Last night I had a lightning strike nearby and one of two displays blanked for a second. It's behind a UPS and a good surge protector. Likely some EMI/RFI getting into the power and/or display cable of the monitor itself, toppling digital circuits in the panel and waking up the watch dog. The same display has also blanked in the infrequent case where I've discharged static on the mouse: the cables are all parallel, so they'll couple and bounce the panel ground plane, with the same outcome.
These devices are built to the edge of performance margins. Throw in some high voltage transients and things flip out. I think displays are particularly susceptible due to long cables, large surface area and unavoidable shape of common displays: they're effectively patch antennas.
The furniture static case is amusing: I imagine some foam cushions can cause millions of tiny static discharges in parallel when they expand. This will flow through the metal stand to "ground" and probably make a VHF range RFI spike (based on the size of a typical chair frame.) Common 24-27" display panel geometry just happens to be in the same neighborhood...
Adding ferrites to cables, as I see suggested several times, might help. You could also get unlucky and make it worse: choke a line to just the right length an it becomes a better inductor/antenna. Electricity is fun.
To be clear, neither of these things are intended to address EMI/RFI. Most consumer-grade UPSes directly pass the AC power through when not on battery, so any noise on the lines will also pass through pretty much untouched.
Surge suppressors are just MOVs (metal oxide varistors) and a circuit breaker. If the line voltage rises too high, the MOVs try to shunt the voltage. But if the EMI's peak voltage is below the MOV's trigger threshold, it will do nothing and the EMI will pass straight through.
There are a couple outfits making M.2 AI accelerators. Recently I noticed this one: DeepX DX-M1M 25 TOPS (INT8) M.2 module from Radxa[1]: https://radxa.com/products/aicore/dx-m1m
If you're in the business of selling unbundled edge accelerators, you're strongly incentivized to modularize your NPU software stack for arbitrary hosts, which increases the likelihood that it actually works, and for more than one particular kernel.
If I had an embedded AI use case, this is something I'd look at hard.
"Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously."
How is this lost on people? Everything that contains the slightest hint of "AI slop" is instantly panned anywhere it appears, and yet people such as Ilia Toli appear to be entirely oblivious to this.
It's tragic. There is at least a non-zero chance that this work is a world changing breakthrough. It's clear, based on his engagement with comments here, that he at least believes this. And yet the first thing the guy does with it is debase it all using a clanker.
It boggles the mind.
We're seeing this throughout academe, in courts with both lawyers and judges, and among lawmakers and journalists. Several times a week one or another of these makes another headline for misapplying "AI". It seems that the work for which we are all expected to have the highest regard is coming from people that are completely witless; both unaware of how transparent this is and unaware of the consequences.
You have to be deeply ensconced inside an impenetrable bubble to do that to yourself.
Yeah, I get that it can be amazing and be of superhuman intelligence and all that, but also it reads exactly like the slop article I saw yesterday that was giving baking instructions for “wood biscuits” (which are a method of joining in cabinetry and are not tasty at all): https://thehoneypotbakery.com/wood-biscuit-size-chart/
Do not match your communication style to nonsense articles.
> You have to be deeply ensconced inside an impenetrable bubble to do that to yourself.
I largely agree with your point, but I’m afraid you are the one in the bubble. Detecting AI writing is a rare skill, not the norm. It’s glaringly obvious to those of us who use AI a lot, but it’s not that obvious to the average person.
To the point of absurdity in cases – I’ve seen loads of people who hate AI complain about AI online, not realising that the account they are talking to is nothing but a simple spam bot.
Replying to myself, because iliatoli's reply to me was [dead] so fast I couldn't reply to it directly...
"The physics is mine — thirteen years of it, starting from the 2013 paper. I use AI for editing, as I use a calculator for arithmetic. The transition state, the barrier, the molecular model, the fluorine uniqueness argument — all computed on my workstation. The tone criticism is heard and will be addressed in revision. The calculations don't change with the prose."
This is NOT about "prose." You're missing the point. Badly. And damn that's frustrating.
Read carefully and inculcate: Do not use LLM to write anything you expect to be taken seriously. This is not negotiable. It doesn't matter if all your peers and colleagues are doing exactly that. It doesn't matter that this is your first experience with such a reaction: it's not a fluke. DO. NOT. DO. IT.
That's an excellent rebuttal to this common factoid.
Recently I encountered a view that has me thinking. They characterized the PIO "ISA" in the RPi MCU as CISC. I wonder what you think of that.
The instructions are indeed complex, having side effects, implied branches and other features that appear to defy the intent of RISC. And yet they're all single cycle, uniform in size and few in number, likely avoiding any microcode, and certainly any pipelining and other complex evaluation.
If it is CISC, then I believe it is a small triumph of CISC. It's also possible that even characterizing it as and ISA at all is folly, in which case the point is moot.
That's not really how it works. There are only a few companies on the planet that are licensed to create their own cores that can run ARM instructions. This is an artificial constraint, though and at present China is (as far as I know) cut off from those licenses. Everyone else that makes ARM chips is taking the core design directly from ARM integrating it with other pieces (called IP) like IO controllers, power management, GPU and accelerators like NPUs to make a system on a chip. But with RISC-V lots of Chinese companies have been making their own core designs, that leads to flexibility with design that is not generally available (and certainly not cost effective) on ARM.
Maybe. People are free to partake in whatever cognitive misadventures they wish. I merely cite the incontrovertible fact that Berkeley RISC predates essentially all of the modern economic history of China, and also the rise of ARM. It came from academe in the US, for better or worse, whether it's crap or the finest ISA ever, and for whatever purpose these US academics had or or have. That is all anyone can truthfully say about its pedigree. The rest is just bullshit from the internet.
It wasn't discussed, so we're left to speculate. If I had to guess, I imagine that the .NET JIT has actual benefits: the variety of architectures has gotten enormous and JIT is likely a performance win after warmup.
A new Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (WC Docket No. 26-82) appeared in the Federal docket today. The FCC 'tentatively concluded' that national security risks extend to existing infrastructure. Consequently, they are seeking comment on a new process to retroactively revoke operating authority for companies already on the Covered List. This would close the 'legacy loophole,' legally barring the continued marketing and sale of previously approved hardware currently on retail shelves.
These devices are built to the edge of performance margins. Throw in some high voltage transients and things flip out. I think displays are particularly susceptible due to long cables, large surface area and unavoidable shape of common displays: they're effectively patch antennas.
The furniture static case is amusing: I imagine some foam cushions can cause millions of tiny static discharges in parallel when they expand. This will flow through the metal stand to "ground" and probably make a VHF range RFI spike (based on the size of a typical chair frame.) Common 24-27" display panel geometry just happens to be in the same neighborhood...
Adding ferrites to cables, as I see suggested several times, might help. You could also get unlucky and make it worse: choke a line to just the right length an it becomes a better inductor/antenna. Electricity is fun.
reply