We're building computers wrong [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#41

Post by mannykannot » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:03 PM UTC

autokad wrote: post #38

phendrenad2 wrote: post #2

With a clickbaity title like that, I knew this would be Veritisium before I clicked it. And now, having verified that it is, I share this information with you.

One thing about Veritasium is that they do get things wrong. They did one on electric circuits where if you had a circuit that was miles long with the energy source sitting right next to you, you would get current as soon as you turned on the electrical circuit because 'electricity doesnt follow the wire' or something along those lines. This has been disproven by people doing experiments

One could quibble over the details of the experiment, such as what sort of lamp to use, but Maxwell's laws would have to be repealed for the experiment to not work essentially as Veritasium claimed. Check out "electromagnetic induction" and "displacement current".

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#42

Post by mardifoufs » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:15 PM UTC

ah9dja wrote: post #13

l33t2328 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something about Veritasium absolutely rubs me the wrong way, and I generally like Youtube education creators, but his videos are borderline unwatchable for me. Does anyone have an explanation for what it is about his videos that is so grating?

Same, but it wasn't this unbearable in the beginning. I think it's partly me thinking there's no way he understands such wide ranging subjects at such great depths without significant research and prep for the video, which contradicts how casually and confidently he's presenting everything. I'm used to expecting a more scripted presentation in these cases, which it probably is, but it doesn't sound like it.

Veritasium used to do a lot less a/b testing on his videos and I guess maybe he just got too big too fast. The thing that bothers me the most though is that he went from almost exclusively explaining interesting scientific facts/experiments to a more "aggressive" style where a lot of his videos are about x being wrong and here is z reason why. And I personally just don't like that style, especially when it turns out that there is a lot more nuance than his titles would indicate. I mean what are the odds of an entire field being wrong , and the truth is actually in a 15 mins youtube video by a very general science channel?

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#43

Post by agumonkey » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:16 PM UTC

i find funny the parallel between the uptake of reactive programming and analog computing (same kind of real time smooth coupling)

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#44

Post by Animats » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:29 PM UTC

That video has one of the best explanations of how and why deep learning works.

The argument for analog is weaker. I've tried some stuff with analog computers, and at one time I was into op-amp circuits. The basic problems are noise and inflexibility. However, that may change as people develop ICs that are reconfigurable, like an FPGA.

Flash memory cells as multipliers by a changeable but not dynamic value are a new idea. That only leads to analog ICs that do a pre-trained neural net, though. Running neural nets isn't that expensive. It's training deep neural nets that needs entire data centers. If they can figure out a way to do the whole backpropagation thing in analog, that would be impressive.

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#45

Post by daltont » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

eternityforest wrote: post #30

mastax wrote: post #21

This video discusses the history and principles of classical analog computing and then says that analog computers have energy efficiency benefits over digital computers. This can give the incorrect impression that classical analog computers are more efficient than digital computers, which is absolutely not correct. It may be true that modern analog phase-change memory AI accelerators are more efficient than their dig…

People always love to say some old lost tech is better than the modern version But it's like, a one in a thousand shot.Almost all modern tech is better with regressions lasting a decade at most. Occasionally there are rumors of some modern medical treatments being worse even though medicine as a whole improves, but mechanical and electrical stuff is much better understood and more controlled. The exception is a few s…

Modern refrigerators and washing appliance can be really flaky from software bugs. I've talk to others who have $3000 fancy stainless steel refrigerators and they seem vulnerable to weird and hard to diagnose problems.

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#46

Post by throwaway14356 » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

autokad wrote: post #37

eternityforest wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People always love to say some old lost tech is better than the modern version But it's like, a one in a thousand shot.Almost all modern tech is better with regressions lasting a decade at most. Occasionally there are rumors of some modern medical treatments being worse even though medicine as a whole improves, but mechanical and electrical stuff is much better understood and more controlled. The exception is a few s…

The analog computers on the Missouri class battleships was never upgraded because the kill radius of the shells was larger than the margin of error the analog computers introduced and that the analog computers required less electricity which is good for something such as a ship. So in this way, yes, they are better (these computers developed in the 30s). It depends on the application. > Occasionally there are rumors…

it just isnt so binary. old tech is always better than new in various ways time tested being the largest factor. we stil move on for reasons

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#47

Post by austinl » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

eternityforest wrote: post #30

mastax wrote: post #21

This video discusses the history and principles of classical analog computing and then says that analog computers have energy efficiency benefits over digital computers. This can give the incorrect impression that classical analog computers are more efficient than digital computers, which is absolutely not correct. It may be true that modern analog phase-change memory AI accelerators are more efficient than their dig…

People always love to say some old lost tech is better than the modern version But it's like, a one in a thousand shot.Almost all modern tech is better with regressions lasting a decade at most. Occasionally there are rumors of some modern medical treatments being worse even though medicine as a whole improves, but mechanical and electrical stuff is much better understood and more controlled. The exception is a few s…

The ancient tech myth I see the most is the idea that the recipe for "Roman concrete" was lost, and somehow modern engineers can't figure out how to make a superior mix.

Certainly, Roman engineers built incredible unreinforced concrete structures. But this was accomplished through structural engineering techniques designed to keep the concrete compressed (e.g. arches, domes). Modern structures like elevated highways and skyscrapers would be impossible to build this way, and require steel reinforcement.

While the mix the Romans used was slightly different (apparently it contained a bit of volcanic ash and used less water), modern engineers deliberately choose a different mix based on the structure. E.g. larger structures with natural reinformcement, like dams, will tend to use a mix closer to what the Romans used.

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#48

Post by aroundtown » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:51 PM UTC

l33t2328 wrote: post #5

phendrenad2 wrote: post #2

With a clickbaity title like that, I knew this would be Veritisium before I clicked it. And now, having verified that it is, I share this information with you.

Something about Veritasium absolutely rubs me the wrong way, and I generally like Youtube education creators, but his videos are borderline unwatchable for me. Does anyone have an explanation for what it is about his videos that is so grating?

The two things that bother me about Veritasium are his brand of pseudo-intellectual (smugness maybe?) and the fact that his videos often aren't telling the whole picture.

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#49

Post by dabernathy89 » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 9:58 PM UTC

l33t2328 wrote: post #5

phendrenad2 wrote: post #2

With a clickbaity title like that, I knew this would be Veritisium before I clicked it. And now, having verified that it is, I share this information with you.

Something about Veritasium absolutely rubs me the wrong way, and I generally like Youtube education creators, but his videos are borderline unwatchable for me. Does anyone have an explanation for what it is about his videos that is so grating?

I really enjoy his content, and I don't expect it to be exhaustive or cover all angles and approaches to a topic. To each his own ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: We're building computers wrong [video]

#50

Post by periheli0n » Fri, Mar 04, 2022, 10:06 PM UTC

Yes, analog computing can be more efficient and faster. But there are reasons why analog was eclipsed by digital.

1. Flexibility. Reprogramming digital computation is easy and quick.

2. Robustness. One can mass-produce devices that operate in the digital domain and sell them as working as spec'd. But operate them in the analog domain, and you will work with a million snowflakes that all operate slightly differently, giving different computation results. And when temperature changes, the result of your analog computation will inevitably change, too. You can work around that by adding more circuitry, and partly also on the algorithmic end but it will cost efficiency and precision.

Matrix multiplication on an analog device is great, unless you want an exact and reproducible result.