I've been reading them since before all of the AI hype, and I've always thought they're pretty good. You a few spicy takes with the overview/opinions/benchmarks. Better than semiaccurate.
The article you link says not a lot of criticisms with very many words, and the AI prose gets much worse towards the end, seemingly when the author also gave up on reading it. I am disappointing in the plagiarism though, especially of Ryan Smith.
I am much more interested in what you think of the site though vs your own experiences running a GPU cloud. I've seen your comments on it for a long time, it's super interesting. So if you think their takes are mostly bunk I'd consider it way more than this hot aisle guy.
It isn't about bunk takes or not. It is about the motivation behind doing something.
Their takes are fabricated in such a way as to drive clicks to their business, where they are printing money selling MNDA to the highest bidder.
Dylan uses his influence as a service and it is borderline criminal. He just sued a whistleblower employee. It is so blatant, he even lives and works directly with people in power who feed him information.
Kind of like how SBF used his altruism to cover up the fraud he was doing. Everyone thought he was a good guy, until they realized he wasn't.
I dunno, it's a blog, so I'm not so worried about the motivation behind it besides how it biases their takes. I think being close to people that feed you information might be prerequisite to the kind of information he sends out.
I've seen the paid subscriber sections and it's nothing groundbreaking. I wouldn't/don't pay for it.
SBF used his altruism to cover up fraud. If the SA benchmarks were fraudulent, that would be a big deal. If he's just "in bed with the AI companies", like, that's a big part of the reason it's such a popular blog?
Also, I don't really have to think that Dylan is a good guy, and I certainly wasn't the only one that did not think SBF was a good guy. I get that it's really easy to call his implosion unsurprising after the fact, but it was truly unsurprising.
> "I'm not so worried about the motivation behind it besides how it biases their takes."
Troi oi. Read what you wrote again.
Dylan is a grifting fraud. I wrote a too long document explaining a ton of examples and you're handwaving it away.
SA benchmarks for inferencemax? Yea... AMD / NVidia put their best engineers on tuning, just for the benchmarks. It isn't about serving up inference fast, it is about appearing better on the charts to sell more chips.
It is a popular blog because it is an influence service. That's the whole point. Write things that get clicks.
I can get info from and even enjoy reading a biased take. It's not so hard to see where they are coming from. In the "semicon trash talk and rumors blogosphere", you take everything with a grain of salt, etc.
> Dylan is a grifting fraud. I wrote a too long document explaining a ton of examples and you're handwaving it away.
I've taken this to mean that it's your post so I went through it again. Some of the points are interesting but I don't think it's a very good case that he's a grifting fraud.
I enjoy the AI images done in their style though, it's pretty funny.
> AMD / NVidia put their best engineers on tuning, just for the benchmarks. It isn't about serving up inference fast.
NV has enough "best engineers" to have a couple people tuning for one of the most popular public tok/$ benchmarks without sweating. IDK about amd.
The article you link says not a lot of criticisms with very many words, and the AI prose gets much worse towards the end, seemingly when the author also gave up on reading it. I am disappointing in the plagiarism though, especially of Ryan Smith.
I am much more interested in what you think of the site though vs your own experiences running a GPU cloud. I've seen your comments on it for a long time, it's super interesting. So if you think their takes are mostly bunk I'd consider it way more than this hot aisle guy.