41–50 of 529 posts
> Today, we closed our latest funding round with $122 billion in committed capital at a post money valuation of $852 billion. A couple things that stand out to me about this is the use of the phrase "committed capital", which only sounds like a promise that could break from various circumstances, and the valuation of their funding keeps changing so it sounds like a max rather than the valuation every investor investe…
Doesn't really strike me as the kind of statement that comes out of a company that can sustain a ~$1T market cap...
> This is not just product simplification. It is a distribution and deployment strategy. iykyk
> Today, we closed our latest funding round with $122 billion in committed capital at a post money valuation of $852 billion. A couple things that stand out to me about this is the use of the phrase "committed capital", which only sounds like a promise that could break from various circumstances, and the valuation of their funding keeps changing so it sounds like a max rather than the valuation every investor investe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe? Previous valuation is $730B + $122B raised in this announcement = $852B valuation in this announcement (no actual increase in valuation)
Previous was $730B pre money. This one is $852B post money. So yeah it's the same one. Good catch.
I'm old enough to remember when companies worth $1 billion were called "unicorns." Now we have a company raising 122 times that? Valued at nearly 1000 times that...? At least they're throwing consumers a bone via the ARK deal. It's crazy how little AI exposure is available to anyone who isn't already wealthy and/or connected.
> At least they're throwing consumers a bone via the ARK deal. It's crazy how little AI exposure is available to anyone who isn't already wealthy and/or connected. It is deliberate. Period. It's always been known that you make money in the private markets and pre-IPO companies and retail is the final exit for insiders and early investors. Retail is not allowed to be early into these companies (Because that would ruin…
I am very much onboard with AI within my workflow. I just don't really see a future where openai/anthropic are the absolute front runners for devs though. Maybe OpenAI does just have the better vision by targeting the general public instead, and just competing to become the next google before google can just stay google?
What is their next step to ensure local models never overtake them? If i could use opus 4.6 as a local model isntead and wrap it in someone else's cli tool, i 100% do it today. are the future model's gonna be so far beyond in capability that this sounds foolish? the top models are more than enough to keep up with my own features before i can think of more... so how do they stretch further than that?
A side note i keep thinking about, how impossible is a world where open source base models are collectively trained similar to a proof of work style pool, and then smaller companies simply spin off their own finishing touches or whatever based on that base model? am i thinking of thinks too simplistically? is this not a possibility?