Specialized hardware for deep learning will unleash innovation

[A version of this post appears on the O’Reilly Radar.]

The O’Reilly Data Show Podcast: Andrew Feldman on why deep learning is ushering a golden age for compute architecture.

In this episode of the Data Show, I spoke with Andrew Feldman, founder and CEO of Cerebras Systems, a startup in the blossoming area of specialized hardware for machine learning. Since the release of AlexNet in 2012, we have seen an explosion in activity in machine learning, particularly in deep learning. A lot of the work to date happened primarily on general purpose hardware (CPU, GPU). But now that we’re six years into the resurgence in interest in machine learning and AI, these new workloads have attracted technologists and entrepreneurs who are building specialized hardware for both model training and inference, in the data center or on edge devices.

In fact, companies with enough volume have already begun building specialized processors for machine learning. But you have to either use specific cloud computing platforms or work at specific companies to have access to such hardware. A new wave of startups (including Cerebras) will make specialized hardware affordable and broadly available. Over the next 12-24 months architects and engineers will need to revisit their infrastructure and decide between general purpose or specialized hardware, and cloud or on-premise gear.

In light of the training durationand cost they face using current (general purpose) hardware, some experiments might be hard to justify. Upcoming specialized hardware will enable data scientists to try out ideas that they previously would have hesitated to pursue. This will surely lead to more research papers and interesting products as data scientists are able to run many more experiments (on even bigger models) and iterate faster.

As founder of one of the most anticipated hardware startups in the deep learning space, I wanted get Feldman’s views on the challenges and opportunities faced by engineers and entrepreneurs building hardware for machine learning workloads.

Here are some highlights from our conversation:
Continue reading “Specialized hardware for deep learning will unleash innovation”

Data collection and data markets in the age of privacy and machine learning

[A version of this post appears on the O’Reilly Radar.]

While models and algorithms garner most of the media coverage, this is a great time to be thinking about building tools in data.

In this post I share slides and notes from a keynote I gave at the Strata Data Conference in London at the end of May. My goal was to remind the data community about the many interesting opportunities and challenges in data itself. Much of the focus of recent press coverage has been on algorithms and models, specifically the expanding utility of deep learning. Because large deep learning architectures are quite data hungry, the importance of data has grown even more. In this short talk, I describe some interesting trends in how data is valued, collected, and shared.

Economic value of data

It’s no secret that companies place a lot of value on data and the data pipelines that produce key features. In the early phases of adopting machine learning (ML), companies focus on making sure they have sufficient amount of labeled (training) data for the applications they want to tackle. They then investigate additional data sources that they can use to augment their existing data. In fact, among many practitioners, data remains more valuable than models (many talk openly about what models they use, but are reticent to discuss the features they feed into those models).

But if data is precious, how do we go about estimating its value? For those among us who build machine learning models, we can estimate the value of data by examining the cost of acquiring training data:
Continue reading “Data collection and data markets in the age of privacy and machine learning”

What machine learning means for software development

[A version of this post appears on the O’Reilly Radar.]

“Human in the loop” software development will be a big part of the future.

By Ben Lorica and Mike Loukides

Machine learning is poised to change the nature of software development in fundamental ways, perhaps for the first time since the invention of FORTRAN and LISP. It presents the first real challenge to our decades-old paradigms for programming. What will these changes mean for the millions of people who are now practicing software development? Will we see job losses and layoffs, or will see programming evolve into something different—perhaps even something more focused on satisfying users?

We’ve built software more or less the same way since the 1970s. We’ve had high-level languages, low-level languages, scripting languages, and tools for building and testing software, but what those tools let us do hasn’t changed much. Our languages and tools are much better than they were 50 years ago, but they’re essentially the same. We still have editors. They’re fancier: they have color highlighting, name completion, and they can sometimes help with tasks like refactoring, but they’re still the descendants of emacs and vi. Object orientation represents a different programming style, rather than anything fundamentally new—and, of course, functional programming goes all the way back to the 50s (except we didn’t know it was called that). Can we do better?

We will focus on machine learning rather than artificial intelligence. Machine learning has been called “the part of AI that works,” but more important, the label “machine learning” steers clear of notions like general intelligence. We’re not discussing systems that can find a problem to be solved, design a solution, and implement that solution on their own. Such systems don’t exist, and may never exist. Humans are needed for that. Machine learning may be little more than pattern recognition, but we’ve already seen that pattern recognition can accomplish a lot. Indeed, hand-coded pattern recognition is at the heart of our current toolset: that’s really all a modern optimizing compiler is doing.

We also need to set expectations. McKinsey estimates that “fewer than 5% of occupations can be entirely automated using current technology. However, about 60% of occupations could have 30% or more of their constituent activities automated.” Software development and data science aren’t going to be among the occupations that are completely automated. But good software developers have always sought to automate tedious, repetitive tasks; that’s what computers are for. It should be no surprise that software development itself will increasingly be automated.
Continue reading “What machine learning means for software development”

Data regulations and privacy discussions are still in the early stages

[A version of this post appears on the O’Reilly Radar.]

The O’Reilly Data Show Podcast: Aurélie Pols on GDPR, ethics, and ePrivacy.

In this episode of the Data Show, I spoke with Aurélie Pols of Mind Your Privacy, one of my go-to resources when it comes to data privacy and data ethics. This interview took place at Strata Data London, a couple of days before the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) took effect. I wanted her perspective on this landmark regulation, as well as her take on trends in data privacy and growing interest in ethics among data professionals.

Here are some highlights from our conversation:

GDPR is just the starting point

GDPR is not an end point. It’s a starting point for a journey where a balance between companies and society and users of data needs to be redefined. Because when I look at my children, I look at how they use technology, I look at how smart my house might become or my car or my fridge, I know that in the long run this idea of giving consent to my fridge to share data is not totally viable. What are we going to be build for the next generations?
Continue reading “Data regulations and privacy discussions are still in the early stages”