People were already doing parallelisable problems before GPUs appeared. For example 3D rendering is highly parallelisable. But unless you had access to specialised hardware you were unable to exploit it. Consider GPU Gems 1 or 2. The applications are from quite a few different disciplines (computational chemistry to finance) and yet very little reference is made to parallel programming because the code to do these things was already completely in a streaming form.
But do I have any actual news to report...NO! Please, Slashdot editors, do some work, check to see if the submitted story actually has any content. (No offence intended to the author who I'm sure was very excited and obviously knows what type of story his editors will pick.)
...the moment. It depends on your application of course. But for number crunching it's hard to beat the GPU on recent graphics cards. For non-graphics applications you can expect speedups from 5-15 times (not %) for things like linear algebra, option pricing and singnal processing. This has been increasing faster than Moore's Law and will likely increase faster. Code written for GPUs is inherently streaming code, and hence easily parallelisable, so many of the complex dependencies that make CPUs tricky to speed up go away. These are exciting times and a big shift in programming paradigm is taking place.
We already know from Star Trek:The Movie that whatever happens Voyager will get picked up by a superintelligent alien from outer space. I wonder if the letters 'o', 'y' and 'a' have rubbed off yet.
Really! People working in neural nets don't half talk a lot of bull sometimes. We have a universality theorem saying that any function can be represented by two layers of signoidal functions. So what?. Any smooth (univariate) function can be represented arbitrarily accurately by a piece of the Riemann zeta function (believe it or not!) but nobody goes round saying that this is a good way to represent functions. The existence theorem for neural nets is devoid of relevance to anything. It's just an abstract existence theorem that tells you nothing about real world applications
He he! I'd never heard of the "Vegetable Lamb" before. Thanks for the link!
It's obvious why the search failed
on
The Baby Bootstrap?
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Who calls what you describe "baby boostrap"? I haven't worked in AI myself but have a keen interest in it and have friends who worked in the field including one who worked on Cyc (who says it's a scam BTW). Not once have I ever heard the expression "baby bootstrap". But what you've done is cool. Rather than search on precisely that term you've submitted your search to the serach engine known as "/. readership". It's not terribly relaible but it is good at fuzzy searches like yours.
The Flat Earth Society was once a serious and respectable society but it folded a few years back. Now anyone can set up a web domain with a name containing the words "flat earth society" and sully their name.
...except that Adobe have written the world's worst PDF reader for the Palm. Pity, as the hardware is perfect. If I had the time I'd write an application to convert PDF to bitmaps that can be viewed on the Palm - but that's easy enough that surely someone out there has done this already.
What a lot of bull. It's a response to a standard myth that people in the last few hundred years knew the earth wasn't flat. Intellectuals were fully aware. Even Christians were fully aware, despite erroneous claims by many historians. But the population of the Earth has always been largely uneducated and it's not trivial to deduce that the Earth is spherical from the existence of a horizon (for one thing this only works at sea and yet prior to 1900 few people traveled more than a few miles in their lives). There is a tendency in historical writing to conflate "educated people" with "everyone" and we frequently see incorrect statements like "everyone knew the world wasn't flat" in historical writing. And I don't see what any of this has to do with karma whoring, the same could be said of any statement anyone makes on slashdot.
I'd put money on 90% of the entire population of the Earth before 1900 believing the Earth was flat. I expect at least 30% of the world's population today think it still is. Maybe when you say "major group" you mean "major group among the world's intellectual elite".
Radiation from cellphones is at completely different frequencies from what is produced by CRTs and they have completely different biological consequences. Anyone who says that the amount of radiation from one isn't "anywhere near" that put out by the other, and expects that to be a useful statement, is clearly talking out of their ass. "I've heard" and this is moderated up. Please! I know this is April 1 but that's going too far.
On April Fool's Day the idea is that you tell people stuff that isn't true so that they are fooled into believing it and we get to laugh at them. The important thing is that they need to be fooled into believing it. Just saying stuff that isn't true kinda misses the point. Admittedly it makes the speaker of the untrue stuff seem like a fool but April Fool's Day is more about make other people seem like fools than being a fool yourself. You're allowed to do the latter any day of the year. Make sense?
If you lack the skill to fool other people another alternative is to say stuff that's untrue but funny. I've always felt this was a poor substitute for playing a joke on someone else but it is generally considered an acceptable form of April Fool's Day behavior.
Anyway, now you're ready and armed to properly enjoy this special day that's granted to us but once a year.
I understand that when a joke is explained it isn't funny any more. That's OK, I don't mind. I just want to understand at an intellectual level why this is supposed to be funny.
Hey! As an amateur robot builder myself I'd love to see some details of what you did. Any chance that you'll be putting together a web site with pictures and maybe writing up a little about what you had to do to make your robot work?
With a country filled with lazy, "I'm too good for this" shirks like parent poster...
You, sir, have an amazing ability to make inferences from the tiniest scraps of information. Unfortunately you need to learn to make correct inferences.
I lost interest at that bit where it started talking about what a mess the rain makes of West Phoenix. It's completely irrelevant and is the kind of filler people write to dilute stories with technical subject matter to make them more palatable to the masses who, let's face it, want to patronisingly talk about how smart these Mexican kids are without actually bothering to find out what they did. Someone point me to an article that tells me what they actually did and how they did it.
Slashdot Mirror
People were already doing parallelisable problems before GPUs appeared. For example 3D rendering is highly parallelisable. But unless you had access to specialised hardware you were unable to exploit it. Consider GPU Gems 1 or 2. The applications are from quite a few different disciplines (computational chemistry to finance) and yet very little reference is made to parallel programming because the code to do these things was already completely in a streaming form.
But do I have any actual news to report...NO! Please, Slashdot editors, do some work, check to see if the submitted story actually has any content. (No offence intended to the author who I'm sure was very excited and obviously knows what type of story his editors will pick.)
...the moment. It depends on your application of course. But for number crunching it's hard to beat the GPU on recent graphics cards. For non-graphics applications you can expect speedups from 5-15 times (not %) for things like linear algebra, option pricing and singnal processing. This has been increasing faster than Moore's Law and will likely increase faster. Code written for GPUs is inherently streaming code, and hence easily parallelisable, so many of the complex dependencies that make CPUs tricky to speed up go away. These are exciting times and a big shift in programming paradigm is taking place.
We already know from Star Trek:The Movie that whatever happens Voyager will get picked up by a superintelligent alien from outer space. I wonder if the letters 'o', 'y' and 'a' have rubbed off yet.
Really! People working in neural nets don't half talk a lot of bull sometimes. We have a universality theorem saying that any function can be represented by two layers of signoidal functions. So what?. Any smooth (univariate) function can be represented arbitrarily accurately by a piece of the Riemann zeta function (believe it or not!) but nobody goes round saying that this is a good way to represent functions. The existence theorem for neural nets is devoid of relevance to anything. It's just an abstract existence theorem that tells you nothing about real world applications
He he! I'd never heard of the "Vegetable Lamb" before. Thanks for the link!
Who calls what you describe "baby boostrap"? I haven't worked in AI myself but have a keen interest in it and have friends who worked in the field including one who worked on Cyc (who says it's a scam BTW). Not once have I ever heard the expression "baby bootstrap". But what you've done is cool. Rather than search on precisely that term you've submitted your search to the serach engine known as "/. readership". It's not terribly relaible but it is good at fuzzy searches like yours.
...may father was you insensitive clod!
The Flat Earth Society was once a serious and respectable society but it folded a few years back. Now anyone can set up a web domain with a name containing the words "flat earth society" and sully their name.
...except that Adobe have written the world's worst PDF reader for the Palm. Pity, as the hardware is perfect. If I had the time I'd write an application to convert PDF to bitmaps that can be viewed on the Palm - but that's easy enough that surely someone out there has done this already.
What a lot of bull. It's a response to a standard myth that people in the last few hundred years knew the earth wasn't flat. Intellectuals were fully aware. Even Christians were fully aware, despite erroneous claims by many historians. But the population of the Earth has always been largely uneducated and it's not trivial to deduce that the Earth is spherical from the existence of a horizon (for one thing this only works at sea and yet prior to 1900 few people traveled more than a few miles in their lives). There is a tendency in historical writing to conflate "educated people" with "everyone" and we frequently see incorrect statements like "everyone knew the world wasn't flat" in historical writing. And I don't see what any of this has to do with karma whoring, the same could be said of any statement anyone makes on slashdot.
...to watch TV for you. Then you can go and spend that time doing something interesting with your life.
Strictly peaking you should be using ordinals, not cardinals, to label releases.
...ten to the thirtieth, ten to the thirtieth and one, ten to the thirtieth and two...
The best possible April Fool's joke would be a funny one. Failing that, slightly humorous would do.
It's more cool, don't you think, if releasing that kind of information isn't legal.
Radiation from cellphones is at completely different frequencies from what is produced by CRTs and they have completely different biological consequences. Anyone who says that the amount of radiation from one isn't "anywhere near" that put out by the other, and expects that to be a useful statement, is clearly talking out of their ass. "I've heard" and this is moderated up. Please! I know this is April 1 but that's going too far.
If you lack the skill to fool other people another alternative is to say stuff that's untrue but funny. I've always felt this was a poor substitute for playing a joke on someone else but it is generally considered an acceptable form of April Fool's Day behavior.
Anyway, now you're ready and armed to properly enjoy this special day that's granted to us but once a year.
I understand that when a joke is explained it isn't funny any more. That's OK, I don't mind. I just want to understand at an intellectual level why this is supposed to be funny.
Titan
- Lakes and rivers
- Clouds and real weather
- Water spouting volcanoes
- Complex organic compounds
- Giant ringed planet in the sky (at least on a clear day, if they ever happen???)
Need I say more?Hey! As an amateur robot builder myself I'd love to see some details of what you did. Any chance that you'll be putting together a web site with pictures and maybe writing up a little about what you had to do to make your robot work?
...I'd like to hear why you think X years is better than, say X+10 years.
I lost interest at that bit where it started talking about what a mess the rain makes of West Phoenix. It's completely irrelevant and is the kind of filler people write to dilute stories with technical subject matter to make them more palatable to the masses who, let's face it, want to patronisingly talk about how smart these Mexican kids are without actually bothering to find out what they did. Someone point me to an article that tells me what they actually did and how they did it.