Apple's MLX adding CUDA support

So to make sure I understand, this would mean:

1. Programs built against MLX -> Can take advantage of CUDA-enabled chips

but not:

2. CUDA programs -> Can now run on Apple Silicon.

Because the #2 would be a copyright violation (specifically with respect to NVidia's famous moat).

Is this correct?

No, it's because doing 2 would be substantially harder.

There's a massive financial incentive (billions) to allow existing CUDA code to run on non-NVidia hardware. Not saying it's easy, but is implementation difficulty really the blocker?

Existing high performance cuda code is almost all first party libraries, written by NVIDIA and uses weird internal flags and inline ptx.

You can get 90% of the way there with a small team of compiler devs. The rest 10% would take hundreds of people working ten years. The cost of this is suspiciously close to the billions in financial incentive you mentioned, funny how efficient markets work.

> funny how efficient markets work.

Can one really speak of efficient markets when there are multiple near molopolies at various steps in the production chain with massive integration, and infinity amounts of state spending in the process?

Yes, free markets and monopolies are not incompatible.

When a monopoly uses it's status in an attempt to gain another monopoly, that's a problem and governments eventually strike this behavior down.

Sometimes it takes time, because you'd rather not go on a ideology power trip and break something that's useful to the country/world.

> > Can one really speak of efficient markets

> Yes, free markets and monopolies are not incompatible.

How did you get from "efficient markets" to "free markets"? The first could be accepted as inherently value, while the latter is clearly not, if this kind of freedom degrades to: "Sure you can start your business, it's a free country. For certain, you will fail, though, because there are monopolies already in place who have all the power in the market."

Also, monopolies are regularly used to squeeze exorbitant shares of the added values from the other market participants, see e.g. Apple's AppStore cut. Accepting that as "efficient" would be a really unusual usage of the term in regard to markets.