I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. Google in general open-sources software for a lot of reasons, probably fairly similar to how other companies that deal with OSS works. Look at the amount of stuff flowing into the Linux kernel—is that for “only for PR purposes”? If so, that's really expensive PR.
Have you ever tried to maintain a closed and open version of anything in parallel? I can tell you it's a pain in the neck.Why would something so basic as neural network architecture model not be compatible between open source and internal TF????
…what? This makes no sense.If that was really the case, that would be one more hell of an argument that anything that Google open sourced was to gain PR or increase their revenue and that it has nothing to do with true spirit of open source.
You mean like the Rybka cluster?No other private engine does run PR campaign for selling of their online services (like cloud TPUs).
You're aware that this paper was submitted a year ago, right, long before the RTX series was announced? Google had no say the lead time here; that was up to the journal.they finally decided to really publish something and give us a little bit more insight and ppl instantly feel like everyone should be enormously grateful to them.
If I'm defending them even if I don't work in the Google PR department, perhaps it's on what I perceive as a factual basis as opposed to just fanboyism?You are not working in Google PR department, why so much need to defend them?
To flip it around, you're not working in FairSearch.org, why so much need to attack Google?
Ah, so you're having different standards for evidence for AlphaZero because you don't like the company behind it (a “giant mean corporation”, in your own words). Well, that's good to know, but it's hardly objective.And no I don't hold the same stance towards other private engines, coz none of them is created by a giant mean corporation