
PyTorch for Scientific Computing: Quantum Mechanics Example Part 2 - freediver
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/hpc/PyTorch-for-Scientific-Computing---Quantum-Mechanics-Example-Part-2-Program-Before-Code-Optimizations-1222/
======
amelius
I wonder when/if we get full CUDA support in mainstream NumPy (not as an
extension).

~~~
tonic_section
CuPy shares a lot of the Numpy API. I've found it pretty interchangable in
most applications.

~~~
amelius
That's great, but I'm hoping that NumPy will incorporate something like this
because that will better ensure that the APIs remain compatible in the future,
and that they will get continued support.

(I can't convince my boss to use any library unless it has a reasonable
guarantee of long-term support.)

------
brian_herman
awesomesauce! This is the kind of things that give me hope in the future of
programming!

------
foadsf
it is confusing to see scientists use vendor specific tools over neural ones.
this promotion of one corporation over the rest. IMHO this is against the
spirit of academia. I will personally not use Pytorch or any tool based on
CUDA.

~~~
shrimp_emoji
Sadly, good engineering (or science) knows no politics.

~~~
enriquto
Avoiding proprietary software is a good engineering practice, it has nothing
to do with politics.

For the case of science, depending on closed products is obviously a
malpractice.

~~~
shrimp_emoji
I understand what you're saying. On the idealistic side in the battle between
idealism and pragmatism, you're trying to negate the premise that the other
side's instruments are even useful. If you can't be certain what the closed
product does, how can it be a reliable source of data?

Put another way: if your goal is to not ever harm your child, how can you
responsibly feed them applesauce or let doctors administer them medicine when
you can't be certain what went into the making of the applesauce or of the
medicine?

With a very rigorous standard, you can't. With the _most_ rigorous standard,
you can't even if the chain of trust has a single link, and you'd only use
food or medicine that you, yourself, produced. But we know that few, if any
people, use such rigorous standards, and that, if they did, they'd be much
worse off. It's not a perfect analogy for software or hardware, but it's
certainly a salient one. With your standards, it's malpractice all the way
down[0].

0\.
[http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack](http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack)

