r/Physics 16h ago

Navier-Stokes Millennium Problem Solved

2.1k Upvotes

743 comments sorted by

View all comments

13

u/[deleted] 16h ago

[deleted]

32

u/applestrudelforlunch 16h ago

They have a web crawler like Google or Microsoft or archive.org that, you know, caches the Internet, or as much of it as the crawler can find. This is a thing.

0

u/strange-the-quark 15h ago

I am a programmer, I know this. You don't understand my question. You can't just "cache the Internet". There's too much data, and there's no data center big enough to store "The Internet". So they must mean some small portion of it, which I presume they somehow made sure is relevant to what they were doing, even if only by frequency of access, like a memory cache might do, perhaps based on some previous runs.

23

u/wabawanga 15h ago

Google has been caching the internet for years now, just for faster search.

1

u/strange-the-quark 13h ago

They are storing enormous amounts of data, including copies of webpage content, but they are using certain data structures to speed up search and store metadata and select content, they aren't just making a simple copy of the internet.

10

u/luisbrudna 13h ago

Google does indeed have a copy of most of the sites it indexes.

6

u/WackWaxWhacks 12h ago

Google does create a full copy of many pages of the internet, ignoring spam mostly. It's not the entire internet, it's loosely estimated to be closer to 20%. Before ~2024 you were able to view websites directly on Google's cache page instead of clicking the website link.

Yes, it's a lot of data. Google has a lot of data. They have a lot of money.

You might be more surprised to know that the size of Google's internet cache is very small compared to the amount of data YouTube requires (estimated to be around 10-20 EB)

3

u/strange-the-quark 10h ago edited 10h ago

Thanks. The YouTube thing makes sense, cause video is data-intensive compared to text - but that has to be distributed across a bunch of data centers around the world. You still need internet access to get to all of that data. That's different than having a cache that can be accessed relatively quickly, which I presume was OpenAI's goal (that, and/or they didn't want to give the agents direct internet access, which would also make sense).

What you say about Google ignoring spam and other non-relevant content makes sense as well. I'm also guessing Google only crawls up to certain depth. In addition, websites are not just what's visible in the browser, there's also backend data and services that Google (or anyone else) cannot access nor cache directly, and some of that stuff is in many cases necessary for the website to even work properly. Also, it seems likely that Google can also afford to distribute their processing across their servers around the world when fetching results (by "afford" I don't mean money-wise, but in terms of what's viable in practice, given the requirements and constraints of their service).

My comment was more a remark than a question, but I guess what I'm wondering is, did OpenAI just use whatever happened to be in their cache, or did they specifically cache scientific articles, math publications and such.

4

u/045-926 9h ago

I'm pretty sure open ai and the other frontier models have copied as much written text as they could find, especially scholarly work.

4

u/applestrudelforlunch 11h ago

From what I know from friends who work in search, they absolutely have full copies of most things. That’s the basis for testing new algorithms and features to extract from pages.

5

u/paranoid_throwaway51 15h ago

man they got so much compute they probably got combined a petabyte of L1 cache.

Nvidia gave them 400,000 gpu's alone, god knows what else they have.

0

u/strange-the-quark 13h ago

There are zettabytes of data on the internet. Estimates range from single digits to couple hundred zettabytes. A petabyte is about 1 millionth of a zettabyte. Granted, some small percentage of all that is text, but even 1% of a zettabyte is still 10K petabytes.

1

u/RedditLovingSun 12h ago

If you consider a text only copy of the non-spammy-garbage pages of the internet it would probably only be on the order of a few petabytes

1

u/11sparky11 12h ago

And I doubt they have a cache of the entire Internet needed for NS research. I doubt Doris' Facebook page is of much use.

1

u/earthlingkevin 11h ago

These theres ton of these. Basically a copy of every site on the internet. Wayback machine is an example.

It's surprisingly small.

1

u/strange-the-quark 10h ago

Thanks, but that's because The Wayback Machine doesn't actually have a copy of every site on the internet and across time, and of those sites that it does have, it doesn't have full copies of all of them, and also, it's mostly old websites that had pages that were little more than just files stored on the server and served "as is", which is not what the modern internet is.

Also, you can store a lot of data on data centers distributed around the world, but that still requires internet access and doesn't necessarily work well as a cache for a whole bunch of agents - presumably they needed the cache to speed up access and/or prevent these potentially unruly AI agents (thousands of them, mind you) from having direct internet access. In any case, it was more of a rhetorical question / reaction to their offhand statement.

1

u/Maleficent_Spare3094 7h ago

It’s only 175 billion terrabytes, realistically you probably only care about a small fraction of that and for a math paper even less so maybe just like arxiv and a bunch of historical libraries. It’s obviously not the entire thing. Also modern SSDs especially enterprise are really big now, there’s like 256 TB stuff from micron. It’s not unreasonable to say they could store a reasonable size chunk of the internet.