Yeah, the latency numbers provide a ceiling for your algorithm. The actual performance depends on the implementation, code generation, runtime hazards, small dependencies one may have overlooked etc.

It is not a binary choice. This is the greatest illusion people in power manage to create, there are only two choices - pro or anti.

Ironic that for someone so steeped in tech, his views on technology seem to be simplistic.

You are building a system that has a shaky mental model and which may or may not adhere to the *.md files.

What is your position? Genuinely asking as someone who is similarly trying to cope and doesn't want to travel down the road being trampled on. Primarily because it doesn't make me better, it doesn't benefit me as an individual and takes the joy out from understanding things.

The point is worrying about results creates anxiety that takes away your focus from doing the job which results is lower performance -> subpar results - it is a recursive spiral. Also results are not "wholly" under our control. Hence avoid worrying about the results "while" doing it.

The final result of any action depends on a lot of external factors for e.g. one might develop a product, but whether it succeeds or not depends on other players, economy, luck and host of other factors that one does not control or know. This feeds into the first point about not worrying about the results.

> AI in particular doesn't have a high requirement at the consumer side

Effective use of these AI tools need high critical thinking skills which are in short supply.

There is a distinct possibility that the credit expansion for the datacenter buildout will turn the AI bubble into a 2008 like situation. That would be painful.

True., however I think it'll probably be more like the fiber buddle in the dotcom era, withsome bankruptcies and a lot of excess capacity. I don't think it'll spread as wide as 08 because that had bad debt sprinkled so far and wide that everything was infected. I think this is more contained. I think. I hope. Because the pop is coming...

>> Stuff runs in parallel. You occasionally have to know about really hardware things like timing and metastability. But the venn diagram of hardware/software design skills is pretty much two identical circles.

I don't know your background, but this feels like from someone who hasn't worked on both the aspects for a non-trivial industry project. The thing is software spans a huge range - web FE/BE, GUI, Database, networking, os, compiler, hpc, embedded etc. Not all of them have the same background to be a good HW designer. Sure you can design HW as if you are writing software, but it won't be production worthy - not when you are pushing the boundaries.

My work straddles both HW architecture and SW. I design processors, custom ISA optimized for SW application algorithms, and ensuring optimized micro-architecture implementation on the HW side to meet the PPA. I sit at the intersection of HW, SW and verification. People like me are rare, not just in my company but in the industry. Things fall through the gap, if you don't have someone to bridge it and then you have a sub-optimal design.

I don't deny that SW people cannot learn HW design, there is nothing magical after all; just hardwork and practice. But to say that the venn diagram is two identical circle is plain wrong. The cognitive load to shuttle up and down the two HW/SW stacks is a lot more than either of them.

> someone who hasn't worked on both the aspects for a non-trivial industry project

I have.

When I say software I mean e.g. proficient C++/Rust developers. There's absolutely no reason any of them would struggle with silicon design. Yet silicon designers treat it as if it's some fundamentally different skill, like the difference between playing a piano and a trombone, rather than something more like the difference between programming GPUs and CPUs.

>> rather than something more like the difference between programming GPUs and CPUs.

Again, I get your point, but you are really trivializing HW design here and I don't want anyone starting or migrating from SW to get a wrong impression that you can just pick it up. Sure, with enough thought, patience, skill and hard work anyone can do it - but that applies to anything. But don't expect that just because you know Scala or are a good parallel programmer, you can design good HW that is PPA competitive. You have a better shot than others, but that's it.