Talk:Embarrassingly parallel

message: I'm not sure I agree that game-tree search in artificial intelligence is in general (or even frequently) embarassingly parallel; while minimax is, alpha-beta is definitely not.
--Kenta2 12:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game-tree search 

message: I've also seen a growing use of the alternative term "pleasingly parallel", as a euphemism for this term, since "embarrassingly" can have negative connotations. -- Bovineone 17:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? No-one thought to call it "trivially parallel"??  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.198.204 (talk) 01:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The term doesn't mean that it's easy or trivial to parallelize something, just that it parallelizes nicely and provides large gains in speed.  Something could be embarrassingly/pleasingly parallel but still be a nightmare to implement. --Bigpeteb (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pleasingly Parallel 

message: I believe this term is also used to describe cloud computing, as in, cloud computing is useful to solve embarassingly parallel problems like millions of users requesting search.  But it would be helpful here to have some counter examples...what are examples of parallel computing at the other end of the spectrum from this?
bobheuman 9:00, 23 Jun 2008(UTC)
Perhaps large and deep neural networks. The high connectivity between and within layers means tranches of neurons can't be separated and run independently from each other however much they are running "in parallel".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.199.71 (talk) 00:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Counter Examples 

message: The phrase "disconcertingly serial" has three matches on Google, none of which are relevant. This should not be included as if it were standard terminology.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.28.39 (talk) 11:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disconcertingly serial 

message: Just wondering.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.128.49 (talk) 04:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How are simulation problems embarrassingly parallel?

message: Thought it might be a good contribution if there was reference for major implementations of Parallel processing for various languages. What do you think? Talgalili (talk) 12:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean things like Fortress?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.195.229 (talk) 11:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added implemantation section

message: Is it ok to say that EP problems are different from distributed computing ones and are thus well suited to large distributed platforms? I see it in the intro. --Javalenok (talk) 13:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distributed Controversy 

message: I'm a fan of bitcoin and studied maths but it took me some time to understand why:
"In Bitcoin mining, blocks with different nonces can be hashed separately."
is "embarrassingly parallel". In mining, a large set of data is hashed and then this small hash is hashed again like hash(hash + nonce). This can be delegated to several CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs (, ASICs?) or mining pool clients.
Actually the whole list is pretty hard to understand for non-experts of the respective fields.
What should be done? Should I explain a bit more about bitcoin mining with links?
--Giszmo (talk) 23:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bitcoin