Well it depends on how you define worthless. For you as an individual to ascertain truth, it may be useless. To build up a bloated AI Enterprise stock value. For false consensus narrative scripting. Very valuable.
Benchmarks have been close to worthless since Nvidia cheated 3DMark benchmarks by adding benchmark detecting code to their drivers in the early 2000s [1].
That's a bit dramatic. One person cheating doesn't mean everybody is cheating. Cycling didn't become pointless after Lance Armstrong was caught doping. But it may be the tip of the iceberg and warrant a change in methodology or further investigation.
Alberto Contador (2010, ban upheld in 2012) – Stripped of his 2010 Tour de France title due to clenbuterol use.
Jan Ullrich (2012) – Officially found guilty of doping in connection with Operation Puerto, though his offenses dated back to the 2000s.
Frank Schleck (2012) – Tested positive for a banned diuretic during the Tour de France.
Johan Bruyneel (2018) – Armstrong’s former team director was banned for life for his role in systematic doping.
Chris Froome (2017 case, cleared in 2018) – Found with high levels of salbutamol; later cleared by the UCI and WADA.
Jarlinson Pantano (2019) – Tested positive for EPO and received a four-year ban.
Nairo Quintana (2022) – Disqualified from the Tour de France for tramadol use, though it was not classified as a doping offense.
It’s essentially worthless for you, as a consumer of them. The best way to see which one works best is to give a bunch of them a try for your specific use case
