81–90 of 162 posts
I think the point of open cuda is to run it on non NVIDIA gpus. Once you have to buy NVIDIA gpus what’s the point. If we had true you competition I think it would be far easier to buy devices with more vram and thus we might be able to run llama 405b someday locally. Once you already bought the NVIDIA cards what’s the point
Step 2: Port to other GPUs.
At least I assume that is the plan.
I think the point of open cuda is to run it on non NVIDIA gpus. Once you have to buy NVIDIA gpus what’s the point. If we had true you competition I think it would be far easier to buy devices with more vram and thus we might be able to run llama 405b someday locally. Once you already bought the NVIDIA cards what’s the point
Some people believe being able to build on fully-open software stacks has value in and of itself. (I happen to be one of those people.) Another benefit could be support for platforms that nvidia doesn't care to release CUDA SDKs for.
As a bonus, with open source platforms you are much less subject to whims of company licensing. If tomorrow Nvidia decided to change their licensing strategy and pricing, how many here will be affected by it? OSS doesn’t do that. And even if the project goes in a random direction you don’t like, someone likely forks it to keep going in the right direction (see pfsense/opnsense).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder to what ends trademark protections reach. Firsthand example, both SpaceX and Subaru have services called Starlink. Subaru Starlink was first, but SpaceX Starlink is more famous. I've been confused and I've seen others be confused by the two.
A trademark is scoped to a specific industry / application. Starlink for internet is unlikely to be confused with STARLINK for Subaru car safety systems. (Perhaps the all caps also helps if they were sued) Trademark applications are scoped so that you can’t monopolize a name, you only own the name within the industry you operate in. For example, there’s a real estate investment fund named Apple and even trades with s…
Or at least it's supposed to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Naming anything is hard and I don’t have better suggestions but when you’re doing something that’s already poking at something a big corp holds dearly hitting on trademark while you’re at it makes it really easy for them.
You can't have the CUDA substring in the name or anything a court would deem potentially confusing. Even if "CUDA" wasn't registered, using a similar name could be seen as an attempt to pass off the product as affiliated with or endorsed by NVIDIA. The similarity in names could be construed as an attempt to unfairly benefit from NVIDIA's reputation and market position. If the open-source project implements techniques…
I think the point of open cuda is to run it on non NVIDIA gpus. Once you have to buy NVIDIA gpus what’s the point. If we had true you competition I think it would be far easier to buy devices with more vram and thus we might be able to run llama 405b someday locally. Once you already bought the NVIDIA cards what’s the point
The NVidia software stack has the "no use in datacenters" clause. Is this a workaround for that?
it's worth noting that "NVIDIA software stack" is an imprecise term. the driver is the part that has the datacenter usage term, and the open-kernel-driver bypasses that. the CUDA stack itself does not have the datacenter driver clause, the only caveat is that you can't run it on third-party hardware. So ZLUDA/GpuOcelot is still verboten, if you are using the CUDA libraries.
I think the point of open cuda is to run it on non NVIDIA gpus. Once you have to buy NVIDIA gpus what’s the point. If we had true you competition I think it would be far easier to buy devices with more vram and thus we might be able to run llama 405b someday locally. Once you already bought the NVIDIA cards what’s the point
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a drink called "Cuba Libre" (White Rum + Coke).
Traditionally, Cuba libre also has lime juice while a plain "rum and Coke" order leaves it out. https://iba-world.com/cuba-libre/
I think the point of open cuda is to run it on non NVIDIA gpus. Once you have to buy NVIDIA gpus what’s the point. If we had true you competition I think it would be far easier to buy devices with more vram and thus we might be able to run llama 405b someday locally. Once you already bought the NVIDIA cards what’s the point
Step 1: Run on NVIDIA gpus until it works just as well as real CUDA. Step 2: Port to other GPUs. At least I assume that is the plan.
why not do this first? because the existing closed sourced CUDA already runs well on nvidia chips. Replicating it with an open stack, while ideologically useful, is going to sap resources away from the porting of it to other GPUs (where the real value can be had - by stopping the nvidia monopoly on ai chips).