> Slapping some half-baked shit onto Github isn't open source. It's littering.
What a negative attitude...
Every programmer has written plenty of shitty code.
I know that I wrote lots of garbage code when I was a teenager just learning how to code. Unfortunately that was long before Github (or even Git) was a thing, and most of that code is either lost forever, or inaccessible on old floppy disks, etc. But today I would love it if my shitty Basic A text based games, and C code full of memory leaks still existed somewhere like Github, where I could look back at it and see how far I've come.
Projects like this one aren't intended to be open source masterpieces. They are fun learning projects by people who enjoy building stuff. If you don't like it then don't pay it any attention and build your own that is better. At least this guy put something together and documented the experience so someone else could follow up and improve on it if they wish.
Congratulations, you were some sort of child prodigy who could code perfectly from day one. Or maybe you just started earlier.
What exactly are you trying to achieve by hating on someone who's done nothing but share what they've learnt with other people. He isn't making you run this. He didn't even make you read it.
I agree that two comments upthread is inappropriately personal.
Several people downvoted all my comments in bulk, including the one below that's a purely technical explanation of using multi CPU/GPU caffee. I personally do not care about points (moreover the same comment in another thread more than offset the 'karmic punishment' in this one) but since you're here, please have a look at the way some people are treating the downvote button.
I will keep things up a level and more broadly constructive in the future.
I didn't write any of the Python code you are complaining about. The install steps do use environment variables (and in fact set some in the bashrc). The install steps are not a script for reasons I gave in other comments in this thread (reboots, remote dependencies). You mention elsewhere that the effect includes JPEG artifacts if you use JPEG as your intermediate state. That is unfortunate, so I have added a links to other Python scripts for making movies so more variation is available.
I started this because none of the instructions I could find actually worked or had prominent enough links into the original BVLC source and Wiki. And why I did not submit to somebody else's Github or Wiki- mostly so I wouldn't have to beg to have pull accepted or a Wiki edit not reverted.
I apologize if you felt I was picking on you personally however I was in the same position as you. Nothing out there works. Now including your recipe.
Meanwhile the top GitHub issue for your referenced Python project (also on the HN home page is):
"Unable to run script with default arguments, get an invalid syntax exception."
I poked in to see if he'd managed to rename "avconf" to "avconv" yet.
Right below:
print("SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTT You're running CPU man =D")
I found this:
# this line is not tested cuz i don't have avconv :(
It's just all so gloriously half-assed. Sorry if you got caught in the cross-fire but it's hard to soar with the eagles when you're hanging out with turkeys.
$2.60/hr is way overpaying. For this task people should definitely be using spot instances, which are $0.32/hr. Big difference! It seems to me like they should also switch from g2.8xlarge to g2.2xlarge because caffe does not benefit much from multiple GPUs. That brings the cost to $0.07/hr; more than an order of magnitude difference.
Actually multiple instances of CAFFE rendering these models is working well for me. I'm paralleling 16 processes across 8 GPUs and everything fits. (Training might not work as well.)
Spot instances are great until the random hedgefund peak sneaks in and deletes all your work.
Your guidance for people just noodling around is right on the mark, though! The 2x machines are fine for playing and, once you get the AMI set up (hint hint) it's a two minute upgrade.
