Universities and Tech Giants Back National Cloud Computing Project (nytimes.com) 27
Leading universities and major technology companies agreed on Tuesday to back a new project intended to give academics and other scientists access to the computing resources now available mainly to a few tech giants. From a report: The initiative, the National Research Cloud, has received bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate. Lawmakers in both houses have proposed bills that would create a task force of government science leaders, academics and industry representatives to outline a plan to create and fund a national research cloud. This program would give academic scientists access to the cloud data centers of the tech giants, and to public data sets for research. Several universities, including Stanford, Carnegie Mellon and Ohio State, and tech companies including Google, Amazon and IBM backed the idea as well on Tuesday. The organizations declared their support for the creation of a research cloud and their willingness to participate in the project.
The research cloud, though a conceptual blueprint at this stage, is another sign of the largely effective campaign by universities and tech companies to persuade the American government to increase government backing for research into artificial intelligence. The Trump administration, while cutting research elsewhere, has proposed doubling federal spending on A.I. research by 2022. Fueling the increased government backing is the recognition that A.I. technology is essential to national security and economic competitiveness. The national cloud legislation will be proposed as an amendment to this year's defense budget authorization. "We have a real challenge in our country from China in terms of what they are doing with A.I.," said Representative Anna G. Eshoo, Democrat of California, a sponsor of the bill.
The research cloud, though a conceptual blueprint at this stage, is another sign of the largely effective campaign by universities and tech companies to persuade the American government to increase government backing for research into artificial intelligence. The Trump administration, while cutting research elsewhere, has proposed doubling federal spending on A.I. research by 2022. Fueling the increased government backing is the recognition that A.I. technology is essential to national security and economic competitiveness. The national cloud legislation will be proposed as an amendment to this year's defense budget authorization. "We have a real challenge in our country from China in terms of what they are doing with A.I.," said Representative Anna G. Eshoo, Democrat of California, a sponsor of the bill.
I think I see the logic here (Score:2)
"The Trump administration, while cutting research elsewhere, has proposed doubling federal spending on A.I. research by 2022"
Yes, if we develop sufficiently advanced AI, then it can solve for us all the issues the other research that we cut funding for was meant to address. That's genius! /sarcasm
We're already being supplanted by China in a variety of research domains. Cutting funding is the absolute wrong way to address that. I'm sure there's justifications for it, but I doubt they are sound.
Re:I think I see the logic here (Score:5, Interesting)
There hasn't been research cutting, if anything it has increased:
https://www.genomeweb.com/poli... [genomeweb.com]
https://www.aip.org/fyi/2020/f... [aip.org].
What has decreased is funding for administrative overhead across the government, that is what Trump initially threatened to decrease funding for, because the NIH and NSF and even NASA had increased their budgets but hadn't actually funded more programs and projects. Now more funding is being redirected at actually doing science instead of filing paperwork, this puts some research institutions such as Universities in a pinch as they likewise have a bloated administrative wing but haven't actually increased classes or faculty recruitment for at least a decade or two.
Re: I think I see the logic here (Score:1)
You're way off narrative.
Re: (Score:2)
...What has decreased is funding for administrative overhead across the government....
Most traditional non-public institutions (businesses, and industries) suffer just as badly from bloated administrative overhead. For far too many, the only employment numbers that have remained steady, or even grown, are in management, to the point where the management to working employee ratio has been inverted from the ratio seen 40 years ago.
This link says it all:
https://www.cartoonstock.com/d... [cartoonstock.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Politics. AI is a good field to fund in the current climate because it 1. Promises lucrative technologies in the near future and 2. Isn't going to lead to any conclusions that would harm those interests currently holding power.
Medical research was also favored, until things got complicated. The big losers in terms of federal funding under Trump are environmental science and sustainable technology. There's no point spending money on research if it's only going to tell people they should be voting for the oth
Re: (Score:2)
Especially, when it is not true...
HPC consortiums already exist (Score:1)
I'm sure they simply want more funding, but HPC consortiums already exist. It's fairly easy to tie together multiple clusters (that already exist) over Internet2.
The problem with many HPC environments is that it is easier and cheaper to simply go to Amazon (at least for individual researchers). Between chargebacks and administrative overhead, many Universities are spending way too much on HPC and charging back thousands per year to grant budgets to cover sunk costs.
Paying $100 to Amazon is cheaper and a ton
Re: (Score:2)
Do commercial cloud providers already connect to Internet2? Should they? If they did, would it scratch this itch?
Is that what TFA already proposes, just in different words?
math gradutates... (Score:3)
2. get funding for some serious cloud computing time
3. write algo that secretly mines bitcoin instead
4. PROFIT!
"Grants Black National Cloud" (Score:1)
That's how I read it at first glance. Been reading way too much BLM news. My first thought was, "why do we need Black only compute clouds?"
Given how far everything else has gone, the idea that someone wants that didn't strike me as ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
Awesome (Score:1)
This program would give academic scientists access to the cloud data centers of the tech giants, and to public data sets for research.
Thank you so much amazon/google to give researchers access to public data sets ! /sarcasm
Re: (Score:2)
The initiative, the National Research Cloud, has received bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate. Lawmakers in both houses have proposed bills that would create a task force of government science leaders, academics and industry representatives to outline a plan to create and fund a national research cloud
They want to build a "national research cloud" - will that happen on their own hardware or will they be buying tie from the tech giants?
This program would give academic scientists access to the cloud data centers of the tech giants, and to public data sets for research. Several universities, including Stanford, Carnegie Mellon and Ohio State, and tech companies including Google, Amazon and IBM backed the idea as well on Tuesday. The organizations declared their support for the creation of a research cloud and their willingness to participate in the project.
It reads like the federal government will create a "scientific" data repository (in maybe, say, Utah?) [wikipedia.org], and then give researchers grants to buy processor time on the major public clouds manipulating that data.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Umm the Intenet and Internet2 (Score:4, Interesting)
And do academic scientists really want to store their data in data centers of tech companies? You know where the tech company can steal your information, like Amazon does on a regular basis to the sellers in their market place.
Here's a better idea: why not collaborate; which again was the point of the internet. Universities could work together. Pool and share resources. You are basically doing that with tax payer dollars.
Re: (Score:2)
So in other words you want universities to have access to the thing they already have access to.
I believe the intention is by squeezing out the profit, the federal government can provide cloud services cheaper, better and faster than profit-motivated companies. I don't agree with it, but I think that's the argument.
And do academic scientists really want to store their data in data centers of tech companies? You know where the tech company can steal your information, like Amazon does on a regular basis to the sellers in their market place.
Do you know how stupid that sounds? The difference between tracking sales data for random items Amazon can source cheaper than you and offer at a discount is not the same as "stealing" your academic research - historical weather database, wind tunnel data, etc.? What the heck do you imagine
Will the companies profit? (Score:3)
From the New York Times article [nytimes.com], "But in the past, the government built the labs and facilities. The research cloud would use the cloud factories of the tech companies. Academic scientists would be government-subsidized customers of the tech giants, perhaps at rates below those charged to their business customers."
This is a wash for academics when comparing with using cloud resources at government labs versus at private companies. The money comes from the government in either case, so it's a wash for the government, too. The big question is whether the big companies stand to profit monetarily. Historically, companies only take on government contracts that are financially favorable for them. I would be quite skeptical that these companies would charge fees "perhaps at rates below those charged to their business customers" unless there were other favorable financial benefits, such as taking advantage of existing low-utilization or spare resources, tax breaks, etc. The government doesn't have a good track record of crafting contracts with below-market rates.
NSFnet, Internet 2 (Score:1)
Academia has twice now had the best network in the world:
- NSFnet, linking "supercomputer centers across the country in a high speed network"
- Internet 2, linking universities in a network that has no "Internet" to it at all
These have been great sources of revenue for academia, and taxpayer burdens on anyone who pays a phone bill, cable bill, etc. and see that "USCF" charge buried in there.
They used these to raise administrative salaries, not increase participation in growing networks or in IT knowhow.
This
What if Nazis use it? (Score:2)
How would one get access to it — and how will it be policed?
Would Nazis — or anyone accused of being a Nazi — be allowed, for example, to work on genome and/or protein-folding, seeking to prove some inherent super- or inferiority of a race?
How about foreigners — sympathetic and hostile to the US, whatever the case may be?
Will there be racial quotas for
Would it be Feasible? (Score:2)
To use every desktop , laptop, cell phone and existing supercomputers in the United States, both civilian and government to create a cloud based super computer?
With consent of course?