Live data from Hacker News

Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

tomtunguz.com

181–190 of 218 posts

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#181
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would blame the business people for being so gullible too.

There's some blame there, sure. But generally people would agree that between a con man and his victims, the con man has the greater moral failing.

In general yes. But here we talk about businessmen who are paid quite a lot of money literally to make decisions like these.

It is kind of like when a cop allows his gun to be stolen. Yes, the criminal is the guilty, but also the cop was the one person supposed to guard against it.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#183
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the risk would only be that the lease would be aborted sooner than expected. That is, in fact, the risk.

But Im saying something different than the person I was responding to. They said that the risk was due to company going bankrupt and therefore Nvidia losing its "investment" - read: the GPUs that it leased. Whereas Im saying that the risk is due to company going bankrupt, Nvidia getting its GPUs back, but now they have too many at hand than they can usefully deploy/sell. The two are risks triggered by the same event,…

In the world in which OpenAI goes bankrupt, their used GPUs would be worth perhaps 10% of their value today.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#184
post #37

The smartest finance folks I know say that this “irrational exuberance” works until it doesn’t. Meaning nobody really thinks it’s sustainable, but companies and VCs chasing the AI hype bubble have backed themselves into a corner where the only way to stop the bubble from bursting is to keep inflating the bubble. The fate of the bubble will be decided by Wall Street not tech folks in the valley. Wall Street is already…

>These finance types (family offices, small secret investment funds) eat clueless VCs throwing cash on the fire for lunch… and they’re salivating at what’s ahead. It’s a “Big Short” once in 20-30 years type opportunity.

No - it's very hard to successfully bet against anything in finance, and VCs and non-public investments are particularly hard. When you go long, you simply buy something and hold it until you decide to sell. If you short, you have to worry about borrowing shares, paying short fees, and having unlimited risk.

How would you even begin to bet against OpenAI specifically? The closest proxy I can think of is shorting NVDA.

There's also nobody whose job it is to make big one-time shorts. Like you said, it's a once in 20-30 years opportunity, so no one builds a hedge fund dedicated to sitting around for decades waiting for that opportunity. There will certainly be exceptions, and maybe they'll make a Big Short 2 about the scrappy underdogs who saw the opening and timed it perfectly. But the vast majority of Wall Street desperately wants the party to continue.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#185
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the risk would only be that the lease would be aborted sooner than expected. That is, in fact, the risk.

But Im saying something different than the person I was responding to. They said that the risk was due to company going bankrupt and therefore Nvidia losing its "investment" - read: the GPUs that it leased. Whereas Im saying that the risk is due to company going bankrupt, Nvidia getting its GPUs back, but now they have too many at hand than they can usefully deploy/sell. The two are risks triggered by the same event,…

In leasing to OpenAI, they aren't deploying those GPUs to other productive uses.

The costs are not just the raw cost of the physical asset, but also the opportunity costs of doing "thing a" vs. "thing b".

The GPUs will also depreciate during the time they're in OpenAI's possession, so again, if that investment doesn't pay off they aren't just getting GPUs back, they're getting "used GPUs" or "more used GPUs" back, not the original or full value of the originally leased asset. Naturally, the lease has to have those costs built in to be a good deal, but the lease has to fulfill to terms for that to happen.

In the end, leasing them means they carry the early risk of the lease not being fulfilled... but they should gain more in the than if they just straight up sold them.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with everything in this book, Goliath,[0] but his main argument was that business monopoly and democracy are in direct opposition. And that since the 1970s we've chosen to enable monopoly again and again. 0: https://www.amazon.com/Goliath-100-Year-Between-Monopoly-Dem...

How does Stoller explain why since the 1970’s there’s been massive turnover whether you look at the largest 10 companies, the largest 100, or the largest 1,000?

Turnover might be due to mergers, takeovers and periods of monopolization of different sectors of the economy, turnover doesn't measure the level of monopolization or duo-polization. Market share and relative capitalization per sector are the valid measures.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#187
post #18

Fiber networks were using less than 0.002% of available capacity, with potential for 60,000x speed increases. It was just too early. I doubt we will see unused GPU capacity. As soon as we can prompt "Think about the codebase over night. Try different ways to refactor it. Tomorrow, show me your best solution." we will want as much GPU time at the current rate as possible. If a minute of GPU usage is currently $0.10, a…

> "Try different ways to refactor it. Tomorrow, show me your best solution."

The cost/benefit analysis doesn't add up for two reasons:

First, a refactored codebase works almost the same as non-refactored one, that is, the tangible benefit is small.

Second, how many times are you going to refactor the codebase? Once and... that's it. There's simply no need for that much compute for lack of sufficient beneficial work.

That is, the present investments are going to waste unless we automate and robotize everything, I'm OK with that but it's not where the industry is going.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#188
post #18

Fiber networks were using less than 0.002% of available capacity, with potential for 60,000x speed increases. It was just too early. I doubt we will see unused GPU capacity. As soon as we can prompt "Think about the codebase over night. Try different ways to refactor it. Tomorrow, show me your best solution." we will want as much GPU time at the current rate as possible. If a minute of GPU usage is currently $0.10, a…

> improved codebase I've seen lots of claims about AI coding skill, but that one might be able to improve (and not merely passably extend) a codebase is a new one. I'd want to see it before I believe it.

Claude will refactor but more than that, it can add documentation. And it can be asked about a codebase too. "Where does FOO happen?" "How does BAR work?".

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With Bezos openly stating the goal to build 10 GW+ data-centers in space, it almost feels in question whether this is about ROI, or simply building the Neuromancer future where the ultra-rich can finally be free of their need for the rest of us. Not needing labor at all would be the final return on investment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45465480 https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/jeff-bezos-claims..…

It is folly to take these statements at their words. Bezos is just saying shit to generate hype. All these executives are just saying shit . There is no plan. You must treat these people as morons who understand nothing. Anyone who knows even the slightest details about datacenter design knows what moving heat is the biggest problem. This is the exact thing that being in space makes infinitely harder. "Datacenters in…

Yes.

Billionaires are often being regarded as having extremely insightful ideas, in practice their fortunes was often built on a mix of luck, grits and competence in a few narrow fields, but their insights out of their domains tend to be average or worse.

Being too rich means you end up surrounded by sycophants.

Re: Circular Financing: Does Nvidia's $110B Bet Echo the Telecom Bubble?

#190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By reddit? No. By the users? No. But they are paid.

You’d like to substantiate that? I’d love to have someone pull the curtain back and learn by whom, if that’s the case.

Many of them are using their subreddits for submarine promotion. Here's a public example: https://www.reddit.com/r/SeattleWA/comments/547wxd/comment/d...

There's much worse that's "pure speculation", because a few thousand unemployed losers that nonetheless have six figure incomes aren't suspicious at all. See the kerfuffle when the mod of r/antiwork went on Fox News, where several of the other power mods alluded to their true incomes and professions (they know what they are - PR people) when trying to boast about how they'd have done better.

Post reply on HN