Hamish Low

80 posts

Hamish Low banner
Hamish Low

Hamish Low

@Hamish_Low5

Research Associate @ IAPS - https://t.co/KaZxq1zhyN

London, England Katılım Şubat 2017
420 Takip Edilen60 Takipçiler
Hamish Low
Hamish Low@Hamish_Low5·
🧵The heads of Naura, YMTC, and Empyrean — alongside top PKU and Tsinghua academics — just published their wishlist for China's 15th Five-Year Plan. It's a rare window into how China's own semiconductor establishment sees the road ahead. The picture isn't pretty for China, with the target being only trial operation of a fully domestic 7nm node by 2030, fully 12 years behind TSMC.
English
10
13
50
24.1K
Hamish Low
Hamish Low@Hamish_Low5·
Their contribution that caught headlines around the articles release was the call for China to have its own ASML: "Taking lithography as an example: ASML's EUV system has 100,000 components, with 5,000 component suppliers — ASML is merely the integrator. It has been reported that China has achieved breakthrough progress in EUV laser light sources, wafer stages, and optical systems at different institutions. How to harness the whole nation's effort to integrate these is a problem that must be solved during the "15th Five-Year Plan." How to create China's ASML — enabling "those to be integrated" to break free from the barriers of "fame and fortune," with unified allocation of funds and human resources — is an urgent issue for which relevant departments should immediately formulate implementation plans." Replicating EUV is clearly an ecosystem challenge, and one on the scale of a decade rather than years. The relative modesty of the targets set out by those actually trying to interface with Chinese policy makers internally gives another perspective to the often hype-driven and misleading coverage around China's indigenization efforts. Export controls on semiconductor manufacturing equipment remain a critically powerful tool for US and allied lead on compute.
English
1
1
10
1.6K
Hamish Low retweetledi
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀
Peter Wildeford🇺🇸🚀@peterwildeford·
Jensen here is frustrating and wrong. The man wrote off billions so of course he opposes controls. 1. Mythos is a ~10T parameter model trained on Nvidia Blackwell. Despite Jensen's best efforts, China doesn't have Blackwell chips thanks to export controls. Huawei's best chip delivers 1/3 the per-chip performance, at 2.5x the power cost, with yields >12x worse. Jensen calling Mythos "fairly mundane capacity" that's "abundantly available in China" is just plainly false. 2. Dwarkesh is right that the compute ratio matters geopolitically. Maintaining a capability lead during the critical window — even 12-18 months — is the whole point of controls. The difference between China running a thousand vs. a million offensive AI agents is huge. Jensen dodges this entirely. 3. Jensen can't simultaneously argue "controls failed because China innovated anyway" (DeepSeek) AND "we must sell to China or they'll leave our ecosystem." If they'll innovate regardless, selling chips doesn't buy the loyalty he claims. 4. Jensen's ecosystem stickiness point (x86, Arm) is his strongest argument, but it cuts against him: the world is already locked into CUDA. Selling Nvidia chips to China doesn't deepen that - it just gives China better hardware while they build Huawei alternatives regardless.
Dwarkesh Patel@dwarkesh_sp

Distilled recap of the back-and-forth with Jensen on export controls: Dwarkesh: Wouldn’t selling Nvidia chips to China enable them to train models like Claude Mythos with cyber offensive capabilities that would be threats to American companies and national security? Jensen: First of all, Mythos was trained on fairly mundane capacity and a fairly mundane amount of it by an extraordinary company. The amount of capacity and the type of compute it was trained on is abundantly available in China. Dwarkesh: With that, could they eventually train a model like Mythos? Yes. But the question is, because we have more FLOPs, American labs are able to get to this level of capabilities first. Furthermore, even if they trained a model like this, the ability to deploy it at scale matters. If you had a cyber hacker, it's much more dangerous if they have a million of them versus a thousand of them. Jensen: Your premise is just wrong. The fact of the matter is their AI development is going just fine. The best AI researchers in the world, because they are limited in compute, also come up with extremely smart algorithms. DeepSeek is not an inconsequential advance. The day that DeepSeek comes out on Huawei first, that is a horrible outcome for our nation. Dwarkesh: Currently, you can have a model like DeepSeek that can run on any accelerator if it's open source. Why would that stop being the case in the future? Jensen: Suppose it optimizes for Huawei. Suppose it optimizes for their architecture. It would put others at a disadvantage. As AI diffuses out into the rest of the world, their standards and their tech stack will become superior to ours because their models are open. Dwarkesh: Tesla sold extremely good electric vehicles to China for a long time. iPhones are sold in China. They didn't cause some lock-in. China will still make their version of EVs, and they're dominating, or smartphones, they're dominating. Jensen: We are not a car. The fact that I can buy this car brand one day and use another car brand another day is easy. Computing is not like that. There's a reason why x86 still exists. There's a reason why Arm is so sticky. These ecosystems are hard to replace. Dwarkesh: It's just hard to imagine that there's a long-term lock-in to the Chinese ecosystem, even if they have this slightly better open-source model for a while. American labs port across accelerators constantly. Anthropic's models are run on GPUs, they're run on Trainium, they're run on TPUs. There are so many things you can do, from distilling to a model that's well fit for your chips. Jensen: China is the largest contributor to open source software in the world. China's the largest contributor to open models in the world. Today it's built on the American tech stack, Nvidia’s. Fact. All five layers of the tech stack for AI are important. The United States ought to go win all five of them. in a few years time, I'm making you the prediction that when we want American technology to be diffused around the world—out to India, out to the Middle East, out to Africa, out to Southeast Asia—on that day, I will tell you exactly about today's conversation, about how your policy ... caused the United States to concede the second largest market in the world for no good reason at all.

English
94
125
1.5K
367.6K
Hamish Low
Hamish Low@Hamish_Low5·
Jensen overall comes across as weirdly behind the ball, overly focused on the Deepseek of yesterday and not at all understanding the insane capabilities of models coming over the horizon. Extremely not AGI-pilled
Dwarkesh Patel@dwarkesh_sp

Distilled recap of the back-and-forth with Jensen on export controls: Dwarkesh: Wouldn’t selling Nvidia chips to China enable them to train models like Claude Mythos with cyber offensive capabilities that would be threats to American companies and national security? Jensen: First of all, Mythos was trained on fairly mundane capacity and a fairly mundane amount of it by an extraordinary company. The amount of capacity and the type of compute it was trained on is abundantly available in China. Dwarkesh: With that, could they eventually train a model like Mythos? Yes. But the question is, because we have more FLOPs, American labs are able to get to this level of capabilities first. Furthermore, even if they trained a model like this, the ability to deploy it at scale matters. If you had a cyber hacker, it's much more dangerous if they have a million of them versus a thousand of them. Jensen: Your premise is just wrong. The fact of the matter is their AI development is going just fine. The best AI researchers in the world, because they are limited in compute, also come up with extremely smart algorithms. DeepSeek is not an inconsequential advance. The day that DeepSeek comes out on Huawei first, that is a horrible outcome for our nation. Dwarkesh: Currently, you can have a model like DeepSeek that can run on any accelerator if it's open source. Why would that stop being the case in the future? Jensen: Suppose it optimizes for Huawei. Suppose it optimizes for their architecture. It would put others at a disadvantage. As AI diffuses out into the rest of the world, their standards and their tech stack will become superior to ours because their models are open. Dwarkesh: Tesla sold extremely good electric vehicles to China for a long time. iPhones are sold in China. They didn't cause some lock-in. China will still make their version of EVs, and they're dominating, or smartphones, they're dominating. Jensen: We are not a car. The fact that I can buy this car brand one day and use another car brand another day is easy. Computing is not like that. There's a reason why x86 still exists. There's a reason why Arm is so sticky. These ecosystems are hard to replace. Dwarkesh: It's just hard to imagine that there's a long-term lock-in to the Chinese ecosystem, even if they have this slightly better open-source model for a while. American labs port across accelerators constantly. Anthropic's models are run on GPUs, they're run on Trainium, they're run on TPUs. There are so many things you can do, from distilling to a model that's well fit for your chips. Jensen: China is the largest contributor to open source software in the world. China's the largest contributor to open models in the world. Today it's built on the American tech stack, Nvidia’s. Fact. All five layers of the tech stack for AI are important. The United States ought to go win all five of them. in a few years time, I'm making you the prediction that when we want American technology to be diffused around the world—out to India, out to the Middle East, out to Africa, out to Southeast Asia—on that day, I will tell you exactly about today's conversation, about how your policy ... caused the United States to concede the second largest market in the world for no good reason at all.

English
0
0
0
130
Hamish Low
Hamish Low@Hamish_Low5·
Jensen also claims that Huawei made millions of chips last year, he must know that isn’t true! I can’t believe he hasn’t seen real estimates there and doesn’t understand how crippling HBM shortages are for them
English
0
0
0
55
Hamish Low
Hamish Low@Hamish_Low5·
The inconsistencies are maddening as well, Huawei is both ten feet tall and an inevitable winner, and can somehow be kept down by how amazing CUDA is
English
1
0
0
55
Hamish Low
Hamish Low@Hamish_Low5·
My giant we don’t allow insider trading sign is getting lots of questions answered by my giant we don’t allow insider trading sign
Hamish Low tweet media
English
0
0
1
39
Hamish Low retweetledi
Dave Banerjee
Dave Banerjee@DaveRBanerjee·
New post on Substack: Securing AI Infrastructure to Prevent Backdoors and Sabotage In an intense AI race, we may expect adversaries (nation-states, insiders, maybe even misaligned AIs) to target our frontier AI models through data poisoning and other integrity attacks One of the best ways to stop these kinds of attacks is securing our AI infra My new post explores open problems in securing AI infrastructure and outlines a concrete research agenda the-substrate.net/p/securing-ai-…
English
0
3
8
321