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

Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 345 posts

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#261

Post by wyager »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #222
wyager wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has completely dropped the ball on every single detail of AI rollout for the last 5 years - why do you think they will suddenly stop now? My prior is that the new siri stuff is just as vaporware as the previous "apple intelligence" rollout

> Apple has completely dropped the ball Apple has sat out a capital-allocation shitshow. Its investors and likely customers are better off for their patience.

That would be a valid explanation if they hadn't totally oversold and underdelivered on "apple intelligence". In reality, this explanation is just cope

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#262

Post by MattDamonSpace »

wyager wrote: post #261
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple has completely dropped the ball Apple has sat out a capital-allocation shitshow. Its investors and likely customers are better off for their patience.

That would be a valid explanation if they hadn't totally oversold and underdelivered on "apple intelligence". In reality, this explanation is just cope

Ehhh if you squint, everything they announced today was announced in 2024.

Doesn’t seem like they changed their ideas much (I’m sure some iteration occurred but still) and the issue was the tech didn’t took 2 years to become workable

Feature set is borderline identical

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#263

Post by bandrami »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #75
krona wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They need to financially engineer a good looking quarter beforehand. Perhaps Larry Ellison can cut them a nice quid pro quo for a few months to make OpenAI look profitable (like the SpaceX/Anthropic deal), although that's probably unlikely given the debt Oracle is taking on to build it's infra.

> like the SpaceX/Anthropic deal I understand the scepticism around Google's deal with SpaceX, given the former holds a stake in the latter. But Anthropic buying SpaceX's compute doesn't have any related-party smell to it. That genuinely looks like SpaceX having cornered some valuable compute.

I think the reference was to Elon giving Dario a two-month discount on compute as part of the deal and Dario immediately announcing a profitable quarter based entirely on that discount.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#264

Post by bandrami »

thallavajhula wrote: post #64

Elon is not going to be happy about this. He's been vocal about his dislike towards the business model OpenAI chose to run with.

I personally think Elon is willing to take a hit on SpaceX's IPO Friday because he knows it will suck the air out of Sam's attempt at exiting.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#265

Post by ifwinterco »

pseudosavant wrote: post #251

It is increasingly look like OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceX (xAI) are going to burst their own AI bubble by going public. Their businesses aren't ready for that kind of quarter-by-quarter grinding scrutiny. It is going to be bad when their lockup periods end.

Bubble has to burst at some point, so IPO now and at least get some exit liquidity. If you wait too long you’ll never be able to exit at all.

I think that’s the thought process and why they’re in such a rush. In fact all three are in a sort of race, you probably don’t want to be the last one to IPO

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#266

Post by merelydev »

In the last week Alphabet has positioned itself to go on the offense, going after exccess liquidity and excess compute.

I fear that OpenAi and Anthropic would not be able to compete against an adveserial Alphabet which owns it's own models, hardware, large corpus of data, talent and network effects. My prediction is that OpenAI and Anthropic will eventually be crushed by Alphabet as they run out of investment and compute, leaving Alphabet to have a monopoly on AI, at least in the west.

This is why I think OpenAI and Anthropic should really be one company, if they join forces and pool together investments and compute they'll stand a chance.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#267

Post by joxdosba »

pseudosavant wrote: post #251

It is increasingly look like OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceX (xAI) are going to burst their own AI bubble by going public. Their businesses aren't ready for that kind of quarter-by-quarter grinding scrutiny. It is going to be bad when their lockup periods end.

Like the TSLA bubble has burst?

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#268

Post by cco »

thallavajhula wrote: post #64

Elon is not going to be happy about this. He's been vocal about his dislike towards the business model OpenAI chose to run with.

Here is my low key prediction about the purchase of Cursor by Elon.

Cursor is purportedly a huge customer of OAI, maybe a top five? I think Elon bought it to have leverage on sama.

If timed correctly, Elon could pull the plug on a huge customer (Cursor) the quarter before OAI try to IPO.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#269

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dualvariable wrote: post #238
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you were to treat all the hyperscalars as one company with one 10-K then Anthropic buying compute from SpaceX/xAI is an internal bookkeeping transfer between two departments This is literally true for any revenue. Treat the buyer and seller as a single company and their transaction is internal.

Because it is hiding the fact that there's very little external revenue coming into the AI sector compared to the costs. AI companies doing business with each other isn't net revenue into the sector. Treating the whole sector as a single entity isn't arbitrary.

> it is hiding the fact that there's very little external revenue coming into the AI sector compared to the costs

There is a lot of revenue dumping into this sector. If there weren’t, you’d have a point about manufactured numbers. But I don’t think anyone seriously doubts Anthropic and Google are hauling in serious dough.

The question, as you point out, is how much they are keeping. But xAI selling compute doesn’t really hide any of that. If anything, given the prices Musk is getting, it adds to the cost line. (And xAI isn’t masking compute revenue as Grok’s.)

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#270

Post by HDBaseT »

panopticon wrote: post #164
HDBaseT wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was under the impression SpaceX was going to be a trillion dollar company. The media and market is hyping these three companies up to be all trillion dollar companies.

Afaik SpaceX is only putting 5% of its shares up on the public market when it IPOs (newly minted shares, diluting the existing private shareholders). So the markets only "need to absorb" $75B when SpaceX IPOs, not its whole $1.7T valuation. At least until the lockup period expires.

Gotcha, that seems a bit more manageable for the market to absorb.

I think it will still be a bit tight with Anthropic and OpenAI IPO'ing at similar times however.

Post reply on HN