141–150 of 294 posts
Given their current product offerings, I really don't see a way they could ever justify a $300B valuation unless they get everyone on the planet to subscribe to their $200/month plan. I'm calling it now: investors are gonna get burned hard on this one. Cause right now all they have is "well we are working on superintelligence" and to that I say "great, then what?". Even if they do make that breakthrough I don't see h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The current state of AI is a perfect mass surveillance technology. How? Are you just going to ask the LLM about who is doing the crime? OpenAI is not an "AI company", it's an "LLM company".
You ask it to do the things that human analysts already currently do with the vast amounts of text, image, and video data they collect but at an unprecedented scale. You can extract what people are talking about, identify people, weapons, or objects in images, extract addresses, license plate numbers, or other identifying references. It can probably even detect when people are using coded language that won’t trigger…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> unless they get everyone on the planet to subscribe to their $200/month plan. that would be a monthly recurring revenue of 200 x 7bn = $1,400,000,000,000 or $1.4tn a month, $16.8tn per year! I think they've be valued a bit higher than $300bn if that were the case.
I think it was hyperbole
Given their current product offerings, I really don't see a way they could ever justify a $300B valuation unless they get everyone on the planet to subscribe to their $200/month plan. I'm calling it now: investors are gonna get burned hard on this one. Cause right now all they have is "well we are working on superintelligence" and to that I say "great, then what?". Even if they do make that breakthrough I don't see h…
Then you ask your superintelligence for advice on how to make money, obviously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'm calling it now: investors are gonna get burned hard on this one. I'm in my late 40s. I'm Gen X. I lived through the glory days of the dotcom boom, when investors got burned for tons of money. But from the ashes of those bullshit companies, we got Amazon, Google, etc., which made investors rich beyond belief. SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son made a bet on Alibaba ($20 million, its stake now worth $72 billion), and he’s b…
Amazon is technically a dotcom company. (I.e. it was around, and quite successful, during the dotcom era.)
Given their current product offerings, I really don't see a way they could ever justify a $300B valuation unless they get everyone on the planet to subscribe to their $200/month plan. I'm calling it now: investors are gonna get burned hard on this one. Cause right now all they have is "well we are working on superintelligence" and to that I say "great, then what?". Even if they do make that breakthrough I don't see h…
They're currently "worth" 3.2 Stripes, which seems pretty absurd to me. (I'm now using 1 Stripe as a metric to measure the valuation of AI companies).
This is a monopoly kind of valuation where no monopoly exists. Its like paying Microsoft billions for Internet explorer.
Personally I believe the future of AI models is open-source. The application of these models will be the real revenue driver.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firstly, the $200/m plan is at a loss, they'll make a profit on PAYG tokens, not plans. Secondly, this is looking very risky: they are at the bottom of the value chain and eventually they'll be running on razor thin margins like all actors who are at the bottom of the value chain. Anything they can offer is doable by their competitors (in Google's case, they can even do it cheaper due to ow ing the vertical which Ope…
The real revenue opportunity for OpenAI is advertising. More than 25% of Americans use ChatGPT instead of Google, and OpenAI has already announced partnership with Shopify to directly list products. But for now they are focused on market share. Google does not really own the complete AI stack, NVDA is extracting a lot of the value there. Google has two other impediments to doing what ChatGPT does. Googles entire busi…
...not sure what you're implying.
Google most definitely has their own stack (spanning hardware-to-software) for AI. Gemini was trained on in-house TPUs:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardnieva/2023/12/07/google-...
I'd give my left nut to buy into OpenAI at this valuation. 300B is peanuts compared to where it would trade publicly, FCF and net income be damned. The growth and the optionality are there when you bring a tool this valuable to the world. This is destined to trade over 2T rapidly imo. PLTR (granted imo a bubble) trades above that, and PLTR is basically a glorified IBM/Accenture business model with mediocre growth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where did I say what anyone else did or didn't do, or judge anybody?
Apologies if I misread your post, but by calling Sam a psychopath in the same post, it seemed to imply that you would have offered her treatment that he did not.