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

AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

futurism.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 407 posts

Re: AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

#11

Post by nolok »

elmer2 wrote: post #2

It won't pay off if LLMs efficiency gets good enough to make those data centers obsolete. It's a huge gamble.

I disagree in a way, part of the reason they can't really succeed at the moment is because it's way too expensive to really deploy at scale for most companies, but even for those AI companies themselves. If they can make business access subsidized/cheap the same way pro/plus/max/whatever plan are for regular users while still being profitable, this can work out. The other solution is if they do reach that "it's so super smart it's reinventing the world every day", but that one is much more of a maybe possibly one day.

What they can't do is the rug pull of pricing like Fable did, hoping for profitability while playing the "it's so super smart" card. It's very profitable, but customer will be very happy to leave for cheaper pasture and that's why the recent news about this or that cheaper chinese models make headlines.

Essentially, the rush now is "if I make it a boring profitable company I'm not worth a trillion AND i'm overshadowed that plays the singularity card even if they're bullshitting"

Re: AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

#13

Post by krunck »

brainwad wrote: post #3
elmer2 wrote: post #2

It won't pay off if LLMs efficiency gets good enough to make those data centers obsolete. It's a huge gamble.

Or: increasing resource efficiency may encourage even more usage, as happened with coal, oil and photovoltaics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Re: AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

#15

Post by Ekaros »

jackb4040 wrote: post #7
brainwad wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or: increasing resource efficiency may encourage even more usage, as happened with coal, oil and photovoltaics.

They improved the efficiency of coal?

Massively. Extracting more useful energy from coal has always been a goal.

Very much unlike with software. Where the goal for long while is to burn as many resources as possible on end user devices.

Re: AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

#16

Post by technothrasher »

jackb4040 wrote: post #7
brainwad wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or: increasing resource efficiency may encourage even more usage, as happened with coal, oil and photovoltaics.

They improved the efficiency of coal?

I assume the reference was to the Jevons paradox, as described in Jevons' 1865 book, "The Coal Question". Watt's steam engine massively increased the efficiency of coal in steam engines, which increased the use of coal fired steam engines, which increased coal consumption.

Re: AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

#19

Post by goda90 »

jackb4040 wrote: post #7
brainwad wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or: increasing resource efficiency may encourage even more usage, as happened with coal, oil and photovoltaics.

They improved the efficiency of coal?

Of coal use, yes. That's what inspired this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Re: AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt

#20

Post by daveguy »

nolok wrote: post #11
elmer2 wrote: post #2

It won't pay off if LLMs efficiency gets good enough to make those data centers obsolete. It's a huge gamble.

I disagree in a way, part of the reason they can't really succeed at the moment is because it's way too expensive to really deploy at scale for most companies, but even for those AI companies themselves. If they can make business access subsidized/cheap the same way pro/plus/max/whatever plan are for regular users while still being profitable, this can work out. The other solution is if they do reach that "it's so su…

You do realize "subsidizing" means charging less for something than it costs to provide, right? So they'll lose a dollar on every sale, but they'll make up for it in volume? E2E is usually where the profit comes from. If they're subsidizing getting regular users on board (pro/plus/max), and they're subsidizing to get businesses on board (massive deploys), where can the profit possibly come from without a pricing rug pull?
Post reply on HN