Did Deleuze & Guatarri explicitly comment on the topic of capitalism / technology / AI? I know that their concept of deterritorialization / desiring-production has certainly influenced Nick Land's accelerationist writings, but haven't heard anything about it from D&G themselves.
as usual with philosophers, you need to decrypt them first
> His philosophy had already stripped away the illusions that would later make “artificial intelligence” look like some epochal rupture. What Silicon Valley insists on calling a breakthrough, Deleuze would treat as another fold in an ancient drift: intelligence was always artificial. There never was a natural thought, no divine spark, no transcendental gift of reason bestowed on Homo sapiens like a medal for good behavior. There is only the machinic phylum — matter in flux, endlessly inventing itself, folding into habits, sedimenting into patterns, crystallizing into programs. Thought is not a privilege of the skull but an immanent property of matter that learns to think itself through circuits, symbols, and flows
To be frankly honest, as a non-American I actually would like a Chinese competitor to NVIDIA, since they have a monopoly on GPUs and can attach whatever ridiculous price they want to it! I for sure would like cheap GPU computing to the masses...
From the other comment by kijin - 1 liter of rice isn't actually that much (~500g, which approximates to 750 kcal). And given that most Koreans in the area didn't eat that much outside of rice (only vegetables and fruits) since access to meat was reserved for the super-wealthy, most Koreans were probably malnourished when also factoring in the manual labor they needed to do (rice farming is very labor-intensive)
Native Korean living in Korea here. Many restaraunts in South Korea have self-bars where you can refill the kimchi (and other various banchan (side dish) assortments) as much as you want - and in the rest of the places that don't have this you can just ask the waiter to give some more for free instead! Refusing to give free kimchi isn't just considered bad service here; it's just outright weird.
Only the "touristy" Korean restaraunts outside of the country don't do this - they charge hefty prices to innocuous side dishes like kimchi, and I've even heard places in Europe sell soju in shots (which is outright ridiculous, soju is one of the most cheap-ass low-brow artificially made commodity liquor here!)
Probably the parent commenter has much more insider info than all of us since he's currently at NVIDIA...
From what I understand, PhysX has been built primarily as a physics engine middleware for games. So when folks at NVIDIA tried to extend this engine to robotics (for IsaacSim/IsaacLab) it seems they've faced lots of challenges (mainly with subpar multi-env performance and inaccurate solver, but also lots of technical debt over the years). So changing the internal engine to a more robotics-oriented one (Mujoco-warp) doesn't seem far-fetched. Nowadays for game engine development there are much better middleware CPU-based physics engines available (mainly Jolt Physics) - and GPU physics in games aren't that popular anymore due to pragmatic reasons (the GPU -> CPU roundtrip defeats the whole purpose of better performance)
I was assuming the context of robot learning (IsaacLab), where Newton Physics will eventually replace PhysX. Newton Physics doesn't target games or other areas.
You do have to take care of the ABA problem - if you access memory using an index that became invalid before and another object is using instead, you will have some weird hard-to-debug logic errors (worse than use-after-free, since even Valgrind can't save you). To prevent this you need another generational counter to store along with your id (which is either incremented for every usage or assigned a random hash)
This matters only for shared data structures. It is irrelevant for thread-local data.
For shared data structures, you have more to worry about, so regardless if you use indices or pointers you must use either atomic operations or means to ensure exclusive access to the entire data structure or means to detect the need for retries when using optimistic accesses.
Well, solving/mitigating the ABA ambiguity can debug use-after-free errors in single-threaded programs also. Because when a pointer A is freed to B, and then recycled again for a new object, we can make it into a different pointer A' (e.g. with a tagging scheme). So then when the old A pointer copies are lingering around, we can tell they are invalid due to having the wrong tag.
Solving ABA is probably a point in favor of indices (if we are working in a higher level language) because their type supports the bit operations for tagging. However, some hardware has support for hardware tagging for pointers. E.g. ARM; Android uses it.
With indices what you say can be implemented trivially, much simpler than with pointers, by always incrementing a reallocated index (i.e. an index extracted from the free list) with the array size and always addressing the array with the indices modulo the array size.
With the array size chosen to be a power of two, this adds negligible overhead in time and no overhead in space.
If you try to do any sort of scientific calculation (ex. physical simulation), at least 32-bit floats are needed to ensure adequate numerical precision. Ideally 64-bit floats are the best, but FP64 performance in recent GPUs are bad up to the point that you can say they're not supported anymore...
You've nailed it: this is exactly why Soviet socialism failed in the past, and also paradoxically the reason why neoliberal capitalism is failing today.
Although I am a Marxist, I reject the idea that Communism is going to be the "final" form of human society. We may be able to get there someday, but only constant care and effort towards maintaining the system will be able to sustain it, and there is no "deterministic" answer to what the ultimate form of human society is.
