How long before there is a "we've detected your account has been used multiple times to re-setup a phone.. we've re-enabled the Google Nanny Safety mode.. also we've locked your google account just in case.. "
I mean other than hackers, who has needed to factory reset their phone more than once in a year you must be doing something shady... right right?
To be accurate, this is originally from Hastings 1955, Princeton
"APPROXIMATIONS FOR DIGITAL COMPUTERS BY CECIL HASTINGS", page 159-163, there are actually multiple versions of the approximation with different constants used. So the original work was done with the goal of being performant for computers of the 1950's.
Then the famous Abramowitz and Stegun guys put that in formula 4.4.45 with permission, then the nvidia CG library wrote some code that was based upon the formula, likely with some optimizations.
I ran this down, because I have a particular interest in vectorizable function approximations. Particular those that exploit bit-banging to handle range normalization. (Anyone have a good reference for that?)
Regrettably, this is NOT from Hastings 1955. Hastings provides Taylor series and Chebyshev polynomial approximations. The OP's solution is a Pade approximation, which are not covered at all in Hastings.
When you say "this is NOT from Hastings" I had to double check my post again -- I guess you are saying that the Pade approximation is not from Hastings, but the polynomial approximation that the OP referenced from nvidia from A&S and ultimately from Hastings, definitely is in Hastings on page 159 -- I think you were referring to the Pade approximation not being in Hastings, which appears to be true yes. In the article it is interesting that the OP tried taylor expansion and pade approximation, but not the fairly standard "welp lets just fit a Nth order polynomial to the arcsin" which is what Hastings did back in the day.
I imagine there is a process in place to allow cities / states / communities to place the cameras on polls. If Vegas somehow got around public comment process to put these on poles, then what would stop any random company from requesting to put their own camera there? Like lets say a motivated individual went through some process to put a camera on a pole someplace near somebody that would definitely make the govt official / flock exec etc nervous, what is stopping them? It sounds an awful lot like Flock is basically going to town's and saying "we will put up a bunch of cameras in a bunch of places" probably based upon algorithm's etc. How do they decide where these get put, who gets to decide that? Why can't any random company request to put up a camera on a random power pole? After they give the map to the govt officials, do they get a chance to say "oh this one by my house, can you move that?"
So using Stefan-Boltzmann equation if you have a 1m^2 surface at 100C you can radiate about 1kW from that surface -- assuming both sides radiate that, then lets assume it is double. Assume each blackwell chip + support electronics etc needs about 2kW of power to run. So each 1sq meter of say a copper plate is needed to cool 1 blackwell chip. So if you have some way to make some massive radiators that are basically giant plates spanning thousands of square meters, then you should be good. the Stefan-Boltzmann equation is proportional to the 4th power of T (in kelvin), so if you can somehow manage to use a heat pump for the heat from the GPU's into your heat sink such that you could run your radiators at a much hotter temperature, then the blackbody radiation that they put out dramatically goes up. So cooling is quite challenging but not impossible. (I also neglected importantly that you would need to use the giant solar panels as a sun shade for these radiators otherwise they would be pulling in heat from the sun)
For power, you need to somehow manage to generate all of the power that you would need to cool. So the most logical would be some huge solar panels -- assuming you could use similar tech to the space station, you can get aroudnd 100kW from those solar panels -- assume you can do say 10X better somehow, then now you have 1MW of power.
Unclear what the goal here is -- if the idea was doing this for cost, it sounds super unlikely to pan out -- if they want to put a datacenter in space such that nobody can tell somebody what to do, it would seem just as easy to go hide a datacenter in some random far flung corner of the world in a bunker. Seems just like a great way to light some money on fire.
Note all of this is mass that currently needs to be launched from Earth at significant cost - it is indeed nice this cost if finally going down thanks to partial launcher reusability (and hopefully full reusability soon as well) but I really don't see this making any economical sense unless a lot of this mass eventually comes from in situ resources you don't need to lift to orbit.
Also about the radiators - ideally they should radiate into empty space. If there is something in the way, like parts of your station or other radiators, then it will heat up - reducing effectiveness (you will have to remove this heat again) or even making stuff overheat.
At least I don't think you can realistically overheat the Sun. :-)
But I guess if you make the radiators reflective and hot enough they should still work to a even at Earths orbit in full sunlight ? Well, this is already in a "calculation needed" territor.
probably something like a stirling engine + working fluid going down tubes in the plate, it becomes worth it to develop silicon-on-insulator GPUs and other weird technologies that run at higher temps
Yea I’m super curious if you could build a heat pump to move the heat from the 100C GPUs to concentrate all of the heat into a blazingly hot radiator — and how well that would actually work.
Yea in an ideal world there would be a legal construct around AI agents in the cloud doing something on your behalf that could not be blocked by various stakeholders deciding they don't like the thing you are doing even if totally legal.
Things that would be considered fair use, or maybe annoying to certain companies should not be easy for companies to just wholesale block by leveraging business relationships.
Barring that, then yea, a local AI setup is the way to go.
Inference / Agentic AI implies "running models performantly using CPU cores" most likely (maybe with some optimizations / special AVX512 stuff) -- so essentially "welp, no sense in trying to build GPU's, we are too far behind nvidia to catch up".
Yea it is tricky for them -- the old model of "search, see google text / link ad, scroll, click website, scroll, see some ads on that page as well, done" will be replaced with "search, see google text / link ad, read AI result, 'and here are some relevant websites'" -- where all of the incentives there will be to "go into more depth" on the websites that are linked there.
The classic "we are taking something away in order to help you -- don't worry!"
In reality, nobody who works on bringing android to other hardware is somehow impeded by having extra device tree info in the source tree.
The most logical thing happening here is like Google is saying "hey man its hard to get drivers working, and we don't want a bunch of freeloaders leveraging our work!!"
The fact that Sam says he would open his laptop to ask Chatgpt something is almost like he is trying to avoid saying he would use his phone.
The reality is that we likely don't need any new devices as much as people want to keep saying that. If you have airpods and a phone you could talk to chatgpt and say "show me how to fix my kid's bike with a simple video on my phone" -- it buzzes your phone and boom the video is there. Sure it is missing the ability to take a picture of the world / video -- so in that case, a pair of the meta rayban glasses would do that -- again just use your phone / cloud, it all works. Or skip the special glasses and hold your phone up to the thing you want to take a picture of. No need for magical new devices.
Having a camera staring at me while I talk to somebody -- yea I'm gonna pass on that.
> Having a camera staring at me while I talk to somebody -- yea I'm gonna pass on that.
My fear is this is a choice you or I can't make; it's up to the whims of others who may choose to use these products.
Time has shown again and again that average people don't exactly value their autonomy or privacy when technology's involved, I have no doubt it'd be the same way with literal live-streaming cameras attached to people's faces.
reply