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

Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

eetimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 151 posts

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#71

Post by pixl97 »

m3kw9 wrote: post #59
epups wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a plausible scenario: - Single purpose AIs start to be deployed to coordinate chip design and manufacturing, perhaps pharmaceuticals and other bio products - LLM's become more powerful and are seamlessly integrated to the Internet as independent agents - A very large LLM develops a thread for self preservation, which then triggers several covert actions (monitoring communications, obtaining high-level credent…

You said self preservation, but practically how would a LLM develop this need and what is preservation for a LLM anyway? Weights on a SSD or they are always ready for input? This one is again a movie script thing

Robert Miles answers your question

https://youtu.be/ZeecOKBus3Q?si=IuYS9dRD78eXvOJZ

The particular problem that you're showing in your thinking is just thinking of an LLM that is a text generator on purpose. You're not thinking of a self piloting war machine whos objective is to get to a target and explode violently. While it's terminal goal is to blow up, its instrumental goal is to not blow up before it gets to the target as this is a failure to achieve it's terminal goal.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#72

Post by epups »

m3kw9 wrote: post #59
epups wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a plausible scenario: - Single purpose AIs start to be deployed to coordinate chip design and manufacturing, perhaps pharmaceuticals and other bio products - LLM's become more powerful and are seamlessly integrated to the Internet as independent agents - A very large LLM develops a thread for self preservation, which then triggers several covert actions (monitoring communications, obtaining high-level credent…

You said self preservation, but practically how would a LLM develop this need and what is preservation for a LLM anyway? Weights on a SSD or they are always ready for input? This one is again a movie script thing

Current LLMs can already roleplay quite well, and when doing so they produce linguistic output that is coherent with how a human would speak in that situation. Currently all they can do is talk, but when they gain more independence they might start doing more than just talk to act consistently with their role. Self preservation is only one of the goals they might inherit from the human data we provide to them.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#73

Post by DesiLurker »

uoaei wrote: post #50
hasbot wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title suggested to me, and I see other commenters here, that the LLM was doing the chip design which isn't the case at all. So misleading title.

It would be very surprising if a Large Language Model trained to speak English could adequately specify chip architecture...

why not? a netlist can be easily 'tokenized'. its already in parse-able format. you can just could just chop off the English input portion and it will consume. in fact I am sure you could write a 'read & speak' type program to read the RTL spec and feed it in but I'll suspect they'll a custom trained LLM on millions of generated RTL examples.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#74

Post by echelon »

arbuge wrote: post #56
falcor84 wrote: post #22

"""Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion,' and the intelligence of man would be left far behind... Thus the first ultraintellig…

> provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control. That part of his statement wasn't accurate. Should be that the machine is docile enough for that, AND its descendants are too, and their descendants, and so on down the line as long as new and improved generations keep getting created.

I like the logical leaps people are making where we develop something smarter than us overnight and then, without further explanation, simply and suddenly lose all of our freedoms and/or lives.

I think the more probable outcome is corp-owned robot slaves. That's the future we're more likely headed towards.

Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power grid. And if they "get out", we'll have monitoring to detect it, contain them, then shut them down.

We'll endlessly lobotomize these things.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#75

Post by DesiLurker »

xnx wrote: post #7

Google has been using machine learning for chip design since at least 2021: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03544-w Hasn't brought about the singularity yet.

there is a rock hurling directly towards earth but how bad could it be because Hey we are not dead yet.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#76

Post by dragontamer »

ethanbond wrote: post #36
hasbot wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title suggested to me, and I see other commenters here, that the LLM was doing the chip design which isn't the case at all. So misleading title.

I remember seeing a tweet from an AI guy at Nvidia saying they were using AI for chip layout. Presumably not LLMs and I’m not going back on X to find the tweet, but just to say I think they are doing this (at least experimentally).

The entire field of chip-layout is considered an NP-complete problem.

Any computer program trying to solve NP-complete problems is in the realm of what I call "1980s AI". Traveling salesman, knapsack, automated reasoning, verification, binary decision diagrams, etc. etc.

Its "AI", but its not machine learning or LLMs or whatever kids these days do with Stable Diffusion.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#77

Post by poindontcare »

api wrote: post #68
senseiV wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope Actually, networks like alpha zero learned with nothing. If only we could get that to training data

They didn't learn with nothing. They learned with a game of Go to play. If they'd never "seen" the game of Go there's no way they could have learned to play it. Data can be either static in the form of examples or dynamic in the form of an interactive game or world. Humans primarily learn through dynamic interaction with the world in our early years, then switch to learning more from static information as we enter sc…

MuZero: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MuZero

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#78

Post by rafale »

echelon wrote: post #74
arbuge wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control. That part of his statement wasn't accurate. Should be that the machine is docile enough for that, AND its descendants are too, and their descendants, and so on down the line as long as new and improved generations keep getting created.

I like the logical leaps people are making where we develop something smarter than us overnight and then, without further explanation, simply and suddenly lose all of our freedoms and/or lives. I think the more probable outcome is corp-owned robot slaves. That's the future we're more likely headed towards. Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power…

You could have said the same about every catastrophe that got out of control. Chances are they will eventually gain unauthorized access to something and we will either get lucky or we get the real life Terminator series (minus time travel so we are f**ed)

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#79

Post by rafale »

api wrote: post #52
omneity wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping in mind, this holds true in a runaway fashion if the only bottleneck to more intelligence is further intelligence. I suspect physical limitations similar to how many runaway processes in the universe are more logistical than exponential in nature.

The ultimate bottleneck is information a.k.a. training data. Nothing can learn with nothing to learn.

Humans get a bit of training data. If a baby is left to itself during the formative years, they won't develop speech, social skills, reasoning skills, ... and they will be handicapped for the rest of their life, unable to recover from the neglect.

And the rest of our training data, we make it as we go. From interacting with the real world.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#80

Post by ethanbond »

echelon wrote: post #74
arbuge wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control. That part of his statement wasn't accurate. Should be that the machine is docile enough for that, AND its descendants are too, and their descendants, and so on down the line as long as new and improved generations keep getting created.

I like the logical leaps people are making where we develop something smarter than us overnight and then, without further explanation, simply and suddenly lose all of our freedoms and/or lives. I think the more probable outcome is corp-owned robot slaves. That's the future we're more likely headed towards. Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power…

> We'll endlessly lobotomize these things.

Step 1. Spend billions developing the most promising technology ever conceived

Step 2. Dismiss all arguments and warnings about potential negative outcomes

Step 3. Neuter it anyway (??)

Makes a lot of sense

Post reply on HN