Interesting People mailing list archives
Re NSA says China's supercomputing advances put US at risk
From: "Dave Farber" <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:20:08 +0000
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Jerry Leichter <leichter () lrw com> Date: Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [Cryptography] NSA says China's supercomputing advances put US at risk To: Christian Huitema <huitema () huitema net> Cc: <cryptography () metzdowd com>
NSA, DOE say China's supercomputing advances put U.S. at riskThe tl;dr version: Fnord fnord China fnord supercomputers fnord more money fnord. Did we
mention
China fnord? And MORE MONEY?A few years ago, s/China/Soviet Union/. Same pitch.
OK, we're all properly cynical. Just because someone will potentially make a great deal of money out of solving a "problem", doesn't mean there isn't an actual problem hiding in there somewhere. And some of the people who would get the money actually *are* experts in the appropriate field. (Of course, I guess you can subscribe to our President's attitude that "so-called experts" are all liars anyway.)
Somehow, the massive data centers built by Google, Amazon, Microsoft or IBM do not seem to count...
Actually ... they don't. I can only speak to what Google builds. It's indeed absolutely massive at an unprecedented scale that few on the outside can even begin to wrap their heads around ... but it's optimized for a large but certainly not universal set of problems. Want to run a highly parallel, loosely-coupled, data-intensive, mainly integer and string manipulation computation? We've got something perfect for you. Want to run a massive, tightly-coupled, data-light (relative to computation) floating point computation? There are better designs out there. We can debate whether problems of this sort are important. We can debate whether Google-like approaches, even if slower, are "good enough" by now to deal with them. We can certainly debate, even if it's important to develop machines to solve such problems, whether government money should be invested in them - one can certainly argue that if there's actual demand, private money will be available. (Note that if you look at the history of super-computing, even when commercial enterprises like CDC and IBM where involved, many, perhaps most, of their customers were relying on government contracts one way or another, so (a) the line is rather fuzzy; (b) it's not a trivial question.) But just outright dismissing the whole issue as "more pandering for a bigger place at the government trough" just doesn't cut it. BTW, I'm sure Baidu has Google-like data centers in China, too. -- Jerry _______________________________________________ The cryptography mailing list cryptography () metzdowd com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125 Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170317092028:7B5A4960-0B14-11E7-AF5B-9C8F47BB072B Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Re NSA says China's supercomputing advances put US at risk Dave Farber (Mar 17)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re NSA says China's supercomputing advances put US at risk Dave Farber (Mar 17)