• eurodyne@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    True, but getting there probably involves using Rosetta 2 to arrive at a solution for taking full advantage of the Apple Silicon SoC memory exchanges and other Apple proprietary stuff. Those chips aren’t bog-standard ARM chips and the Asahi Project (bless their hearts) have barely broken into the M3 chips— so… if OpenAI are leveraging Apple Silicon from the last year or 2, they’re building out their own solution using Rosetta as some sort of bridge.

    Edit: which also means they must be getting help from Apple directly, ew. And that really pisses me off, because I have long maintained that Rosetta should be open-sourced.

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I don’t understand why Rosetta has to be involved in any way at all.

      Apple provides APIs for programming low level GPU instructions, including AI workloads, on their chips, using the Metal API. Anyone interested in using Apple hardware to its full potential can just write Mac-native software, same as any other MacOS native software directly compiled as binaries to run on Mac M series chips. No Rosetta required for translating x86 instructions to ARM, when the whole thing compiles for Apple’s native instructions in the first place.

      • eurodyne@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Uhh, you’re skipping a few steps

        Steps that either would not work between architectures or that Rosetta would handle (thereby answering your own question)

        And I’m not here to teach a computer science class

        • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Steps that either would not work between architectures or that Rosetta would handle (thereby answering your own question)

          What? They would compile the code that they control for the M-series architectures. The target architecture is M-series ARM chips running on MacOS.

          Rosetta is for translating x86 to ARM. Which wouldn’t be necessary because there are no x86 binaries involved at all.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          No, @[email protected] is right.

          What does Rosetta have anything to do with what OpenAI needs? Machine learning on Macs is done in MLX or something else with Metal, running OSX. Most agenic frameworks or other ML-related infrastructure are just Python, or open code that can compile on OSX/Macs just fine. In fact, OSX is often the first target platform.

          This even includes inter-node frameworks for clustering Macs together.

          No one doing “AI” on Macs is using Rosetta. There’s no point, and its a bad idea. They’re doing everything in OSX, which works fine, and I can’t imagine what OpenAI would be doing with them that wouldn’t work in OSX.

          But maybe I’m missing what you’re implying here. And I’m sorry to come off as thorny, but condescending comments like “I’m not here to teach a computer science class” rub me the wrong way.

          • eurodyne@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            If you don’t know, then you are really not in a position to say that I’m wrong LMAO

            Have fun with your little “my ignorance is proof that I’m right!” concept, lol

            Oh, and the fact that you even brought “AI” into the conversation is hilarious

            The two of you should get together and do a stand-up routine called “I and O my God I have no idea what I’m talking about”