borramakot

Given the author mentions multiple cores being available, I'd guess you could use any method, including MPI, to distribute the computation. But whether you used 1 core or 10k cores, it would be nice to have a 20x speedup on each core via this arithmetic/fixed size optimization. Since that's the focus of the article, communication technologies feel pretty unrelated.

I don't know much about MPI, but I thought it related to message passing/distributed workloads rather than arithmetic performance?

The amount of effort and extra hardware required to maintain this reproducibility across different hardware (cpu generations, GPU hardware/drivers, etc) feels insane to me. For example, people seem extremely interested in performance, but insist on using the much slower modes in MKL to maintain the bottom few bits of their golden data.

Do you find this genuinely important? If not, have you had any success encouraging e.g. validating against golden data in a non-bitwise comparison?

If I recall, the zstd binary has a mode that is basically "adapt the compression ratio so that compression isn't the bottleneck", but I didn't have a chance to try it. Have you used that?

I understand cause of death statistics can be calculated, but do you have an article on what happened with a decapitation being counted as a covid death?

There's no way to get the raw data from this site, is there? I have long been interested in doing some analysis of how syllabi have changed over time, but that doesn't seem possible with this interface.

Are are the TPUs in Chisel? I thought only a subset, like edge, were in Chisel?

(I have fairly minor quibbles with some of Nate's modeling ideas, but I broadly mean to be defending him).

I don't mean to imply 2016 was a black swan event- I agree that ~30% was probably as accurate a take as could be achieved (most evidence that seems reasonable to use indicated a lead for Clinton, but that it wouldn't be that surprising for that lead to be overcome). I just mean that the model assumes a fairly normal election environment, without like a huge attack on Election day or something on election day.

The N=3 comment was meant specifically for evaluating their calibration, not the data they use for their model.

I don't think this article provides strong evidence that they are well calibrated on the presidential election specifically (sample size N=3), or that they are correctly accounting for rare black swan events, but it does seem to imply that the criticisms about "538 claims victory no matter what because they always have non-zero probabilities" are oversimplified.

You say formerly catapult- is catapult no longer being developed?