Skip to main content


Google tells employees it must double capacity every 6 months to meet AI demand


in reply to Powderhorn

Gaslighting. Processor capacity doubles every 2 years according to Moore's law which at best can be energy neutral. All other increases can only come from proportional energy increases. So instead of needing 1000x the energy, at best it is 250x.
in reply to plyth

Moore's "law" died back in 2016. It's not held for a while now. The only way they can scale the way they want without a major breakthrough is more power and larger machines
in reply to mushroommunk

They will simply co-design the next generation of specialized compute hardware for neuronal networks, no problem! /s
in reply to Powderhorn

If someone says 10x it's probably bullshit. 100x it's definitely bullshit. I don't even have a term for 1000x
in reply to Scrubbles

1,000x = KiloBullshit

100,000x = MegaBullshit

1,000,000x = GigaBullshit

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Scrubbles

If someone says 10x it's probably bullshit. 100x it's definitely bullshit. I don't even have a term for 1000x


The term we're looking for is "fantastic investment opportunity".

in reply to Powderhorn

Well that's totally sustainable.
in reply to Powderhorn

so... it'll collapse in 6 months?
in reply to Powderhorn

Doubling every year would be crazy unsustainable at Google scale, but to tell employees you need to do so every 6 months seems like a fever dream of someone that doesn't understand what they are asking (or knows they aren't responsible for actually doing it). The old "just throw it over the fence" approach that corporate kool-aid drinkers love because they can take credit and shift blame.
in reply to Powderhorn

the next 1000x in 4-5 years


At the risk of stating the obvious, Ars is working backwards from this metric to get their headline "double every 6 months." 2^10 = 1024, to get that number in 5 years means doubling every half-year.

But Google didn't set incremental 6-month deadlines for 5 years straight, they set a single 5-year deadline. Because in 6 months shareholders can call their bluff quite easily, but in 5 years they're hoping everyone is A) distracted by some new disaster, or B) there's a new tech hype cycle they can push. They're trying to stall the bubble popping by pointing to a nebulous future where they magically scale to infinity, and hoping we all forget that they ever made this claim.

in reply to Powderhorn

Google’s AI infrastructure head Amin Vahdat told employees that the company must double its serving capacity every six months to meet demand for artificial intelligence services, reports CNBC.


Sound awfully like a cancer tumour inside Amin's head.

in reply to Powderhorn

Double every six months? Yeah. Totally feasible and absolutely not a bubble at all.
in reply to Powderhorn

We need to turn the entire world into ~~paperclips~~ GPUs
in reply to AllNewTypeFace

Everyone was too concerned the AI would do it and wasn't looking close enough at the C-Suite Execs.
in reply to AllNewTypeFace

"Self-replicating GPUs that devour the world"

"Wake up honey, new apocalypse just dropped!"

in reply to Powderhorn

Better get some fully functioning fusion reactors to power all that.
in reply to Powderhorn

puts a bunch of AI features in, turns them on by default without user’s asking for them, mandates employees use it when ever they can.

“How could this be a bubble? Look at all the demand!”

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to Powderhorn

collaboration and co-design


Bribing?

in reply to Powderhorn

"My loyal advisor," said the king, "I must grant you a reward for your many years of good service. What is it that you desire?"
And the advisor asked the king, "Sire, simply give me one grain of rice on the first square of the chessboard, two on the second square, four on the third square and so forth until all sixty-four squares are filled."
"Such a small thing?" said the king. "It shall be done at once."
And so the advisor was given all the rice in the kingdom.
in reply to Powderhorn

I'm really high and at first glance saw all the colorful pipes as like a 90s McDonalds play area.

I feel like that interpretation made this whole article ~70% less silly.

in reply to Powderhorn

So...no different from shareholders. Nothing changes while everything changes.