• eestileib@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Dude on the right is correct that perturbed gradient descent with threshold functions and backprop feedback was implemented before most of us were born.

    The current boom is an embarrassingly parallel task meeting an architecture designed to run that kind of task.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      The current boom is an embarrassingly parallel task meeting an architecture designed to run that kind of task.

      Plus organizations outside of the FAANGs having hit critical mass on data that’s actually useful for mass comparison multiple correlation analyses, and data as a service platforms making things seem sexier to management in those organizations.

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Random but why is “embarrassing” or similar adjectives so often used to describe a parallel program? What’s embarrassing about it?

      • Kichae@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Embarrassingly parallelizable” is just the term for a process that can be perfectly paralleled.

          • xthexder@l.sw0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the usage implies it’s so easy to parallelize that any competent programmer should be embarrassed if they weren’t running it in parallel. Whereas many classes of problems can be extremely complex or impossible to parallelize, and running them sequentially would be perfectly acceptable.