Because until it hits market, it’s almost meaningless. These journalists do the same shit with drugs in trials or early research.
NutWrench@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Look, It’s one of those articles again. The bi-monthly “China invents earth-shattering technology breakthrough that we never hear about again.”
“1000x faster?” Learn to lie better. Real technological improvements are almost always incremental, like “10-20% faster, bigger, stronger.” Not 1000 freaking times faster. You lie like a child. Or like Trump.
jali67@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
trolololol@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I agree that before it’s a company selling a product it’s just dreams.
However this is serious research. Skip the journo and open the nature.com link to the scientific article.
For the ones not familiar with nature, it’s a highly regarded scientific magazine. Articles are written by researchers not journalists.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
The Nature paper says they’ve done a proof of concept with a few bits, and concluded that they can reproduce it with cutting edge processors. That’s akin to ‘Mice survive cancer longer’ becoming ‘We’ve cured cancer forever’.
jkercher@programming.dev 1 day ago
AI hype in a nutshell
notarobot@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
It can be 1000x faster because it analog. Analog things take very very little time to compute stuff. We don’t generally use them because they are very hard to get the same result twice and updating is also hard
Flipper@feddit.org 1 day ago
The fun thing is, for LLM you don’t need perfectly repeatable result. It won’t speed up training but running the chips could be significantly cheaper with that kind of tech. Veritasium had a video about it a couple of years back, before the ai craze.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Its funny that most posts including the one our are responding to are fully incoherent by people who not only didn’t read the article but are incapable of doing so
BrilliantantTurd4361@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Analog is literally computing on the fabric of the universe.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
You mean like all computers
floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 hours ago
Here’s a Veritasium video from 3 years ago about an American company making analog chips, explaining why they are so much more efficient in certain tasks. youtu.be/GVsUOuSjvcg
It is not an incremental improvement because it’s a radically different approach. This is not like making a new CPU architecture or adding more IPC, it’s doing computation in a whole different way, that is closer to a physical model using springs/gravity/gears/whatever to model something like the Antikythera mechanism or those water-based financial models than any digital computer.
Also, uncritically dismissing anything coming from China as a scam is not being resistant to Chinese propaganda, it’s just falling for the US’.
blakemiller@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Yep! It’s a modal difference. Analogous to dismissing SSDs as a replacement for HDDs. HDDs get incrementally better as they improve their density capabilities. SSDs, meanwhile, came along and provided a “1000x” gain in speed. Let me tell folks here: that was MAGICAL. The future had arrived, at tremendous initial cost mind you, but it’s now the mainstream standard.
^(Funny thing about HDDs — they’re serving a new niche in modern times. Ultra high densities have unlocked tremendously cheap bulk storage. Need to store an exabyte somewhere? Or need to read some data but don’t mind waiting a couple minutes/hours? SMR drives got ya covered. That’s the backbone of the cloud in 2025 with data storage exploding year over year.)^