pokeypokes

Important to understand that with these kinds of libraries, it's one thing to get everything working, and a whole other to have it all be fast. Given finite resources AMD are (rightfully) focused on the second, for a narrower set of use cases - namely big customers with big pockets, using the latest compute cards.

See, for example, the world's fastest super computer. That's a whole lot more than a presentation tick box.

As someone doing relatively small scale work, on gaming cards, you just aren't the target user. While these kinds of users are well represented on forums, they're a rounding error in terms of actual $.

Switching to SYCL makes no sense. They need to unseat Nvidia, and specifically CUDA. The whole point of HIP is to clone CUDA, make it easy for users to switch and piggy back on Nvidias success.

I used to work in this space (not at AMD lol), and generally I don't think the comments on HN are fair to AMD. Obviously ROCm has a long way to go (CUDA and libs are some truly amazing work), but it's going.

I have the book but didn't know about these, thanks for the link!

Do you work at AMD and therefore have some kind of insight that we don't? Based on my own experience it's much more likely the call was just a marketing exercise, completely orthogonal to actual development.

Gfx drivers are complicated, long term projects. They're not something that get fixed with a phone call.

He found a bug, and made a bunch of noise about it. No need to make it more than it was.

Feeling frustration about something not working is a normal part of software development. Reporting a bug, or choosing not to use that software are normal too. Making a public video trashing the work of 100s, using the language he did, is a meltdown.

I've worked on public software before, and it's left me with an extremely low opinion of this kind of behaviour, and the kind of people that show it.

What contributions did he make to ROCm?

Didn't he just find/report a bug in the multi-gpu case? Then have a melt-down after an AMD engineer sent him a fix a couple of days later? I think you are overstating his contributions, in fact it's not clear to me he made any.

A non-trivial amount of effort has gone (and is going) into this, see the Hipify tool.

The overwhelmingly most valuable (and difficult) part of copilot is the work done by openAI. You're acting like you single handedly built it.

I can't stand working with people like you, classic main character syndrome.

Seriously, I'm shocked at these other replies. How can you see someone like this and not help? Nobody is asking anyone to get in a knife fight, but at the very least call someone.

If I just left someone to die like that it would be hard to look in the mirror after.

Yeah the parent comment kinda reads like "optimizing matrix multiplication isn't hard if someone abstracts away all the hard parts for me"

John Henry wasn't hammering those spikes for fun mate. Many of us (idealistically) work on tech with the goal of freeing us to spend time on things like your examples.

I don't see a contradiction.. Humans can both be intelligent and overestimate that intelligence (by thinking it's special and unobtainable) at the same time.

"It's just a parrot" parroted repeatedly to suggest a lack of deeper understanding, while revealing the same.. So meta.

The general reaction of people to all this has been one of the most interesting things about it imo. Earlier versions were generally just fun and sometimes amazing but suddenly so many are going out of their ways to play it down. Of course there are valid criticisms and worthy discussions but some of it feels like more than that.

I think one side of it is that for the first time many people are genuinely comparing bots to humans, which by itself is kind of mind blowing.

Another side seems to be more about "controlling" something new and scary. Maybe that thing is tangible, like the tools themselves, or maybe it's just the idea that we're not that special.