191–200 of 476 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This year: chromeos is 17 android is 18 chrome is 18 google docs is 20 google translate is 20
In retrospect, it is wild how good/successful google was 17-20 years ago!
How is Anthropic, OpenAI and xAi going to compete against the likes of Google that can spend $200 billion a year? It’s an impossible war and all these investors are throwing their money into a bottomless insatiable pit of money. Until the funding stops for one reason or another and then everyone loses all their money at once like a star that collapses into a black hole singularity in a femtosecond.
Theoretically Apple can spend just as much. What are the outcomes though? All those giants have their own business that are established and profitable. It’s the new kids in the block that will make the difference. You know those lists on twitter about how many companies US has in top 10 and are presented as a win? Those are actually lists of capital concentrations blocking innovation. It looks like US is winning but…
The GP was talking about Google specifically, and their outcomes on AI are nothing to scoff at. They had a rocky late start, but they seem to have gotten over that. Their models are now very much competitive with the startups. And it's not just that have more money to spend. They probably have more training data than anyone in the world, and they also have more infrastructure, more manpower, more of a global footprint than the startups.
The Innovator's Dilemma is an anecdotal, maybe a statistical relationship at best, but not a fundamental law of nature. When an established company has everything it should take to become a leader in a new industry in theory, and in practice their products are already on par with the industry leaders, you know at some point it becomes rational to think that maybe they might become a leader.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hiive and Forge Global are the ones I know of. You must be an "accredited investor" which means nothing at all except that you have a million dollars or make $200k/yr.
Like you can buy shares of Anthropic as long as you prove you make over 200K? That easy? Shouldn't they approve of the purchase? Sorry, noob in this space!
If you are NOT knowledgeable and simply have money ... well it'll soon be parted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a friend who needs a medication that costs more than 30,000$ a year. Here in Canada it is 100% covered by our government health insurance regime. In the USA he would be bankrupt (or dead). Here in Canada if I have an accident i do not have to worry about being bankrupt if the ambulance brings me to the wrong hospital. I am really not enthusiastic about the so-called superior quality of life some US-ians like t…
> In the USA he would be bankrupt (or dead) Why? I live in the US. I have the best healthcare coverage in the world. I pay absolutely nothing for it, ever. No matter the cost. And I have access tot he best doctors, innovations, and technology in the world. Tell me again why your friend would be dead? It sounds like you really have a poor understanding of American health care.
How is Anthropic, OpenAI and xAi going to compete against the likes of Google that can spend $200 billion a year? It’s an impossible war and all these investors are throwing their money into a bottomless insatiable pit of money. Until the funding stops for one reason or another and then everyone loses all their money at once like a star that collapses into a black hole singularity in a femtosecond.
How is Anthropic, OpenAI and xAi going to compete against the likes of Google that can spend $200 billion a year? It’s an impossible war and all these investors are throwing their money into a bottomless insatiable pit of money. Until the funding stops for one reason or another and then everyone loses all their money at once like a star that collapses into a black hole singularity in a femtosecond.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>As measured by prosperity life in the US is better; the poorest US state has a higher GDP per capita than most western European countries. GDP per capita/prosperity is a poor proxy for quality of life. The US is lagging most of the developed world in most quality of life metrics, even as reported by US news outlets, which don't rank the US in even the top 20: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/quali…
Keep in mind there are two Americas, a wealthy one and a not wealthy one; someone posting on HN is likely in the former bucket, and not juggling a retail job and doing Uber on the side while being unable to afford healthcare.
How is Anthropic, OpenAI and xAi going to compete against the likes of Google that can spend $200 billion a year? It’s an impossible war and all these investors are throwing their money into a bottomless insatiable pit of money. Until the funding stops for one reason or another and then everyone loses all their money at once like a star that collapses into a black hole singularity in a femtosecond.
Slight counter point - claude code is basically the only developer tool that ever been happy to pay money for. Getting the entire software industry to give you $200/mo/person is quite the market.
How is Anthropic, OpenAI and xAi going to compete against the likes of Google that can spend $200 billion a year? It’s an impossible war and all these investors are throwing their money into a bottomless insatiable pit of money. Until the funding stops for one reason or another and then everyone loses all their money at once like a star that collapses into a black hole singularity in a femtosecond.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> "Get bankrolled by the state at the state's discretion until they get what they want, even if they need to burn $1B to get $1M of value" If that's how it worked, they wouldn't lead in anything, they'd be bankrupt already. They burn state money like VCs burn cash. DeepSeek, Alibaba, Tencent, Xiaomi, Huawei, etc., disprove your point.
Ghost cities, empty high speed rail lines, solar cells being mass produced at a loss.
All these things also produced end products the state wanted, no doubt. But the capital allocation strategy is basically a "throw all the money the leader gives in that direction until the leader says stop".