231–240 of 626 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The car industry is also a trillion $$ market in the US. I don't see why that would go any differently from the Chinese cars ban.
You wouldn't download a car, would you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting... So Chinese models are not so bad ?
There's a chance that the real reason why they want to ban Chinese models is that they are so good at fixing bugs and preventing exploits that intelligence agencies have been using for espionage and surveillance for a long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is impossible to justify the absurd private valuations they have given themselves in collusion with investors. I wish they had tried to IPO because then we’d see the judgement of the market on this. But that’s why they didn’t this year. How long can they keep up the charade that their models are uniquely valuable and on the path to AGI?
> private valuations they have given themselves in collusion with investors. What's the collusion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI and Anthropic are both seeking trillion IPOs, while Chinese labs are pumping out open-weight models that are free for US providers to host and monetize. These Chinese models cost less of US SOTA models to run, even if they are less capable. Providers can just run them, offer cheap tokens, and pocket the margin. I just don't see how you justify a trillion valuation for US AI labs when the underlying models are…
Another interesting potential market here will be 'LLM in a box'. All the hardware and other tooling in a prebuilt, but modular, package ready to go. Pay one up-front cost, get a system running [whatever open LLM] with a token rate of [x], optionally configured to be immediately ready for distributed usage. Basically the opposite of cloud stuff: no rent, no dependency, 100% guaranteed uptime, guaranteed security/priv…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That makes them at best temporary middlemen. It only justifies their long term valuations if they can leverage that temporary monopoly for technological superiority (they can't) or lasting market share (they can't). Chinese models prove there's no technical advantage, and the software side is heavily commoditized so there's not much advantages to market share either.
The question mark in my mind over the technological superiority is whether the additional volume of data they see due to capturing the top of the market allows them to do recursive self-improvement in a way nobody else can match, before any of the other labs can figure it out. That's the only runaway outcome I can see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is going to be catastrophic. Whether AI works or is useful or not isn’t even the question anymore. It can fulfil every promise Sam Altman has been making and will still make no financial sense to justify these valuations.
I take it from [1] (transcript of recent DeepSeek CEO discussion with investors) that DeepSeek would disagree on the immediate catastrophic impact to the likes of OpenAI or Anthropic. The reason is even though technology parity mostly exists, only OpenAI, Anthropic et al have the inference capacity to gain market share and generate revenue. Chinese vendors don't have the chips needed to scale up inference and gain ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is going to be catastrophic. Whether AI works or is useful or not isn’t even the question anymore. It can fulfil every promise Sam Altman has been making and will still make no financial sense to justify these valuations.
I seriously need to start considering the scenario in which this leads to next global financial crisis.
Also, take in consideration that the AI trade infected a lot of other trade in the economy, if you decide at some point to move your money to a place that is safe in case of a downturn be sure to carefully evaluate that’s actually the case
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think at this point the question is: will the US government be willing and capable to justify the trillion dollar valuation for _one_ of the companies via regulatory capture? The US has a workforce of 170m, so 1.7 trillion would come down to 10k per person, or a discounted cashflow at 3% of 25 USD per month - not including private use, students etc.
Why would you restrict to the US workforce? ChatGPT has a billion users.
Apparently they are scanning OSS and popular software at scale and disclosing the vulnerabilities they found: https://cvd.z.ai/ Most of these are under embargo, but it seems there are a lot of CVE here from a wide range of popular software, many considered critical or high. I understand the argument of "people are not actively looking", but isn't the cost for such a scan getting lower by the week, and Anthropic's Pro…
> ... Anthropic's Project Glasswing is supposed to find them quite a while ago? That was my thought too. For all of Anthropic's talk about their "adversaries", it seems Z.AI have been quietly offering fixes for single shot Remote Code Execution flaws in US software (Safari / WebKit) that Apple and Glasswing / Mythos missed, and that Apple would not attribute to GLM.
It’s very likely they found all of them, but that the same happened that happened to Microsoft a couple of decades ago: NSA orders not to disclose / fix them so that they can put it in their collection of unfixed zero days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> private valuations they have given themselves in collusion with investors. What's the collusion?
Circular investment deals and investment deals at valuations which have no possible justification.