It boggles the mind what OpenAI could possibly do with all this money.
hire like 8 people?
OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
11–20 of 294 posts
Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#12It boggles the mind what OpenAI could possibly do with all this money.
Put millions of people out of work
Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#13Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#14It boggles the mind what OpenAI could possibly do with all this money.
Pay current expenses for about two and a half months.
Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#15So OpenAI is running at a $13B ARR, meaning this is a ~23X valuation. I don't have a good read on margin.
But this would imply massive growth assumptions which I struggle a bit to understand where they come from.
(1) New customers new to AI or migrations from Claude/Perplexity/Google: The overwhelming majority of people already know about the offerings, leaving most new people to come from residual people who identify Plus/Pro as a worthy service (can't imagine this will be huge). OpenAI can be better than their peers for certain use cases but not sure it will drive massive growth
(2) API: If anything, my bet here is that price squeezing will continue to happen until most API services are dirt cheap / commoditized
(3) New consulting services: What's the differentiation here? Palantir and many consulting companies have been doing this for years and have the industry connections, etc
Not sure what I'm missing here, I like to not subscribe to the bubble thought but having a hard time merging the reality of running a business to the AGI-implied valuations
Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#16Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#17Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#18Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#19Re: OpenAI raises $8.3B at $300B valuation
#20Nice they can poach 3 engineers back from Meta!
Out of all blockchain/AI hype bs, best thing is engineers getting rich
The only thing that can be stated as definitely good is that every person receives as much wealth from the profits of their actions in proportion to the amount of legitimate, valuable effort and vision that they contributed.
EDIT: ive been rate limited
I did realize that as I typed that :) that's why I added that extra bit about "valuable effort" and "vision".
"Valuable effort" to me is a good proxy for "if this action wasn't performed, the profits would not have been made".
And "vision" is, "you were objectively the person who saw the value of performing some action and stuck to it even when things became tough and other options were available".
Taken together, these two constraints do a mostly-perfect job of preventing the gaming of the system as described in your boulder example.
Lastly, if me and my teammate/business partner contributed roughly equally, and sales of our product were $10,000,000, then nobody should be offended when the proposed split is $5,000,000 each