Live data from Hacker News

I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

simonwillison.net

61–70 of 1001 posts

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#61
post #47

They've got, ballpark, $5t to $10t to make back in the next 5 years, or the hardware buildouts will start getting written down. This means we're going to need $1t+ per year in spending, per year, on tokens. 200m knowledge workers in the world, 30m developers. We're talking about a world where you need 5% of every knowledge workers salary to go into tokens. 20% if you're a developer. That's a _huge_ shift. Most people…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#62

They've got, ballpark, $5t to $10t to make back in the next 5 years, or the hardware buildouts will start getting written down. This means we're going to need $1t+ per year in spending, per year, on tokens. 200m knowledge workers in the world, 30m developers. We're talking about a world where you need 5% of every knowledge workers salary to go into tokens. 20% if you're a developer. That's a _huge_ shift. Most people…

> We're talking about a world where you need 5% of every knowledge workers salary to go into tokens.

They are assuming ~10% global GDP growth instead of ~3%. You probably don't need the same %s if the pie grows a ton.

I'm highly skeptical we get that growth, but if you aren't, it makes it easier to digest.

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#63
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried the large open source code models? I use glm-5.1 and occasionally deep seek v4. They are as good or better than Claude's latest models. And significantly cheaper. I've converted 3 of my engineer friends as well. All three have dropped their $200 month plans they had with anthropic. We've all been a bit shocked at just how good these models are now. If you "have" tried GLM (I specifically find it shocki…

I use GLM-5.1. It's good enough for personal stuff. It doesn't compare to the latest Opus I use at work. You can certainly argue I don't need Opus for work, but there is clearly a difference. Also, at least with z.ai, GLM-5.1 is s l o w! After using Claude at work, I get really impatient with GLM-5.1 at home. When doing "true" vibe coding (i.e. not really examining the code), Opus is a ton faster (easily 5x). But yea…

task i am working on right now at work is comparing two verisions of apis and documenting responses in their outputs. i suspect a vast majority of work at entrprise is of similar complexity.

right now everyone is using latest and greatest to do dumb stuff like that. that would change fast if companies start caring about costs.

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $5t to $10t to make back in the next 5 years Wait what? They spent 2 order of magnitude less on hardware.

From the verge: https://archive.is/kU4Zg > Gartner forecasts that large AI companies would need to earn cumulatively close to $7 trillion in AI-driven revenue through 2029, which is close to $2 trillion per year by the end of the period. In order to achieve “historic returns,” the providers would need to earn nearly $8.2 trillion in the same period.

Those numbers don't even track even in the same sentence. If it is $2T/year by the end of 2029, it would be something < $6T cumulative in 3 years.

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#66

> Anthropic are strongly rumored to be about to have their first profitable quarter. Is that quarter same as any other quarter in terms of infrastructure costs (e.g. are there any temporary discounts happening coincidentally)?

Didn't xAI basically donate the compute for that quarter so Anthropic could get to say they turned a profit?

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#67
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usage costs will come down with better hardware. Hardware is improving rapidly each generation.

That trend held true for the past three years, but it doesn't feel as safe to me now. But memory costs are going way up. And both OpenAI and Anthropic bumped up the price of their frontier models in April.

Algorithms are also improving. I believe it's very unlikely for these two improvements together to not result in one to two orders of magnitude cheaper cost per "intelligence". Of course, that might just make use cases that are too expensive today viable and thereby increase usage further.

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $5t to $10t to make back in the next 5 years Wait what? They spent 2 order of magnitude less on hardware.

From the verge: https://archive.is/kU4Zg > Gartner forecasts that large AI companies would need to earn cumulatively close to $7 trillion in AI-driven revenue through 2029, which is close to $2 trillion per year by the end of the period. In order to achieve “historic returns,” the providers would need to earn nearly $8.2 trillion in the same period.

The numbers are made up political correctness anyway.

Everyone's agency is 100% captured by belief in Wall Street. Too few We'll continue to have consent manufactured via media platforms and in 3 years no one will bat an eye at these companies being worth $12 trillion as Altman and Musk climb two ladders holding a "mission accomplished" banner.

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#69
post #56
post #22

200$ per month per seat is nothing . A single 3D CAD license pack for the guys in our R&D group costs multiple thousands of dollars per seat, per month. It's about time software seats get some love too.

How many guys is that? Every single white collar worker is in the AI ICP (customer profile). edit: typo

white collar*, not color

What does ICP mean?

Re: I think Anthropic and OpenAI have found product-market fit

#70

They've got, ballpark, $5t to $10t to make back in the next 5 years, or the hardware buildouts will start getting written down. This means we're going to need $1t+ per year in spending, per year, on tokens. 200m knowledge workers in the world, 30m developers. We're talking about a world where you need 5% of every knowledge workers salary to go into tokens. 20% if you're a developer. That's a _huge_ shift. Most people…

> unless we figure out how to make developers 2x, 5x, 10x as productive on stuff that matters, this isn't going to play out well.

Simple - you make them work 2x, 5x, or 10x more hours.

Post reply on HN