That would have prevented Xbox and Playstation sharing the same x86 internals.Natural progression would have been ruiz kicked out by the board, Jensen instated
No it wouldn't have. Nvidia and microsoft had a bit of a falling out over the original xbox. Microsoft chose then ATI technologies for the 360, the rival of nvidia then. Historically while the two were rivals nvidia had more successes than ati. amd overpayed for ati, the two parties said as much years after the fact. Playstation and Xbox could have gone to ati in an alternate timeline but they would have tried AMD first. Because NVidia would have ceased to exist as it would have been absorbed by AMD. Su may have come back to x86 or she would never have. Take her out of the timeline or put her in, it doesn't matter. You're assuming microsoft or sony wouldn't opt for amd then when their problem along with other companies having a problem was nvidia. In that timeline AMD wouldn't have faltered so much due to overpaying for ATI. Jensen now or then was a much more capable ceo than hector ruiz.That would have prevented Xbox and Playstation sharing the same x86 internals.
Main reason AMD won both console makers over was Lisa's "success" with Playstation 3 (she got IBM, Toshiba and Sony to collaborate on the Cell CPU). While the Cell was too ambitious for its time and a pain to program, Lisa likely saw the pros of getting thousands of experienced x86 programmers interested in programming x86 consoles too and made it happen. It sucks that she's been lured by the Dark Side of enterprise profits...
Intellectuals get used by the morons everywhere. It seems to be the cool thing to do these days. Excuse me while I attend to a moron.hardware engineers are underpaid across the board for the amount of work they put in. There's some bs arguments about it but there's no reason a 20 year veteran in hardware engineering should be paid maybe 300K total at some companies while a zit faced mentally challenged moron who's 3 years out of a good college is making that much money starting and will likely triple their yearly totals within a decade. it's all perverse.
Calling some or most of my colleagues or myself intellectuals is a stretch. to put it plainly some are butt hurt over the fact that a 30 yo today working for a craphole like meta or idk amazon is clearing a million a year in total compensation. that is unfair because they get to sit around home in their pajama bottoms and play video games in between "work" which likely consists of copy and pasting prefabricated snippets of "code" it would be easier to a be a woman in this field, have a faux affair and get a large 8 figure settlement than work your ass off until your 60s and then retire with a crap pension and shot eyesight and back problems.Intellectuals get used by the morons everywhere. It seems to be the cool thing to do these days. Excuse me while I attend to a moron.
Either way transformer or not(if entropy is to be maintained, I assume it is), you're gonna need one set of neurons per layer per customer, the weights are static post training, so it makes sense, you just need that one "neuron" context pr layer executed. We dont know how many layers in GPT? But supposed it would be 6, then you'd be able to process 6 customers in parallel on the same network. But again, as the weights are static and by far and large the most memory intensive in a network, there is not reason why you couldnt spawn a lot of networks with individual neurons but sharing the same weights. That way you'd get parallelism both within the same network and across networks sharing weights.I'll admit my mistake now. Your link said it, not you. But you can still take the credit--there is plenty of credit to go around and plenty of learning to do when it comes to AI.
"The Transformer is also able to parallelize its computations, which means that it can process multiple requests at the same time. This allows ChatGPT to respond to user queries very quickly."
AI has two elements: training and inference. You are completely ignoring half of the picture.
Training requires massive amounts of power and data. That training will mostly be done in servers on the internet. Imagine things like teaching a computer what an image of a fish looks like--that will be done in the cloud.
But inference, where you use a model that the training created, often will not be done on servers. Things like asking PowerPoint to browse all of your computer photos to make a collage of photos of your father fishing for his memorial service--that is most likely done on individual devices. Focus the laptop camera only on your face (even more specifically, focus on your eyes) during a conference call--done on your laptop not the cloud. Getting photoshop to properly select the subject (all of it) and none of the background (none of it)--that will be done on your computer. Real-time voice translation from any language to any language works best on your device, especially if you are not in internet range. Having Microsoft Word write a cover letter summarizing your work is best done on your work desktop and not have all your sensitive work data sent to the cloud. Having Excel scan all your data to write your quarterly business report is best done in secret to avoid insider trading laws--that is on your computer not in the cloud. Etc.
He's one of those yobs who think Apple is selling your data to third parties despite them saying they don't. Apple doesn't, but uses their user data outlined here in the link below for their own metrics but they use those anonymized metrics to sell ad space only on their platform. In 2022 apple's ad revenue jumped from under 2b a year to nearly 20b. this is due to google paying them more to be the default search engine and also because advertisers dropped meta and google to go to apple directly if the were targetting apple consumers. you and I know the typical iphone owner and mbp owner spends more on apps and services than the typical android owner and there's an income disparity too with apple product owners typically bringing in more than android users at the normal consumer level. techies and execs... is different.I don't suppose you have some proof of this?