I am composing a letter now. My inclination would be to write to NVIDIA
first, to give them an opportunity to set things right before taking to
social media campaigns or hiring a skywriter. Making a special
accommodation for one type of computing application, simply because it is
profitable, while restricting others sets a dangerous precedent. In this
particular case, the application itself is also destructive--anyone who
opposed dropping net neutrality should be concerned for just the same
reasons.
Dave
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> It's tough to say who would be best to write to at NVIDIA about this. The
> unfortunate thing is that while the correct channel is probably the
> alliance managers who handle our fields this decision is likely made way
> above their pay grade and so they are unlikely to be able to influence it
> even if they disagree with the decision themselves.
>
> That said they are probably a good place to start and can forward concerns
> up the chain. I don't want to throw anyone under the bus here so won't post
> their name / email directly here but they (and others at NVIDIA) are
> subscribed to this list so can post here if they think they would be the
> correct channel for these concerns or provide a suggested alternative.
>
> That said posting comments and concerns publicly on social media etc might
> end up being more effective.
>
> All the best
> Ross
>
> > On Dec 26, 2017, at 11:29, Charles-Alexandre Mattelaer <
> camattelaer01.gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Amber users and developers
> >
> > As only having started a PhD project last year, these concerns left me
> quit
> > perplexed. I knew Nvidia/cuda was used in several software suites for
> > speedup (to great extent for specific kinds of calculations), but their
> > 'abuse' of their position on the market is really shocking.
> >
> > Since you asked us to address our 'complaints' to Nvidia, I was
> wondering:
> > Is their a specific portal of Nvidia you recommend to direct our worries
> > to? Should we just direct ourselves to local customer relationship
> agencies
> > or is there a more centralized address we should use?
> >
> > I would also like to use this opportunity to thank you (and obviously all
> > others involved) in trying to keep AMBER for affordable gpu's up and
> > running. MD is a really interesting tool in understanding biochemical
> > systems and not every lab has the means to purchase specific
> > 'workstation/HPC-grade' gpu's.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Charles-Alexandre Mattelaer
> >
> > Op 26 dec. 2017 5:07 p.m. schreef "Ross Walker" <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>:
> >
> >> Dear Fellow Amberites,
> >>
> >> Following on from the concerns I brought up several weeks ago about
> NVIDIA
> >> deliberately restricting the supply of GeForce cards to companies that
> sell
> >> computers to researchers I wanted to bring your attention to a recent
> more
> >> troubling situation, that I have fought against behind the scenes for
> many
> >> years, involving a change in the end user license agreement that NVIDIA
> has
> >> made in the last few days to it's drivers for GeForce cards.
> >>
> >> https://tinyurl.com/ydxfgnjh <https://tinyurl.com/ydxfgnjh>
> >>
> >> Specifically section 2.1.3 which has the new line in bold (my emphasis)
> >> below.
> >>
> >> -------------------
> >> 2.1.3 Limitations.
> >>
> >> No Modification or Reverse Engineering. Customer may not modify (except
> as
> >> provided in Section 2.1.2), reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble
> the
> >> SOFTWARE, nor attempt in any other manner to obtain the source code.
> >>
> >> No Separation of Components. The SOFTWARE is licensed as a single
> product.
> >> Its component parts may not be separated for use on more than one
> computer,
> >> nor otherwise used separately from the other parts.
> >>
> >> No Sublicensing or Distribution. Customer may not sell, rent,
> sublicense,
> >> distribute or transfer the SOFTWARE; or use the SOFTWARE for public
> >> performance or broadcast; or provide commercial hosting services with
> the
> >> SOFTWARE.
> >>
> >> No Datacenter Deployment. The SOFTWARE is not licensed for datacenter
> >> deployment, except that blockchain processing in a datacenter is
> permitted.
> >> -------------------
> >>
> >> As I am sure many of you will agree this is deeply troubling and does
> not
> >> bode well for the future of cost effective GPU computing. In
> particular, in
> >> my opinion, it speaks volumes about NVIDIA's ultimate intentions. The
> >> blockchain exception is particularly Trump like. To me, at least, this
> >> implies that in NVIDIA's eyes bitcoin mining is acceptable but science
> is
> >> not. The truth likely being that this is a case of NVIDIA trying to
> exploit
> >> it's monopoly, which unfortunately a number of us CUDA developers
> >> unwittingly and pro bono helped NVIDIA build. NVIDIA does not have a
> >> monopoly in the cryptocurrency space, hence the exception.
> >>
> >> While I am not a lawyer at least for now the EULA appears to be poorly
> >> written. It does not define Datacenter or what the term Deployment
> strictly
> >> means. A fact that has been noticed on many forums (e.g.
> >> https://tinyurl.com/ya3qddnf <https://tinyurl.com/ya3qddnf>). I for one
> >> still refer to my clusters being installed in HPC machine rooms.
> >> Nevertheless it does not bode well for the future and is likely an omen
> of
> >> what is to come. I would urge each of you who has concerns to contact
> >> NVIDIA and make them aware of these.
> >>
> >> In the meantime I, and others, are working with AMD to try and complete
> a
> >> port of AMBER, and other scientific and deep learning software, to AMD
> GPUs
> >> to at least try to restore some balance to the force. Anyone who has
> >> in-depth experience with GPU programming who would like to help with
> this
> >> effort please do not hesitate to contact me.
> >>
> >> All the best
> >> Ross
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> AMBER mailing list
> >> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amb
> >> <http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > AMBER mailing list
> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Tue Dec 26 2017 - 12:30:03 PST
