?
poldk 2y ago
In implementation neural nets end up being a variety of different chunks of code like we already have. They’re never just one file with one magical pattern doing all the magic Software industry is again re-inventing the marketing to justify sitting and doing largely the same job
DrMiaow 2y ago
That sounds a lot like what I have been building, but not one net. A system for evolving a system that can handle many nets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqvHjXfbI8o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqvHjXfbI8o
djaouen 2y ago
Well that doesn’t sound dangerous at all! /s
pointlessone 2y ago
We spent good 60 years to get OKish text rendering. I mean, some of us can tell the difference between Arial and Helvetica. Now imagine adding a new font to an OS like that: “Sure, boss! We only need to generate 5b examples for training and just 20 years of GPU time.”

25 points by bilsbie 2y ago

"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? How would such a magical neural net computer be trained? Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer? How would the neural net being trained distinguish between good, wanted input/output combinations versus bad, error input/output combinations? How would you program such a computer or load new software onto it? If the whole thing is a single neural net, wouldn't the neural net need to be replaced in order to add new functionality or correct errors/bugs? How would user data be persisted while upgrading the applications?

porphyra 2y ago
Theoretically the network could be trained on the raw input and output voltages of the camera and display serial interface and so on. But yes, it's a magical fantasy computer.
dojomouse 2y ago
I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists. The questions you pose are interesting ones, for the sake of the experiment I think at least: - Programming - Loading new software - Adding new functionality - Persisting user data Could all at least in principle be achieved without changing the network architecture, but rather just providing the relevant data at the inputs (eg the full bit stream of the install file of the new software being installed) and having that lead to adjustments in activations (not weights or architecture) across the network which lead to any future inputs to the network resulting in the outputs that would be expected in the presence of the new software. Same deal for the other examples. As to whether this is practical or achievable at present - not even remotely close in my view. But it’s still an interesting idea, even if just to think about why it wouldnt work and what that implies for future development direction of multimodal networks etc.
- Someone 2y ago
  > I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists. I think this kind of computer exists and is called ”brain”.
  - thesuperbigfrog 2y ago
    >> I think this kind of computer exists and is called ”brain”. True, but there are ethical and rights considerations unless you are building / growing an artifical brain. You can't just grab a human or sufficiently-suitable animal brain and turn them into your personal mentat (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Organizations_of_the_Dune_universe&diffonly=true#Mentats https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Organizations_of_...) or computing servitor (https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Servitor https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Servitor) to do your computing for you. (At least, not ethically.) Where would you get a brain to train? Also, it's not easy to train human / animal brains in their natural state as any parent / animal trainer can attest.
lagrange77 2y ago
> How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? Why do you single out drivers? If the whole I/O behaviour of the computer would be performed by the NN, why not drivers? > Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer? Yes and that bit sounds to be relatively easy to automate. > How would the neural net being trained distinguish between good, wanted input/output combinations versus bad, error input/output combinations? I guess you would put that information into the dataset. In supervised learning it's called labels.
- thesuperbigfrog 2y ago
  >> You put that information into the dataset. In supervised learning it's called labels. I was assuming that the "general purpose computing" training dataset would be so unfathomably large that unsupervised learning would be a necessity. Who is going to label the "general purpose computing" training dataset and how would it be persisted?
  - lagrange77 2y ago
    > Who is going to label the "general purpose computing" training dataset That's what i imagined to be easy to automate. We have tons of inputs* and real computers, that will output what real computers would output. * and hopefully the knowledge to come up with a set of inputs that (together with an actual general purpose computer) contains the essence of what general purpose computing is.
boznz 2y ago
It is not magical if it is allowed by the laws of physics
- weare138 2y ago
  That's why I'm introducing my new Quantum Heisenberg computer. It works until you observe it.
  - dzhiurgis 2y ago
    Sounds like most of my code :(
yellowapple 2y ago
> How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? That's my impression, yeah: the neural net would learn to associate input signals with output signals. If this could ever be made to work then it'd have some pretty neat implications for human prosthetics. > How would such a magical neural net computer be trained? You'd need some way to praise or scold the thing. Probably a debug line or something to encode pass v. fail. > How would you program such a computer or load new software onto it? If the whole thing is a single neural net, wouldn't the neural net need to be replaced in order to add new functionality or correct errors/bugs? I think you answered your own question: swap out the entire neural net (which would probably entail a hardware swap unless you're able to train a neural net to replace itself). > How would user data be persisted while upgrading the applications? Train the neural net to interface with a hard drive?

johnea 2y ago

I'm sure it's good for some things, but... I wouldn't want the automatic braking system in my car using this... 8-/

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

lagrange77 2y ago

Reminds me of Bio-neural gel packs. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Bio-neural_circuitry https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Bio-neural_circuitry

bob1029 2y ago

If we are talking about a single neural network that can do everything in real-time, then the only viable path I am aware of is spiking neural networks. When you are working with I/O, you need to be very sensitive to time domain considerations. Training a periodic timer (i.e. polling for a response) into the current crop of transformer models does not seem feasible outside of clunky agentic approaches that invoke some external tool.

richrichie 2y ago

This describes humans, cats, dogs, … Just like humans our source some tasks to classical computers, this computer will have to outsource tasks to classical computers.

drzzhan 2y ago

This reminds me of people in the past comparing computers as another brain because circuit network is similar to brain. I guess it is not impossible to construct one neural net. But how to train them, modify them (to add more programs), maintain them (security purpose), and make sure they are correct will be impossible in the near future (in my view). It would be crazy to see a madlad tunes every neuron to make a proof of concept though.

petermcneeley 2y ago

Is this the same guy that said self driving cars should also just be a single neural net?

pyinstallwoes 2y ago

So a human?

poldk 2y ago

In implementation neural nets end up being a variety of different chunks of code like we already have. They’re never just one file with one magical pattern doing all the magic Software industry is again re-inventing the marketing to justify sitting and doing largely the same job

DrMiaow 2y ago

That sounds a lot like what I have been building, but not one net. A system for evolving a system that can handle many nets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqvHjXfbI8o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqvHjXfbI8o

djaouen 2y ago

Well that doesn’t sound dangerous at all! /s

pointlessone 2y ago

We spent good 60 years to get OKish text rendering. I mean, some of us can tell the difference between Arial and Helvetica. Now imagine adding a new font to an OS like that: “Sure, boss! We only need to generate 5b examples for training and just 20 years of GPU time.”