[flagged]
DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
71–80 of 174 posts
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#72A more accurate but less inspiring title would be: RAM Has a Design Tradeoff from 1966. I made another one on top. The first tradeoff, of 6x fewer transistors for some extra latency, is immensely beneficial. The second, of reducing some of that extra latency for extra copies of static data, is beneficial only to some extremely niche application. Still a very educational video about modern memory architecture. [EDIT:…
It could be a display bug on my side, but you posted this exact comment twice.
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, something is funny here. In the previous submission ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47680023 ) the only (competently) criticizing comment (by jeffbee) was downvoted into oblivion/flagged.
Well he veered off of the technical and into the personal so I'm not surprised it's dead. But yeah something feels weird about this comment section as a whole but I can't quite put my finger on it. I think rather than AI it reminds me of when (long before AI) a few colleagues would converge on an article to post supportive comments in what felt like an attempt to manipulate the narrative and even at concentrations th…
It is one of the few instances were the reddit discussion seems more normal/indepth. See the longer comments here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1sgtkdf/tailsl...
There are a few glazing comments there too though.
> Well he veered off of the technical and into the personal so I'm not surprised it's dead.
I don't know what he posted, but it is easy to see how a small fan group around Laurie can form?
She is an attractive girl not afraid to be cute (which is done so seldom by women in tech that I found a reddit thread trying to triangulate if she is trans. I am not posting that to raise the question, but she piques peoples interest) plus the impressively high effort put into niche topics PLUS the impressively high production value to present all that.
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#74This is very much worth watching. It is a tour de force. Laurie does an amazing job of reimagining Google's strange job optimisation technique (for jobs running on hard disk storage) that uses 2 CPUs to do the same job. The technique simply takes the result of the machine that finishes it first, discarding the slower job's results... It seems expensive in resources, but it works and allows high priority tasks to run…
>> It replicates data across multiple, independent DRAM channels with uncorrelated refresh schedules This is the sort of thing which was done before in a world where there was NUMA, but that is easy. Just task-set and mbind your way around it to keep your copies in both places. The crazy part of what she's done is how to determine that the two copies don't get get hit by refresh cycles at the same time. Particularly…
"This is the sort of thing which was done before in a world where there was NUMA"
You sound like NUMA was dead, is this a bit of hyperbole or would really say there is no NUMA anymore. Honest question because I am out if touch.
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
> using (undocumented!) channel scrambling offsets that works on AMD, Intel, and Graviton Seems odd to me that all three architectures implement this yet all three leave it undocumented. Is it intended as some sort of debug functionality or what?
it's explained in the video, and there's no way I'll be explaining it better than her
you could however link to the timestamp where that particular explanation starts. i am afraid i don't have time to watch a one hour video just to satisfy my curiosity.
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unnecessarily negative imo. I like the video because I cant read a blog post in the background while doing other stuff, and I like Gadget Hackwrench narrating semi-obscure CS topics lol
> I cant read a blog post in the background You can consume technical content in the background?
if your foreground work doesn't occupy your brain, why not?
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a 54 minute video. I watched about 3 minutes and it seemed like some potentially interesting info wrapped in useless visuals. I thought about downloading and reading the transcript (that's faster than watching videos), but it seems to me that it's another video that would be much better as a blog post. Could someone summarize in a sentence or two? Yes we know about the refresh interval. What is the bypass? Up…
Just use the Ask button on YouTube videos to summarize, that's what it's for.
>Just use the Ask button on YouTube videos to summarize,
For anyone confused because they don't see the "Ask" button between the Share and Bookmark buttons...
It looks like you have to be signed-in to Youtube to see it. I always browse Youtube in incognito mode so I never saw the Ask button.
Another source of confusion is that some channels may not have it or some other unexplained reason: https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/1qaudqd/youtube_as...
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I cant read a blog post in the background You can consume technical content in the background?
this is a thing people do. convince themselves they can consume technical content subconsciously. its now how the brain works though. it will just give you the idea you are following something.
not all technical content is the same, or has the same level of importance. this video does not introduce anything that i need to be able to replicate in my work, so i don't need to catch every detail of it, just grasp the basic concepts and reasons for doing something.
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#79She could probably have been stinking rich on this work alone, but instead she just put it up on Github. Kudos to Laurie.
Companies are standing in line to double their RAM usage right now, right.
For an HFT firm, RAM cost is a non-issue. Even the tiniest improvement in latency can result in millions of dollars of extra profit. They can octuple their RAM usage and still make a killing.
I bet Citadel already has reached out to Laurie :)
Re: DRAM has a design flaw from 1966. I bypassed it [video]
#80A more accurate but less inspiring title would be: RAM Has a Design Tradeoff from 1966. I made another one on top. The first tradeoff, of 6x fewer transistors for some extra latency, is immensely beneficial. The second, of reducing some of that extra latency for extra copies of static data, is beneficial only to some extremely niche application. Still a very educational video about modern memory architecture. [EDIT:…
It could be a display bug on my side, but you posted this exact comment twice.
He tried to reduce latency