I don't get the sales pitch, spend 15 million dollars to win a 1 million dollar price?
Showing of the model's capabilities - okay, but it's not like it solved the problem on its own, and apparently not particularly efficient. Are there practical applications that justify the investment?
How is that any different from any other academic research? Every PhD candidate solves problems essentially nobody cares about. They don't even get $1M, they get nothing.
There are two benefits though.
One is recognition. Cred. The PhD candidate gets to put a ", Ph.D." behind their name, opening doors to future academic employment or other endeavors where people value titles. The AI lab gets to say their tech solved sth that humanity wanted bad for a long time. Both cases with substantial financial upside (higher income for Mr. PhD and higher company valuation for the AI lab).
The other one is that this is how scientific progress works. $1M or not. That number was just a PR campaign by the math community to point to some goals. It's clear that it would cost more than $1M to get there.
Aren't business consulting firms even worse? They are explicitly for business and there are known cases where they shared confidential information of one of their customers with another one.
On PCs, the best you could really do is restrict access to certain websites on certain boxes with TPMs the users can't disable. Remote attestation can lock people out of your stuff, but not out of their own stuff. For that you need control of the device. Of course, most mobile phones aren't easy for the user to have control of, but most PCs still are, so long as you scrub the rootkits (e.g. windows) off 'em
I'd have voted for it as a judge! I stopped participating in hackathons because they became just about integrating sponsor APIs and half-baked start-up ideas based on quarter-baked demos... All entirely corporate and loveless.
This, however, is a return to the weird shit, and I embrace it!
I suppose it's not about patents or copyright but rather the fear that a re-submitted patch can't be trusted because the original patch is considered not trustworthy, or that the resubmission is carried out by the sanction person itself or a friend under an email address that doesn't fall under the sanctions. Either way, it could be seen as a liability.
In what general direction would the innovation be?
I'm not sure if it's actually needed - a lot of things have been tried and the paradigms that persisted you can choose between but it seems to be a matter of taste. I often feel that the real issue is the lack of maturity and stability. I rather want a complete UI toolkit including learning resources (not reference docs!), no matter how boring, instead of super clever implementation that is never in a usable state.
With Noctua I highly doubt that is the case given their track record for quality overall and all other information available around their design and engineering process. As far as I know based on all the information I have seen all the design and engineering is done in Austria. They also have a track record of only releasing things once they are satisfied something performs within their standards. Something that would be next to impossible when solely relying on external fabs and process engineering.
They also utilize different manufactures afaik (historically Taiwan, but also China these days) meaning they need to have pretty solid in house knowledge and expertise to make sure different factories produces similar results. When they first started utilizing Chinese factories people noticed visual differences and were worried about that. But Noctua at the time claimed that they made sure that performance was still the same. A claim that was put to the test by various review outlets at the time (I want to say gamer nexus did a big piece about it?) and confirmed to be true.
Having said that, if you do utilize external factories you automatically are making use of their process engineering to some degree as well. But, and this is difficult for many people to understand, that isn't a binary thing either. You can entirely rely on the factory to basically do everything for you and just send feedback on iterations but you can also work closely with them and actually get involved in the process itself.
The other thing to consider is that while China is known for making cheap items for the American market (because that is what Americans want) they have become experts in the tool and die needed to make those cheap items.
If you want top class injection molding tooling / machines or process you are probably going to contract a Chinese company to do it.
Yep, if you're a big enough source of income for the factory you can basically do whatever you want, up to and including stationing your employees in their factory year round.
Showing of the model's capabilities - okay, but it's not like it solved the problem on its own, and apparently not particularly efficient. Are there practical applications that justify the investment?
reply