241–250 of 306 posts
The current commitment by hyperscalers is around 1.7T USD, reported liabilities 1.3T and this year global debt related to AI is 570B. So that’s around 3T total. For this to make sense AI must generate 2T in new revenue per year by the end of the decade. And that would be only a 10% ROIC. For context ROIC for big tech is around 35% so at 10% they will be barely breaking even. The SP500 gives 10-12%. With 10% ROIC from…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long will a SOTA model be necessary? If day to day work can be achieved on an open weight model, the most evaporates overnight. Look at any computer in a big company. It isn't the fastest on the market, nor will it have the most RAM or largest monitor or fanciest keyboard. It is good enough at a good enough price point. Once it becomes possible and cheaper to host your own good enough open weight models, with all…
> How long will a SOTA model be necessary? If day to day work can be achieved on an open weight model, the most evaporates overnight. Depends on the advantage it gives people and marketing of that advantage. You'd be surprised at how overpowered the average workplace laptop is. Each company I've been at has had at least some people who do non-technical roles using high-end hardware. Why? Because the account executive…
We have already seen tech workers at big name companies get whiplash from "leaderboards showing people using the most tokens!" as a good thing one month to being pressured to using fewer tokens a month later.
i dont understand the concern. they are putting up great financials. you have to invest ahead of the outcome. this is just classic quarterly public company earnings BS, where public markets dont reward innovation investment. they just want crank the handle financials. The bigger issue is on the model front, can Google compete; Gemini doesnt seem to be able to compete on the heavy expert end; they are doing well on li…
I've given up on Gemini. It sounds smart but most of what it tells me ends up being wrong or misleading. I might actually hand $20/mo to OpenAI. It's been far more helpful with the random collection of legal and health problems I've thrown at it. My recent comment history is going to make me come across like a shill for them but, holy crap, GPT has been doing amazing things for me at work as well. I don't get it eith…
As in convincing?
Or accurate?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What costs are 1/100th?
Of serving a (approximately) gpt4 sized model.
Also, lost revenue from other services being degraded by shifting resources to supporting training/serving models (Google Search...)?
Looking at cash burn is looking at the wrong end of the horse. Some companies, like Meta, have burned huge piles of cash in pursuit of, for example, the Metaverse and they've got nothing to show for it, not even a slight increment in ad tech, and yet they earned enough to shrug it off. There's a big difference between Google spending tens of billions on AI infrastructure and what Oracle is doing. Oracle is spending t…
Meta glasses are a direct result of this investment, and they're selling like hotcakes
But wait it gets worse: since Meta hasn't got a platform comparable to a mainstream PC or mobile device OS, the Meta glasses business is vulnerable and subscale, as impressive as owning half the TAM is. Since Meta glasses aren't a companion to an existing platform (not even AndroidAR, even though they run Android) they will become a second tier choice as soon as Apple or Samsung ship a smart glasses product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just don’t understand this view. This is the most significant technology ever developed. The uncertainty currently is whether it 1) has massive impact, completely altering society and the making world significantly significantly better or 2) if we go into a fast takeoff/rsi loop. Personally I’ve always been highly skeptical of the later, but that seems like a genuine possibility now. It’s not ‘are we going to be ab…
> It’s not ‘are we going to be able to generate 10% roic on compute’ the answer to that is yes. Based on what? No AI company has ever made a cent in profit (exept for Nvidia lmao).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Data centers are NOT real estate. Buildings and power lines usually last 30-50 years. GPUs become obsolete in 5 years. Data centers are real estate. One of the big players in carrier neutral data centers even calls themselves Digitial Realty. The contents of the DC is not real estate. But neither is the an office or a house or a warehouse.
The “contents” represent the majority of the cost and meaningful functionality of what we call a “datacenter”. Those contents will not last for “real estate” debt timelines.
Oh no a company spending money is bad for the economy… especially since they are spending it on … the most advanced tech humanity has ever created…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just don’t understand this view. This is the most significant technology ever developed. The uncertainty currently is whether it 1) has massive impact, completely altering society and the making world significantly significantly better or 2) if we go into a fast takeoff/rsi loop. Personally I’ve always been highly skeptical of the later, but that seems like a genuine possibility now. It’s not ‘are we going to be ab…
It will obviously be a large part of the economy like online shopping is today. The companies that built up a lot of debt to be brand names in online shopping primarily went bankrupt because new companies had no debt (and perhaps no negative sentiment from early customer experiences.)