Yeah, historically it’s been software that’s limited AMD here. Not surprised to hear that may still be the issue. NVidia’s biggest edge was really CUDA.
Software aside, does AMD have a potential strategic advantage in the long term since they are also producing top tier CPUs? Is there some future benefit to tightly integrating their products? IIRC NVidia partnered with intel for this purpose, right?
I’ve been wondering about this. It used to be that different chip makers had different efficiencies, and so measuring two different companies chips in gigawatts wouldn’t be a good apples to apples comparison.
Is that still true or has the gap narrowed? Or have GPUs always been similar across the board and it’s CPUs that have more disparity?
Franklin Templeton | Quant Implementation Lead | Boston, MA | In-Person | $145k - $190k + Bonus
We're building an end-to-end portfolio construction system to support FTIS, a $100bn multi-asset investment manager within FT. This is a front office role that will help guide our quantitative staff as we build out this new system. This project is a strategic objective for FTIS, highly visible, and frankly one of the most fun jobs in the industry.
We're looking for mid to senior level researchers or developers with strong buy-side backgrounds who can help translate our investment process into a robust, scalable, and approachable design.
Reach out with any questions - dan.nadler (at) franklintempleton (dot) com
I can remember for example when I was wrong and how and still responding correctly, I don't have to forget my wrong answer to respond with the correct one.
I have a similar mindset though less focused on the type of questions being asked and more about how many times I have to answer the same question.
Ideally, the number is one time. As in one conversation where the person walks away understanding the answer. If I have to have that conversation more than once it’s a problem.
Obviously there’s nuance - it can take time to get your head around a new concept or hard problem. But in any case, I like that as one dimension when thinking about a person’s skill/level/potential.
> I have a similar mindset though less focused on the type of questions being asked and more about how many times I have to answer the same question.
Yes, I completely agree and do that as well.
The focus on “type of question” has been something I’ve done more recently after helping someone out. Just reflecting on “what type of problem did I just help solve and how can I make it easier for them to solve on their own in the future”. Very often the answer is “more documentation” or similar, getting things only in my head down where everyone can benefit. On the other hand I walk away from some problems I’ve helped with frustrated that the answer was 1-2 Google searches away and the issue had nothing to do with “our stack”.
I mostly agree with you, but there’s another angle that is similar. How many times does the person come to you with a similar question but on a slightly different topic and you need to guide them through _how to find_ the answer. I’ve supervised mid level engineers in the past who will just drop a stack trace in a slack DM and expect me to tell them what’s wrong - I didn’t write the code so why do you expect me to figure it out for you. But when I have the conversation of “we’ve talked about how to dxooore these kinds of problems a few times now, next time you need to apply these techniques”,it often doesn’t land.
Actually, I think humans require much less energy than LLMs. Even raising a human to adulthood would be cheaper from a calorie perspective than running an AGI algorithm (probably). Its the whole reason why the premise of the Matrix was ridiculous :)
Some quick back of the envelope says that it would take around 35 MWh to get to 40 years old (2000 kcal per day)
I read an article once that claimed an early draft/version that was cut for time or narrative complexity had the human brains being used as raw compute for the machines, with the Matrix being the idle process to keep the minds sane and functional for their ultimate purpose.
I've read a file that claimed to be that script; it made more sense for the machines to use human brains to control fusion reactors than for humans to be directly used as batteries.
(And way more sense than how the power of love was supposed to be a nearly magical power source in #4. Boo. Some of the ideas in that film were interesting, but that bit was exceptionally cliché.)
I'd love to read that file. Of course, we're close (really close?) to being able to just ask an LLM to give us a personalized version of the script to do away with whatever set of flaws bother us the most.
One of the ways I experiment with LLMs is to get them to write short stories.
Two axies: Quality and length.
They're good quality. Not award winning, but significantly better than e.g. even good Reddit fiction.
But they still struggle with length, despite what the specs say about context length. You might manage the script length needed for a kid's cartoon, but not yet a film.
I'll see if I can find another copy of the script; what I saw was long enough ago my computer had a PPC chip in it.
Beige proto-iMac. I had a 5200 as a teen and upgraded to either a 5300 or a 5400 at university for a few years — the latter broke while at university and I upgraded again to an eMac, but I think this was before then.
HA! I used REALbasic a bit back in the day, then spent my time comparing it to LiveCode, back then called Revolution. Geoff Perlman and I once co-presented at WWDC to compare the two tools.
reply