Re:Laws of Tech: Commoditize Your Complement (2018)
by zozbot123 on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @06:10PM
(#18860711)
How is Google's TPU chip a commodity? If anyone is commoditizing a ML chip, it's ironically-enough Nvidia <nvdla.org>. (And the RISC-V ecosystem will most likely get there eventually, but that's kindof a given anyway. Systolic arrays are very old tech, of Atari Transputer fame.)
Re:Laws of Tech: Commoditize Your Complement (2018)
by vonnik on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @06:17PM
(#18860760)
Google's TPU decreases demand for chips from Nvidia, by introducing a competing chip within Google that runs ML workloads really quickly, so people pay less for algorithm training. Since TPUs are not commercially available outside of GCP, GPUs are only commoditized for Google and whoever uses TPUs on its cloud.
Re:Laws of Tech: Commoditize Your Complement (2018)
by wbl on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @09:47PM
(#18861859)
That's not commoditization. It's the exact opposite where Google is trying to have a differentiated TPU product they use.
Re:Laws of Tech: Commoditize Your Complement (2018)
by vonnik on Wednesday January 09, 2019 @07:05PM
(#18870328)
It doesn't matter how TPUs are different from GPUs. It matters what the two chips have in common, which is the kind of workloads you can run on them. Any good that is a cheaper and plausible alternative to another good commoditizes the latter.
Almost any layer can commoditize all around itself, as long as it has the critical mass of users. Google first got them with the search layer (who knew that was going to be such a thing in the late 90s?), which commoditized content. Netscape got it and then lost it.
Once you achieve dominance around a standard and necessary protocol at one layer of the stack, which is the whole game in tech, you can lay waste to competition in all directions, to ensure that no other layer of the stack commoditizes you.