61–70 of 139 posts
Can someone explain why everything is being marketed in terms of power consumption?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bro the planet is literally experiencing a climate disaster and you think the solution is to create more systems that are misaligned with the planet's ecosystem for humans? I guess the great filter is a real thing and not just a thought experiment.
I assure you that voluntary meat consumption because "taste buds go brr" is a much bigger problem than AI that results in actual productivity gains (and potentially solve the very climate crisis you complain about.)
$19B -> $30B annualized revenue in a month ? Feels like the lede is buried here!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, very very recently they said in a court filing that their lifetime revenue was "at least" 5 billion. Which is it?
Curious - what’s this court filing?
$19B -> $30B annualized revenue in a month ? Feels like the lede is buried here!
Also, very very recently they said in a court filing that their lifetime revenue was "at least" 5 billion. Which is it?
They're not quite growing that fast, but there's nothing inherently inconsistent between these claims... as long as the growth curve is crazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That these data centers can turn electricity + a little bit of fairly simple software directly into consumer and business value is pretty much the whole story. Compare what you need to add to AWS EC2 to get the same result, above and beyond the electricity.
That's a convenient story, but most consumers' and businesses' use of AI is light enough that they could easily run local models on their existing silicon. Resorting to proprietary AI running in the datacenter would only add a tiny fraction of incremental value over that, and at a significant cost.
$19B -> $30B annualized revenue in a month ? Feels like the lede is buried here!
Also, very very recently they said in a court filing that their lifetime revenue was "at least" 5 billion. Which is it?
So I don't think those numbers are really in tension at all
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, very very recently they said in a court filing that their lifetime revenue was "at least" 5 billion. Which is it?
If your revenue doubles every month, then in the first month where you make $2.5B, your total lifetime revenue has been $5B ($2.5B this month, $1.25B the month before, etc. is a simple geometric series). But your current revenue run rate for the next year will be $2.5B x 12 = $30B. They're not quite growing that fast, but there's nothing inherently inconsistent between these claims... as long as the growth curve is c…
1) It's in their interest to distort numbers and frame things that make them look good - e.g. using 'run-rate' 2) The numbers are not audited and we have no idea re. the manner in which they are recognising revenue - this can affect the true compounding rate of growth in revenues
I guess gigawatts is how we roughly measure computing capacity at the datacenter scale? Also saw something similar here: > Costs and pricing are expressed per “token”, but the published data immediately seems to admit that this is a bad choice of unit because it costs a lot more to output a token than input one. It seems to me that the actual marginal quantity being produced and consumed is “processing power”, which…
Gigawatts seems like more a statement of the power supply and dissipation of the actual facility. I’m assuming you can cram more chips in there if you have more efficient chips to make use of spare capacity? Trying to measure the actual compute is a moving target since you’d be upgrading things over time, whereas the power aspects are probably more fixed by fire code, building size, and utilities.