Slashdot Mirror
Sacrificing Accuracy For Speed and Efficiency In Processors
Skudd writes "Modern computing has always been reliant on accuracy and correct answers. Now, a professor at Rice University in Houston posits that some future applications could be revolutionized by 'probabilistic computing.' Quoting: 'This afternoon, Krishna Palem, speaking at a computer science meeting in San Francisco, will announce results of the first real-world test of his probabilistic computer chip: The chip, which thrives on random errors, ran seven times faster than today's best technology while using just 1/30th the electricity. ... The high density of transistors on existing chips also leads to a lot of background "noise." To compensate, engineers increase the voltage applied to computer circuits to overpower the noise and ensure precise calculations. Palem began wondering how much a slight reduction in the quality of calculations might improve speed and save energy. He soon realized that some information was more valuable than other information. For example, in calculating a bank balance of $13,000.81, getting the "13" correct is much more important than the "81." Producing an answer of $13,000.57 is much closer to being correct than $57,000.81. While Palem's technology may not have a future in calculating missions to Mars, it probably has one in such applications as streaming music and video on mobile devices, he said.'
And $81,000.31 is a much more correct answer!
Q: Why didn't Intel call the Pentium the 586?
A: Because they added 486 and 100 on the first Pentium and got 585.999983605.
Accuracy with financial calculations is extremely important. Hasn't this guy ever watched Superman 3?
http://twitter.com/onion2k
So what you're saying is that it might make all my MP3s sound like they are AutoTuned? But the battery will last 30 times longer?
I guess the question is can Cher sue over this technology?
i scrfcd accrc 4 spd a lng tm ago
What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
TOP TEN SLOGANS FOR THIS NEW PROCESSOR:
9.9999973251 - It's a FLAW, Dammit, not a Bug
8.9999163362 - It's the new math
7.9999414610 - Nearly 300 Correct Opcodes
6.9999831538 - "You Don't Need to Know What's Inside" (tm)
5.9999835137 - Redefining the PC -- and Mathematics As Well
4.9999999021 - We Fixed It, Really
3.9998245917 - Division Considered Harmful
2.9991523619 - Why Do You Think They Call It *Floating* Point?
1.9999103517 - We're Looking for a Few Good Flaws
0.9999999998 - "The Errata Inside" (tm)
You get a one-way ticket to pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
Watch out for your cornhole, bud.
I'd like to see executives at CBS explain how nipples showed ON TOP of a superbowl performer's outfit.
Talk about a wardrobe malfunction.
I can see the defense now:
Your honor: We ran probabilistic tests with out processors, and while we couldn't really duplicate the problem, we were able to show a penis during one test run. We'd really like to show it to you, but Ms. Jackson has stated that she would quote "Sue us into the ground" unquote.
But what about the conjugal visits?!
That was a very confusing video. What I learned from it: you haven't done some stuff, Zoom Fish!, widgets, Zoom Fish!, behind schedule, zoom, Fish!, widget framework, Fish!
I guess it's a system that lets you zoom in on fish?
Transistors are naively analog
Oh those simple-minded transistors. When will they learn?
Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
... that the economy is now based on Monopoly money.
Now when you log on to your online banking account, you'll get a Chance card:
Bank errors are in your favor... at the moment.