Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GNU Gneural Network

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 111 posts

Re: GNU Gneural Network

#91

Post by [deleted] »

dharma1 wrote: post #25
microtonal wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I'm not sure how Gneural plans to compete with those packages without support from CUDA or cuDNN, all of which are distinctly not open source. I don't see the point either. Gneural will probably never be better than Theano, Torch, Tensorflow, Caffe, et al., which are already open. If anything, time/resources are much better invested in contributing to a polished/competitive OpenCL backend to one of thes…

Caffe has an OpenCL backend - https://github.com/BVLC/caffe/tree/opencl

[deleted]

Re: GNU Gneural Network

#93

Post by tajen »

Talking about this, GNU/the FSF should start drafting an OSS license for neural networks. Like APL Afferro for cloud services, the specifics of neural networks is that data is strategic.

APL -> Guaranty of OSS for the desktop

APL Afferro -> Guaranty of OSS for the cloud

??? -> Guaranty of OSS for NNs

Re: GNU Gneural Network

#96

Post by teythoon »

jjawssd wrote: post #11
semisight wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost all of the open source software in the area is permissive-licensed, and relies on non-free components (CUDA). To be honest, I'm not sure how Gneural plans to compete with those packages without support from CUDA or cuDNN, all of which are distinctly not open source.

Gneural will compete with Theano sort of like how the GNU Hurd competes with Linux

I know you're just trying to be funny, but I don't think it's funny at all.

The Linux kernel undoubtedly many features that the Hurd system lacks, but that is due to the severe lack of manpower of the latter system and the billions of Dollars being poured into the former.

On the other hand the Hurd has features that the Linux kernel can never hope to achieve because of its architecture.

Re: GNU Gneural Network

#98

Post by cLeEOGPw »

riscy wrote: post #28
fche wrote: post #26

The "ethical motivations" section is out of place here. Its moaning about "money driven companies" (as though money were a bad thing), or "monopoly" (which does not exist in AI), just reflects badly upon the project.

The monopoly _does_ exist in AI: machine learning is entirely data driven, and companies like Facebook and Twitter quite literally have investors throwing money at them because they have such valuable data for that purpose. Google is no different.

So this library isn't solving anything then.

Re: GNU Gneural Network

#99

Post by Aeolos »

teythoon wrote: post #96
jjawssd wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gneural will compete with Theano sort of like how the GNU Hurd competes with Linux

I know you're just trying to be funny, but I don't think it's funny at all. The Linux kernel undoubtedly many features that the Hurd system lacks, but that is due to the severe lack of manpower of the latter system and the billions of Dollars being poured into the former. On the other hand the Hurd has features that the Linux kernel can never hope to achieve because of its architecture.

> The Linux kernel undoubtedly many features that the Hurd system lacks, but that is due to the severe lack of manpower of the latter system and the billions of Dollars being poured into the former.

That's why GNU Hurd is essentially a dead project. Sadly it never attracted the attention and manpower necessary for it to survive.

> On the other hand the Hurd has features that the Linux kernel can never hope to achieve because of its architecture.

For example?

Re: GNU Gneural Network

#100

Post by IshKebab »

chei0aiV wrote: post #88
IshKebab wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they've really missed the fact that it isn't the algorithms or code that we're missing out on. Companies are usually pretty open about these because they know it isn't bit that is hard to compete on. The hard bit is the training data. Good luck collecting 10k hours of transcribed speech, or 10k recordings of "Okay Google".

http://voxforge.org/

That's the biggest by far and still only 1k hours.

But yes, that is what we need more of - not matrix libraries.

Post reply on HN