As expected, the RDNA 3 GPUs will take a page out of Ryzen's book, using a group of chiplets rather than a single large slab of silicon like Nvidia is using. By making a GPU out of many smaller interconnected silicon dies, AMD can potentially reduce the cost and improve the yields of its GPUs by ensuring that less silicon is thrown out or binned because of small imperfections or defects.
The book pays no tribute to traditional structural formulations; it redefines the domain of interest as behavior and organizes topics in the light of what was known about behavioral processes. For example, it classifies verbal operants according to their controlling variables: Some verbal operants are responses to text; some are verbal chains; some are controlled by characteristic consequences; some are controlled by the stimulus properties of objects or events and are maintained by generalized social reinforcement. Some second-order verbal operants are controlled by dimensions and patterns of first-order verbal operants. Advanced topics emphasize the simultaneous effect of multiple sources of control, audience effects, self-editing, control by covert events, and thinking. Little reference is made to prevailing linguistic theories, and there is no summary of supporting research. Rather, the book rests entirely on the conceptual foundations of The Behavior of Organisms (1938), Science and Human Behavior (1953), and related work. Of this decision, Skinner later wrote,
Some early reviews of the book were positive, others mixed, but all were respectful (e.g., Broadbent, 1959; Dulaney, 1959; Gray, 1958; Mahl, 1958; C. Morris, 1958; Osgood, 1958; see Knapp, 1992, for a comprehensive summary of the reviews). Chomsky's paper appeared in the journal Language in 1959. Whereas the typical review was brief and dispassionate, Chomsky's was 33 pages long and was written in an aggressive debating style, common then and now among linguists and philosophers. Most of the review was devoted to disputing the relevance of concepts derived from the animal laboratory to an interpretation of language. The central point, repeated in the Virués-Ortega (2006) interview, was that Skinner's analysis obviously could not be taken literally; however, when taken metaphorically, it was merely common sense dressed up in jargon:
The reader is urged to read all three relevant documents: Chomsky's review, MacCorquodale's reply, and of course, Verbal Behavior itself. As a partisan, I am no doubt unable to discuss them objectively. On my reading, Chomsky's review is unsound, MacCorquodale's reply devastating, and Skinner's book a masterpiece. However, not all behavior analysts agree with this one-sided assessment. For example, Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, and Roche (2001), Place (1981), Stemmer (2004), and Tonneau (2001) have identified a range of problems with Skinner's analysis from the trivial to the fundamental. However, in each case, their criticisms were accompanied by a proposed behavior-analytic improvement. It is unlikely that their proposals would satisfy Chomsky.
In this quotation and in the Virués-Ortega (2006) interview, Chomsky confirms that his central criticism of Skinner's analysis is that because it is obviously false when taken literally, it must be intended metaphorically, in which case it is merely a poor paraphrase of conventional wisdom. Before going further, it would be well to respond to this argument. One could make an equal case that, outside the laboratory, Newton's laws of motion, if taken literally, are obviously false, but if taken metaphorically are merely paraphrases of the rules of thumb of craftsmen. Skinner did not intend that his analysis be taken metaphorically. He was making the strong claim that the principles of behavior derived from the laboratory study of behavior are applicable, in their technical sense, to the interpretation of verbal behavior. That was the point of his book. Skinner himself said as much in a note he wrote after reading passages from Chomsky's (1971) review of Beyond Freedom and Dignity: 153554b96e