These are basically all things that an engineering org can justify as necessary for some reason but can immediately disappear when leadership announces a change in strategy.
Not to take away from your point too much - this is a significant amount of work that shows their current stance towards maintaining the mac as a premium development platform. But I imagine they will start to split this - lower cost SKUs will get the iOS-ified OS while "Pro" SKUs will get (some of) the above and can still install homebrew, to prevent a full developer revolt.
Techies will figure out how to "jailbreak" the lower SKUs to unlock the full experience and the amount of people that follow through with that will round to 0%. Tech businesses will buy the >$3k Pros for their devs.
This is interesting because it's the same logic either way -
"taking from people who work hard (the working class or billionaires) to give it to people who live off other peoples hard effort (billionaires or poor people)
In 2026 capitalism who is living off whom? Who is really toiling or creating utility?
On large teams I think the "cherry pick" workflow (Gerrit style) beats the "pull request" workflow (GitHub/gitlab style). On smaller teams it's the other way around. I think it's somewhere around 10-20 people actively committing that the cherry pick workflow comes out ahead.
This is exactly it. When I worked in a ~10 person team I just didn't get it, PRs worked quite well (with some basic discipline, they're not perfect). When I moved to a... much larger company... I don't know how PRs would work here, it would be way too unwieldy. The Gerrit style works fantastically here.
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.
Valve let's you sell your game on your own website and users can add the key to their steam for 0% skim. 30% rake for what is sold through their ridiculously popular store.
Apple should just charge devs for the services like fee per download if the app is free. I believe currently the minimum paid app is $0.99, so it seems reasonable to allow $.33 apps where the dev gets none and $0 if the dev wants to front the $0.33 per user.
I guess you could argue that even $0.99 apps are subsidized but I doubt it'd be accurate. They already charge to join the dev program and it's not that expensive to run an app store.
It's worse, this is mostly just to be a shoe-in for a good state school, with a "maybe I'll get lucky and an ivy will accept anyways", unless you're really exception in at least one of these areas.
> Using one’s time to do something unique and/or exceptional would be time much better spent.
The fact is that most high schoolers are just not unique or exceptional but still want a shot to break out of currently very poor job prospects or hourly labor. I think many of these kids are capable of much more once they have some time to grow up, but the system is such that they need to show their color by roughly 17 to be "exceptional" along the traditional route.
I was in high school not that long ago, I understood the point you make then, but it didn't make me unique or exceptional. Most kids just want to be good enough, to do okay.
