Posts by jacksmith210060 17 publicly visible posts • joined 27 Apr 2018
Makes sense. Nobody better at security than Google. They dropped a big zero day with MacOS yesterday that Apple still had not fixed after 90 days.
Saw Microsoft added Google Reptoline to Windows to make more secure without performance hit.
Google has now found Shellshock, Cloudbleed, Spectre, Heartbleed, Meltdown among of a bunch of others.
Makes sense for the tech company best at security to offer it as a service.
What is the problem then? MS appears to just not care about security. They have more on the line yet Google finds all the major security vulnerabilities. Google found Shellshock, Meltdown, Cloudbleed, Spectre, Heartbleed and a bunch of other ones. Spectre and Meltdown found by multiple.
It just does not seem like MS is doing their part. Google created Chromebooks which are far more secure than Windows. Then they add GNU/Linux using a super secure method using containers and a VM and MS put it right into the OS which is going to be far less secure.
Agree. It is just amazing and love it. The overall UX with ChromeOS is excellent. Perfect example is not long ago my son went to turn off his Windows machine he uses for gaming. The computer indicates Do Not turn off updating. So told him to just leave on for the evening.
He wake up and the computer indicates Do Not turn off updating. He looks at me and I am ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Chromebooks updates behind the scenes and pick up next boot. Just a way, way, way better UX. Now having GNU/Linux it is about perfect.
Strongly disagree. Look at Google text to speech. They are using a neural network at 16k cycles a second. But then offering the service at a competitive price. That is not happening with a FPGA.
The old method take minimal computation work versus this method. Yet Google is offering at a competitive price because they have significantly lowered their inference per joule compared to competition.
All we care about is the joules per inference. The processing power is really more of a pissing contest. Google is offering the TPU 2.0 for about 1/2 the price of using Nvidia hardware on AWS doing the same amount of work.
What will be curious how much Google was able to lower additionally with the TPU 3.0? But it appears Google is now 2 generations ahead of Nvidia as Nvidia was yet to catch up to the TPU 2.0.
But it seems pretty obvious why Google needed the TPUs. They are doing the most real sounding text to speech I have ever heard. They are using a neural network with audio at 16k cycles a second. The computational power would be just incredible to get the better result. But the problem is the old method used very, very little computational power. BTW, I would consider text to speech to now be a solved problem.
So Google had to significantly lower the cost as in joules for the compute or they would not have been able to offer the service at a competitive price. There is just no third party silicon that can do that. State of the art is Nvidia and they do not have anything close as of today.
It is also how they are able to do the John Legend voice. We now have 6 voices but would not expect to see a ton of them. The issue is the most power used today is memory access and to move the model into memory would be too expensive.
I will be most interested to see how long it takes for anyone to be able to offer what Google is doing in this area. They continue to just keep raising the bar. We need someone to do it. Apple appears to have gone asleep. MS could have been doing it but without mobile kind of just does not mater.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
