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

Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 367 posts

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#261

Post by stevefan1999 »

davedx wrote: post #202
aurareturn wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure models are encrypted all the way.

Dude, Chinese labs distil attack via the APIs , if Musk wanted to do something like that, technically he could. Legally it would be a giant slam dunk liability though

Well, knowledge distillation requires a teacher model and a student model and the student model attempts to learn and extract and (preferrably) compress the information of the teacher model, so it is possible for model collapse due to high SNR in between [1].

What I suggested is to steal the (possibly intermediate) weight in between by sniffing the network communication bus, which means MITM for getting the exact values. Or unless it turns out OpenAI or Anthropic leveraged homomorphic encryption, or I'm not certain how is Anthropic would safely allow Mythos to run on AWS without their control.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_distillation

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#262

Post by tristanj »

pyrale wrote: post #256
rafram wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does, though.

It does until you're embedded enough with the surveillance system [1]. If a company was able to get immunity in the wat AT&T got it, no contract would protect the other side. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepting_v._AT%26T

That case has nothing to do with contract law.

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#263

Post by tristanj »

47282847 wrote: post #190
tristanj wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) The situation you described would be covered under the contract between Anthropic and xAI, and that any violation of that would be subject to financial penalties and legal proceedings. The US has a robust corporate legal system, and disputes do get resolved through the court system, although in a slow and costly manner. The contract can stipulate a penalty at a high enough amount to discourage this behavior. 2) Ou…

> The US has a robust corporate legal system Thanks for the chuckle. ;)

It's an accurate statement. The US (specifically Delaware) has a world-class corporate law system. Delaware has a court dedicated to only corporate and commercial disputes, with 200+ years of case law.

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#264

Post by swader999 »

Melatonic wrote: post #143
robwwilliams wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The newer location is about 3 miles southwest of the Memphis Airport (MEM), one of the world’s largest cargo airports and the center of FedEx operations (500 take-off and landings per day most concentrated in a 6 h FedEx window with lots of engines running on ramps and that produces about 2000 tons of NOx per year). I live about 18 miles downwind of the new Colossus sites, the airport, and lots of truck logistics sit…

Hey Siri - can you please order this guy a spare set of lungs ?

Or upgrade their Tesla to that bio hazard filtration level

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#265

Post by flumes_whims_ »

ACCount37 wrote: post #200
aurareturn wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure models are encrypted all the way.

Can't run inference on encrypted weights and get any kind of performance out of it.

The overhead shrinks with larger models. It doesn't seem that bad.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2409.03992v2

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#266

Post by jrflo »

urams wrote: post #20

Very possible Elon is doing this to make give Anthropic better chances against OAI while he attempts to reshape xAI. Also possible he sees infra as the future of xAI if he really believes in the value of space compute. Hard to see this any of this as anything other than a bearish sign for Grok though.

Space compute isn't real though, it's just a scheme to pump the value of SpaceX before IPO by associating it with AI. It's really hard to cool things in space, because there's no matter to transfer the heat away. All you've got is radiative cooling, and that's really really slow.

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#267

Post by utopiah »

urams wrote: post #20

Very possible Elon is doing this to make give Anthropic better chances against OAI while he attempts to reshape xAI. Also possible he sees infra as the future of xAI if he really believes in the value of space compute. Hard to see this any of this as anything other than a bearish sign for Grok though.

> space compute

Heard anybody remotely competent about space talk the topic? It's pretty much a literal laugh every time.

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#269

Post by Forgeties79 »

utopiah wrote: post #267
urams wrote: post #20

Very possible Elon is doing this to make give Anthropic better chances against OAI while he attempts to reshape xAI. Also possible he sees infra as the future of xAI if he really believes in the value of space compute. Hard to see this any of this as anything other than a bearish sign for Grok though.

> space compute Heard anybody remotely competent about space talk the topic? It's pretty much a literal laugh every time.

It is absolutely baffling to me how frequently I hear people talk about this around me. There is no way this is happening anytime in the near future.

Re: Anthropic is expanding to Colossus2. Will use GB200

#270

Post by tristor »

usef- wrote: post #136
krige wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The debunk is extremely sketchy on many points. https://www.bearlythinking.com/p/andy-masley-doesnt-understa...

That post is mentioned at the bottom of what I linked. He has a full post response here: https://blog.andymasley.com/p/to-be-clear-i-do-understand-ho...

Interesting, I read this series of posts and as someone who does not have a dog in this fight but does have a more than passing background in both audio engineering and datacenter engineering, the response Masley gives here to the very first criticism is fundamentally incorrect. I haven't read the rest of this, but his claim about sound intensity what it would imply about energy is on its face untrue.

When you take a measurement of a sound, you are measuring both its pressure and its intensity, that is what is implied by a measurement in decibels. The measurement is taken from the point of the measurement device/listener in relation to the source/generator. If the measured value is potentially harmful, there is no such implication about needing to redirect additional energy to make it harmful, it's already been measured as potentially harmful at the point of measurement.

It's basically nonsense. My most charitable interpretation of his very first responsive argument is he's saying that a datacenter would need to intentionally direct energy towards increasing the intensity of its sound output to make Jordan's original measurements meaningful. That's neither how measurement works, nor how sound works, nor even how datacenters work. Things like sound and heat are BYPRODUCTS and not the point of the datacenter, both have an intensity, and that intensity is measurable, and any energy which is expended towards that intensity is energy that was wasted away from doing computations.

I stopped reading after this. I don't know if Masley is out of his element or just practicing motivated reasoning and thinks his readers are stupid. Either way, his rebuttal already failed on the first point.

Post reply on HN