Live data from Hacker News

Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

nytimes.com

171–180 of 507 posts

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#171
post #165
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the big risk here? He has the cash to burn and he has full control of his position. Nothing will happen to him if he wastes a few Billions. He is not some poor single mom who has to decide between fixing her car and paying for kid’s Christmas presents

Cash is the least concern. I listened to a podcast about the history of Microsoft and there were times where Gates said "at least it was only money" or something to that effect. Microsoft floundered an entire decade on mobile and Windows Vista when they were going to lose out on Google that was literally paying OEMs to use their software and Apple, who had a vertical stack and made money off hardware. Huge setback in…

There's a pretty common saying in the tech industry - "if you can solve a problem by throwing money at it then it isn't really a problem".

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#172
post #84
post #79

Spending $15B to hire a 28 year old to build you some AI is certainly a move. You can call Zuck many things, but "afraid to take risks" isn't one of them.

What is the big risk here? He has the cash to burn and he has full control of his position. Nothing will happen to him if he wastes a few Billions. He is not some poor single mom who has to decide between fixing her car and paying for kid’s Christmas presents

Absolutely bonkers perspective

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#173
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk here is that you've now put a person with no track record of success outside of being good at sales in charge of your AI efforts. You're betting that he's going to be the one to attract talent. The right leadership might be able to get talent to work for a discount. The wrong one would lead to talent not coming at all.

If Meta is known for anything besides user privacy violations it's for taking risks that often pay off. They were laughed at for overpaying for Instagram and Whatsapp, yet both were instrumental to their current success. Their continued bet on VR is still highly criticized, yet they were the first Big Tech company in the space, they're the current market leaders, and I'm sure it will have huge ROI in the near future.…

Sure, but this is a different value proposition. FB paid $1B for Instagram, which was trendy, growing fast, and already had 30 million users. FB paid $19B for Whatsapp, which was already established worldwide with ~400 million users. These acquisitions were very much in-line with FB's core product. The people saying it was risky were mostly just saying that it was a waste of money and that FB could have just beaten their competition instead of buying them.

And bringing up VR is probably not the best comparison to make- sure, Meta is a leader here, and they are competitive with their AI team too. But "I'm sure it will have huge ROI in the near future" is just saying that it hasn't paid off and they don't have an obvious path to getting there. Shoving VR and the Metaverse into everyone's face hasn't paid off for several years, and the VR segment as a whole has remained niche despite being around for decades.

This acquisition is different- AI is not Meta's core product, it's just something hot right now and CEOs are trying to figure out how to stuff it into their products and hoping they can figure out how to make money later. Plus, they paid a pretty big chunk of money for a company that does, what? Cleans data for LLM training? Meta's Llama team clearly has a good data group already. They paid for a few employees that are clearly popular amongst the executives in the tech industry, but I don't know how this will go in terms of attracting other talent. Unless Wang is bringing something secret along with him, I think this one is an overpayment- Meta will need to both figure out how AI makes them money and Wang will have to attract several billion dollars worth of talent to the team. I'm skeptical that people will talk about this the same way they will about Meta getting Yann LeCun to work for them for a lot less money.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#174
post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a wild story for sure. Dropped out of MIT after freshman year and starts Scale to do data labeling. Three years later Scale has a $1B valuation and two years after that Wang is the world's youngest billionaire. Nine years after Scale's founding they're still doing less than $1B in annual revenue. Yet Meta is doing a $14B acquihire. There's definitely more than meets the eye. I suspect it involves multiple world…

> Dropped out of MIT after freshman year and starts Scale to do data labeling I was in their YC batch, so two notes: 1. He didn't start it himself 2. They weren't doing data labeling when they entered YC. They pivoted to this.

I didn't mean to imply he started it alone. Though his co-founder Lucy Guo is almost as bizarre of a story as Wang himself. I'm curious, what were they doing before data labeling?

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#175
post #79

Spending $15B to hire a 28 year old to build you some AI is certainly a move. You can call Zuck many things, but "afraid to take risks" isn't one of them.

He was spending $5b a year on whatever the metaverse was supposed to be and even renamed the company. Does anyone here use it? I think he weathers what I consider failure well. Or, conversely he can take big risks without too much blowback.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#176
post #89
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the big risk here? He has the cash to burn and he has full control of his position. Nothing will happen to him if he wastes a few Billions. He is not some poor single mom who has to decide between fixing her car and paying for kid’s Christmas presents

Spending $15B is a risk. Yes they have the money, but we're talking a quarter of Meta's annual income. That's not nothing. And money concerns aside, Meta needs to be a major player in AI. If they have made the wrong bet with Scale AI & Wang then the company will suffer in the long term.

You're thinking in the wrong scale. Meta is a $1.7T company, for them a $15B investment is less than 1% of the company. In the span of a year, this is negligible money.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#177
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Scale is interesting by itself. This is all about Alexandr Wang. Guy is in his mid 20s and has somehow worked his way up in Silicon Valley to the same stature as CEOs of multi trillion dollar companies. Got a front row seat at Trump's inaugration. Advises the DoD. Routinely rubs shoulders with world leaders. I can't say whether there's actual substance or not, by clearly Zuck sees something in him (probably a…

It's a wild story for sure. Dropped out of MIT after freshman year and starts Scale to do data labeling. Three years later Scale has a $1B valuation and two years after that Wang is the world's youngest billionaire. Nine years after Scale's founding they're still doing less than $1B in annual revenue. Yet Meta is doing a $14B acquihire. There's definitely more than meets the eye. I suspect it involves multiple world…

i don't know Alex directly that well but i believe his "freshman year" skipped all GIRs and was spent polishing off the most advanced graduate courses in CS theory (18.404), machine learning (6.867), algorithms (6.854), etc.

so basically he did MIT at the PhD level in 1 year.

As a classmate myself who did it in 3, at a high level too (and I think Varun - of Windsurf - completed his undergrad in 3 years also)...

Wang's path and trajectory, thru MIT at least, is unmatched to my knowledge.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#178
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like Uber, Doordash & co don't have a good reputation among their contract workers. The entire business model is based on exploitation of labor. That doesn't mean it isn't valuable (in a capitalist sense).

No, those were entirely different user experiences when the services you mentioned were gaining traction and finding product market fit. UberCab and Palo Alto Delivery were both services that had great success at user experiences for everyone involved including drivers, riders, small businesses, people ordering food. These experiences created brand champions who went out and raved about these technological innovation…

People on HN aren't the ones driving Ubers, so I'm not sure what experiences you are expecting to hear about. Go talk to actual drivers and you'll find that things aren't exactly rosy.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#179
post #93
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the big risk here? He has the cash to burn and he has full control of his position. Nothing will happen to him if he wastes a few Billions. He is not some poor single mom who has to decide between fixing her car and paying for kid’s Christmas presents

If Scale never creates value, he will lose billions of his own money due to his indirect holding in Meta.

So what, do you think Mark really worries about losing a few billions in his company?

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#180
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every frontier lab has moved (or is moving) away from scale to other vendors/platforms/bespoke solutions.

How do you know this?

One can only guess but if they were so subscribed with their existing clients why have they started focusing on much on government contracts?
Post reply on HN