Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 519 posts

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#331

Post by elxr »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #327
scottyah wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you worried about Google too? They're selling compute. Same with Microsoft, and Amazon. As far as I know Anthropic is really the only one that's compute-bound.

> As far as I know Anthropic is really the only one that's compute-bound. I use gemini models daily. Jetbrains tells me when they are overloaded and switches to alternative (usually to openai which turns everything to shit). I'd say happens about fortnightly. It's a good litmus and forecaster for AI demand and I wish we had more visibility.

Is gemini really better than gpt 5.5 currently? I haven't seen much sentiment along that direction.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#332

Post by fhn »

scottyah wrote: post #295
philipwhiuk wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But like... most companies are so short of GPUs they'd run it on anything. SpaceXAI not needing the compute is not really a good sign imo.

Are you worried about Google too? They're selling compute. Same with Microsoft, and Amazon. As far as I know Anthropic is really the only one that's compute-bound.

Google, Microsoft, and Amazon's business model include selling compute - SpaceX, not so much.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#333

Post by XorNot »

hx8 wrote: post #282
Thrymr wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if "pretty smart" means overinvest in capital spending on an dirty datacenter powered by unpermitted gas generators that you don't even need anymore because of lack of demand for your product, so you lease it to a competitor (presumably at a huge loss). I am not sure that "major source of revenue" as a datacenter provider is the kind of growth opportunity that IPO investors are looking for.

> presumably at a huge loss Why do you say that? I was under the impression that everyone in the datacenter business was printing money.

Oracle certainly isn't.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#334

Post by XorNot »

BrianGragg wrote: post #184
aurareturn wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Chinese government tells Anthropic they can freely sell Claude in China, Dario is suddenly going to be kissing China's ass instead of saying how we can't let China win the AGI race for democracy and western values.

After they told the US government no on a very large contract. I find that hard to believe.

They told the US government no on using Claude for approving lethal military strikes.

China can get plenty of value from Claude without needing to use it for anything similar.

They very specifically avoided a trap where the next time the US blows up a school full of children they were very obviously going to blame Claude for it.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#335

Post by jsnell »

Footnote7341 wrote: post #294
gambiting wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what exactly is the benefit of having that thing in orbit then, where it costs you millions of dollars to put it there?

The current bottleneck on compute is power and zoning. Solar panels are 5x more efficient in space, and there is no zoning in space.

The current bottleneck is silicon. Every chip that is manufactured gets housed and powered. (It makes sense: the cost of compute is dominated by capex, the power costs are irrelevant, so they're ok paying a premium for power).

The space data center hypothesis relies on compute supply growing faster than power supply. (Both are bottlenecked on parts of the supply chain that will take ages to scale.)

Even if you believe that's the case, the point at which orbital data centers start making sense is incredibly sensitive to the exact growth rates.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#336

Post by driverdan »

toephu2 wrote: post #131
aurareturn wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plot twist but makes perfect sense for both companies. Anthropic gets the compute they so desperately need to keep growing. Elon rents out compute that xAI couldn't make use of due to little demand for Grok. SpaceX gets revenue on the books for IPO. PS. I want to translate this part: We’re very intentional about where we’ll add capacity—partnering with democratic countries whose legal and regulatory frameworks suppor…

> funded by Middle East non-democratic governments What's the problem here exactly? Are you insinuating any non-democratic government is bad and evil and only democratic governments are the correct and right way to govern? sort of like: "there is only one true prophet, and it's the one I follow, and all the others are false!"

> Are you insinuating any non-democratic government is bad and evil

The ones run by people who chop up journalists certainly are.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#337

Post by giwook »

svnt wrote: post #226
giwook wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's the conspiracy theory that you're making it out to be. It is publicly known that the vast majority of deals in the AI space are circular in nature without the need for explicitly encoding any of it in a legal contract or even tacit agreements. e.g. Nvidia has invested significantly in many AI companies including both Anthropic and OpenAI which rely heavily on Nvidia's hardware and will undoubtedly…

Your argument is that since it is common in a bubble to make circular deals, there is no conspiracy. But you seem to suggest that people committing tens of billions of dollars aren’t looking any further down the pipeline than the name on the receiving bank account? Have you ever been anywhere near a large deal?

That's a lot to imply from my simple comment. My viewpoint is actually the exact opposite of what you claim: it all feels like a house of cards that is set to collapse at any moment. I can also tell you're quite passionate about this and I wonder if that emotion is clouding your interpretation of what was meant to be an innocuous comment.

My point was that there is a lot of this happening, it is not a unique statement nor is it surprising to see at this point.

I made no attempt to dismiss or justify any of it.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#338

Post by driverdan »

swalsh wrote: post #63

Models are a commodity, let's say Elon actually figures out building datacenters in space, or maybe he continues to be the leader of building earth based datacenters. Probably better business to not have yourself as your only customer. Dogfood, and open it to all.

> Elon actually figures out

Elon doesn't figure out anything. He pays people to do it and then tries to take the credit.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#340

Post by igor47 »

elxr wrote: post #331
dzhiurgis wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as I know Anthropic is really the only one that's compute-bound. I use gemini models daily. Jetbrains tells me when they are overloaded and switches to alternative (usually to openai which turns everything to shit). I'd say happens about fortnightly. It's a good litmus and forecaster for AI demand and I wish we had more visibility.

Is gemini really better than gpt 5.5 currently? I haven't seen much sentiment along that direction.

No it's really bad
Post reply on HN