It's hard to read this because it's AI written, and at least three times as long as it needs to be. TL;DR: A lot of credit crises happen because of a decrease in acceleration (the second derivative) rather than a decrease in point in time slope (first derivative), or absolute value. The author (or at least the person who prompted AI for the article) says they think AI capex has to continue to accelerate in order for…
The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
11–20 of 26 posts
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#12It's hard to read this because it's AI written, and at least three times as long as it needs to be. TL;DR: A lot of credit crises happen because of a decrease in acceleration (the second derivative) rather than a decrease in point in time slope (first derivative), or absolute value. The author (or at least the person who prompted AI for the article) says they think AI capex has to continue to accelerate in order for…
In light of the article, why are you bullish?
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree it's going to break these companies; they are all capable of paying their debt service. The reason this was an issue in mortgages was that the mortgages were adjustable rate - the borrowers were defaulting when the rates adjusted because they weren't able to pay the new rates. I'm not aware of any financial instruments for these AI companies that would balloon like this.
The article addresses the mechanism in the "How It Breaks" section. The problem lies in the interconnected contracts, not debt financing. If OpenAI cannot get new financing, it will have to cut costs, and one of its big costs are forward compute commitments it will have to break. Those commitments are a significant share of revenue for other companies like CoreWeave and Oracle, so if OpenAI has to cut significantly,…
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#14Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#15Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article addresses the mechanism in the "How It Breaks" section. The problem lies in the interconnected contracts, not debt financing. If OpenAI cannot get new financing, it will have to cut costs, and one of its big costs are forward compute commitments it will have to break. Those commitments are a significant share of revenue for other companies like CoreWeave and Oracle, so if OpenAI has to cut significantly,…
I'm extremely unconvinced. The article didn't at all address what OpenAI would really do if they couldn't get new financing. They'd sell the contracts for some of that compute to the fifty other companies desperate for it. With supply constrained, they'd likely make money on those sales, and there'd be little or zero downstream impact.
When OpenAI will be looking to sell and everyone knows it, the price would be x0,7 for depreciated used hardware or go bankrupt yourself.
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#17I dream of a world where I can just read a prompt behind some slopicle and cut the middleman entirely. > The bulls and I do not disagree about AI. We disagree about which derivative the structure is written on. They are watching the level. I am watching its acceleration. That is not a difference about technology. It is a difference about arithmetic - and arithmetic, eventually, does not take opinions. Regardless, 2nd…
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#18It's hard to read this because it's AI written, and at least three times as long as it needs to be. TL;DR: A lot of credit crises happen because of a decrease in acceleration (the second derivative) rather than a decrease in point in time slope (first derivative), or absolute value. The author (or at least the person who prompted AI for the article) says they think AI capex has to continue to accelerate in order for…
Why do you think it’s ai written. I do not get that sense except that it’s overly wrong but perhaps you found some key ai areas?
The way it does it headings and each paragraph neatly chunked. Fancy words, lengthy explanations that don’t add any meaning.
Someone wanted to write a long lesser and feel good.
A shorter human written one would be better.
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm extremely unconvinced. The article didn't at all address what OpenAI would really do if they couldn't get new financing. They'd sell the contracts for some of that compute to the fifty other companies desperate for it. With supply constrained, they'd likely make money on those sales, and there'd be little or zero downstream impact.
What will be the price? GPUs costs are x3, memory and SSD x5. When OpenAI will be looking to sell and everyone knows it, the price would be x0,7 for depreciated used hardware or go bankrupt yourself.
It looks like you want to discuss "if prices and demand drop", which would be a different scenario, which I do not believe is likely in the same timeframe barring some separate economic meltdown.
In today's world, the selling price would likely be an increase over what OpenAI paid. This isn't selling hardware, it's selling contracts for future hardware. It's basically futures trading.
Re: The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
In light of the article, why are you bullish?
I think in the long term AI will be a massive market. I just don’t think it will be massively profitable. The hardware will get better, the models will be even more commoditised. It’s useful and it will get even more useful.. it’s just not going be a licence to print money.
If you don't think this will be profitable, you're saying you don't think software, the most profitable enterprise in human history, will be profitable. Looking at it that way, does it make sense why those of us on the business side of software disagree? I've produced more software (and quite good software) in the last six months than I did in the first ten years of my engineering career.