301–310 of 331 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is a great respomse to something I did not say.
It's a response to the most obvious motive for you saying it. Why are you bringing up the possibility, in such an inflammatory manner (in particular, making reference to "state media"), otherwise?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The premature optimizer is never the innovator. Japan eventually stopped that role and their products improved greatly.
I like your point but I think it's a little too harsh to call it premature. Sometimes you're forced into that position and it makes sense to do so. But it's a good take if you're busying yourself with optimizations of old tech you'll never innovate or be a leader. It's still a good preoccupation in many constrained situations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> China may never be able to export these chips While you type this, the rest of the world is already using Chinese cars, something that was unthinkable a year or two ago. The US has closed the market off from this for its auto industry to survive.
This statement doesn't make a lot of sense. 40-50% of vehicles are foreign-made already[1]. I would strongly wager it's vastly more likely that these Chinese vehicles do not meet US safety standards - which are quite high. [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-pr...
This was correct a few years years ago.
It's actually the opposite nowadays, most of these cars are safer than the typical 2.5L 4 cylinder American car. Both the EU and Australia has been completely flooded with these cars, to an extent that you'd have to see it to believe it.
The authors mention that NCCL and Ray initialization were too slow (see quote below), but from the description it sounds like they’ve reimplemented a layer that’s increasingly being standardized by frameworks like nixl and uccl.
> Distributed executor: Inference engines support model parallelism via distributed executors (e.g., Ray [32] and NCCL [9]), whose initialization takes tens of seconds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>the same time the US is breaking up its own alliances This isn't happening. The US is driving a harder bargain with our allies. No one serious thinks anyone is walking away from alliances with the US.
lol this is a joke right? Ask any Canadian if they think America is driving a hard bargain or pushing away its closest ally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Increasing domestic military production is actually a great outcome. Obviously Wall Street would have preferred purchasing from US-listed/owned arms companies, but from the perspective of a military alliance, having well-armed allies is the main point. It's really hard to argue with Trump's methods if they led to Europe finally spending on their own defense.
You've moved the goalposts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is certainly slowing down China considerably. China would certainly not have an import ban on Blackwell GPUs if they were made available. And upstream, the ban on EUV and other high end semiconductor production equipment has severely limited china’s capacity to produce logic and DRAM (including HBM).
You severely underestimate what they can do with alternative tech paths. You don't have to chase nanometers for good AI system outcomes. Their current, and very viable, strategy is to build a ton of slower chips and to pump in a humongous amount of power. And to optimize the software stack, e.g. more efficient architectures. Unlike the west, they have a lot of cheap power (think solar panels in the desert) and excell…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But now the US is trying to be xenophobic like China, restrict tech import/export like China but compete against 10x population and lack of similar levels of internal strife and fissures. Do I infer correctly that you believe that China has less internal strife and fissures than the US has?
By perception of the population at least, yes. I mean, the US is literally on the verge of a civil war lol.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But now the US is trying to be xenophobic like China, restrict tech import/export like China but compete against 10x population and lack of similar levels of internal strife and fissures. Do I infer correctly that you believe that China has less internal strife and fissures than the US has?
By perception of the population at least, yes. I mean, the US is literally on the verge of a civil war lol.
The English-speaking lands where the US is now have seen two internal conflicts that killed at least 1% or so of the population: the American revolution, which killed about 1% of the population of the American colonies (but significantly less of the combined entity of England plus its American colonies) and the US Civil War, which killed about 2.4%.
Historically, China has been significantly less stable than that. Here is a link to a summary: https://chat.deepseek.com/share/16duc6iflzhav114dx
Here are 3 excerpts from that summary:
>The Transition from Yuan to Ming Dynasty (Mid-14th Century) . . . This period was one of the most devastating in human history. Plague and widespread warfare ravaged China. The population is estimated to have fallen from around 120 million at the Yuan peak to about 60-65 million at the start of the Ming. The death toll was catastrophic, easily exceeding 1% by an order of magnitude.
>The Ming-Qing Transition (c. 1618-1683) . . . While debated, estimates suggest a population decline of 20-40 million from a late-Ming peak of around 160-200 million. This includes deaths from war, famine, and plague.
>The Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864). This is the deadliest civil war in human history. Most conservative estimates place the death toll at 20-30 million people, with some estimates going as high as 70-100 million when including famine and disease. With a total population of around 400-450 million at the time, this represents a death toll of at least 5-7% of the entire population.
Imagine if the primary mission of the US Army was to put down internal rebellions and that everyone involved admitted that this was the main mission. That was the situation in China from 1949 to about 10 years ago, when it becomes no longer possible to identify with confidence the primary mission because Beijing added a second important mission, namely to use its navy and islands in the South China Sea to protect the sea lanes by which China imports oil from the Persian Gulf and exports manufactured goods around the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They definitely won't idle out- if they idle out, it'll take on the order of up to 60 seconds to load the model back into VRAM, depending on the model. That's an eternity for a request. I highly doubt they will timeout any model they serve.
Why does it take 60 seconds to load data from RAM to VRAM? Shouldn't the PCIE bandwidth allow it to fully load it in a few seconds?
If it was engineered right, it would take:
- transfer model weights from NVMe drive/RAM to GPU via PCIe
- upload tiny precompiled code to GPU
- run it with tiny CPU host code
But what you get instead is gigabytes of PyTorch + Nvidia docker container bloatware (hi Nvidia NeMo) that takes forever to start.