Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
1–10 of 25 posts
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#2"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it."
Sounds like a magical fantasy computer.
How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net?
How would such a magical neural net computer be trained? Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer? How would the neural net being trained distinguish between good, wanted input/output combinations versus bad, error input/output combinations?
How would you program such a computer or load new software onto it? If the whole thing is a single neural net, wouldn't the neural net need to be replaced in order to add new functionality or correct errors/bugs? How would user data be persisted while upgrading the applications?
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#3"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow wi…
Theoretically the network could be trained on the raw input and output voltages of the camera and display serial interface and so on. But yes, it's a magical fantasy computer.
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#4I'm sure it's good for some things, but...
I wouldn't want the automatic braking system in my car using this... 8-/
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#5"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow wi…
I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists.
The questions you pose are interesting ones, for the sake of the experiment I think at least:
- Programming
- Loading new software
- Adding new functionality
- Persisting user data
Could all at least in principle be achieved without changing the network architecture, but rather just providing the relevant data at the inputs (eg the full bit stream of the install file of the new software being installed) and having that lead to adjustments in activations (not weights or architecture) across the network which lead to any future inputs to the network resulting in the outputs that would be expected in the presence of the new software. Same deal for the other examples.
As to whether this is practical or achievable at present - not even remotely close in my view. But it’s still an interesting idea, even if just to think about why it wouldnt work and what that implies for future development direction of multimodal networks etc.
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#6[deleted]
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#7"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow wi…
> How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net?
Why do you single out drivers? If the whole I/O behaviour of the computer would be performed by the NN, why not drivers?
> Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer?
Yes and that bit sounds to be relatively easy to automate.
> How would the neural net being trained distinguish between good, wanted input/output combinations versus bad, error input/output combinations?
I guess you would put that information into the dataset. In supervised learning it's called labels.
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#8"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow wi…
I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists. The questions you pose are interesting ones, for the sake of the experiment I think at least: - Programming - Loading new software - Adding new functionality - Persisting user data Could all at least in principle be achieved without changing the network architecture, but rather jus…
> I think it’s very much a magical fantasy computer :-) A thought experiment, rather than a claim to something that’s been built or exists.
I think this kind of computer exists and is called ”brain”.
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#9"100% Fully Software 2.0 computer. Just a single neural net and no classical software at all. Device inputs (audio video, touch etc) directly feed into a neural net, the outputs of it directly display as audio/video on speaker/screen, that’s it." Sounds like a magical fantasy computer. How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow wi…
> How would the input and output devices work without drivers? Does "no classical software at all" mean that the drivers are somehow within the neural net? Why do you single out drivers? If the whole I/O behaviour of the computer would be performed by the NN, why not drivers? > Wouldn't it require observing countless inputs and outputs for a normal computer? Yes and that bit sounds to be relatively easy to automate.…
>> You put that information into the dataset. In supervised learning it's called labels.
I was assuming that the "general purpose computing" training dataset would be so unfathomably large that unsupervised learning would be a necessity.
Who is going to label the "general purpose computing" training dataset and how would it be persisted?
Re: Andrej Karpathy on X: "100% Software 2.0 computer.Just a single neural net
#10Reminds me of Bio-neural gel packs.