Live data from Hacker News

Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

nextword.substack.com

61–70 of 190 posts

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#61
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my humble opinion, a chat interface (API or not) does not a product make. Not to mention that Llama is free and competitive with both (same with Mistral, heck the 7B model works great on my RTX 3080). If you started a company that blew up because you made a badass product (and let's say you used ChatGPT under the hood), you would just eventually train and deploy your own model because an LLM is not a product .

That's one opinion. the number off people who get value out of ChatGPT is known only to them, but anecdotally it's pretty high. a lot of people I know are actively using it on a daily basis and paying them $20/month.

Anecdote: me (SWE) and my wife (executive) each have a $20 subscription.

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#62
post #48
post #31

I'm not sure I'm exactly at the edge of things, but I have 2 companies trying to setup regular meetings with me to be a beta customer. Both have promised I can help define a new product, but when I list my real problems... they aren't in the mission. Everyone wants to solve RAG (that's easy, don't need help) or they want to give me a gui I don't need, or wrap open source software like vllm. Or "solve privacy" (which…

We had the exact same problem before genAI became the next big thing. All the startups were selling generic fine tuning and labeling services both of which are super easy to build, and they didn't even work on our unique super high quality super high resolution 40TB dataset. Our problem was we had a real world problem and real data. All the startups were solving for imaginary problems and had no data.

Sounds like you need a consultancy and not a startup to solve your problem.

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#63
post #62
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had the exact same problem before genAI became the next big thing. All the startups were selling generic fine tuning and labeling services both of which are super easy to build, and they didn't even work on our unique super high quality super high resolution 40TB dataset. Our problem was we had a real world problem and real data. All the startups were solving for imaginary problems and had no data.

Sounds like you need a consultancy and not a startup to solve your problem.

maybe that's really where the business here is.. working through a whole bunch of custom data-sets and trying to generalise from there. It'll be hard to generalise all of it, but I'm sure there'll be pockets of functionality that can be shared across more than a single data-set.

And maybe that's at the core of the issue here, namely that this service in its current form doesn't scale like b2c internet tech

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one opinion. the number off people who get value out of ChatGPT is known only to them, but anecdotally it's pretty high. a lot of people I know are actively using it on a daily basis and paying them $20/month.

Anecdote: me (SWE) and my wife (executive) each have a $20 subscription.

n=3 now so it's full on anecdata, I've got a $20 sub professionally (swe). It has to save me so little time to be worth it it's easily great. Might add claude, though at this point probably better to find a nice interface and use the APIs.

These things are products.

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#65
post #46
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything SaaS that solves a painpoints for established industries. Those that have billions of turnaround for decades already, are not good at building tech themselves, and buy solutions/services to run their business. Bonus for low barriers to entry. Agriculture, logistics, real estate, energy, etc.

I have a theory that the days of established businesses that don't know tech is dwindling. A lot of companies which has adopted tech has started building a small foundation of talent internally. I think you're seeing this trend accelerate with the large tech companies laying people off. I have heard about top grade data science talent landing at some small sized health plan. My companies fastest growing competitor is…

You confirm my observation as well. Even motel chains have developers building internal tools these days

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#66
post #32
post #18

Infra has always been a tarpit idea. Google didn't start out as an "infra" company, and neither did Amazon or Facebook. In fact, the few "infra companies" that did start back then (companies like Godaddy) are minuscule compared to the aforementioned. VC pouring money in LLM infra is legitimately crazy to me. It's clear as day that there will be winners of this AI cycle, but, as always, they will be companies that pro…

> VC pouring money in LLM infra is legitimately crazy to me. VC business model is throwing money at the wall and seeing what sticks. They love congratulating themselves on how smart they are but at the end of the day their overall returns trail S&P 500. They are salespeople and their job is to sell themselves to private capital on how smart and connected they are.

I think they don't even trail S&P 500 - with all the dirty tricks up their sleeves they roll losses over and over. Bottom will fall off at some point when hype train stops rolling, but so far it was good years as we have hype after hype.

I am waiting what will be next one after AI, because quantum computing feels like too hard to become a hype, the same with space ventures, there is some upward trend going on there but still space is too hard.

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#67
Great article. I am not going to name names, but over the last one year, whenever there is a concept that became popular in Gen AI, thousands of startups pivoted to doing that. Many come from software background where the expectation was that if the code works on one dataset, it would work for everything. You can see this with 1/ Prompt engineering 2/ RAG 3/ and now, after Apple's WWDC, it's adapters.

Enterprises I have spoken to says they are getting pitched by 20 startups offering similar things on a weekly basis. They are confused on what to go with.

From my vantage point (and may be wrong), the problem is many startups ended up doing the easy things - things which could be done by an internal team too, and while it's a good starting point for many businesses, but hard to justify costs in the long term. At this point, two clear demarcations appear:

1/ You make an API call to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Together etc. where your contribution is the prompt/RAG support etc.

2/ You deploy a model on prem/private VPC where you make the same calls w RAG etc. (focused on data security and privacy)

First one is very cheap, and you end up competing with Open AI and hundred different startups offering it. Plus internal teams w confidence that they can do it themselves. Second one is interesting, but overhead costs are about $10,000 (for hosting) and any customer would expect more value than what a typical RAG provides. Difficult to provide that kind of value when you do not have a deep understanding and under pressure to generate revenue.

I don't fully believe infra startups are a tarpit idea. Just that, we havent explored the layers where we can truly find a valuable thing that is hard to build for internal teams.

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#68
post #30

The title is true. But, the arguments don't hold water for me. 12 years ago, I started a big data company. It looked similar for big data companies when Cloudera raised almost $1B in 2014. Too many people building data warehouses, especially in the cloud. I exited. Who knew that Snowflake and Databricks would emerge against the incumbents. Similarly, there will be winners in the AI infrastructure space. To win, you n…

> Who knew that Snowflake and Databricks would emerge against the incumbents. Snowflake is not profitable. I doubt Databricks is. Their market and business is crap.

if they are not profitable with these prices ... what the fuck they are doing!? do they just have company coke-athons all day every day?

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#69
post #18

Infra has always been a tarpit idea. Google didn't start out as an "infra" company, and neither did Amazon or Facebook. In fact, the few "infra companies" that did start back then (companies like Godaddy) are minuscule compared to the aforementioned. VC pouring money in LLM infra is legitimately crazy to me. It's clear as day that there will be winners of this AI cycle, but, as always, they will be companies that pro…

are there even any VCs pouring money in LLM infra? I would assume VCs aren't interested in projects which won't give them a tenfold return. And with infrastructure there are some many existing competitors (like AWS) so that such returns are never expected

Re: Why AI Infrastructure Startups Are Insanely Hard to Build

#70
Did any of the startups in question actually ever want to build AI infrastructure or did they all pivot from Metaverse to Crypto to AI in the great pivotting of 2022.

Given VC's penchant for throwing cash at grifters in the latest hype space is it any suprise that some of the beneficiaries are looking for a quick exit before they have to do any actual work?

Post reply on HN