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

OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 443 posts

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#301

Post by Retric »

ac29 wrote: post #262
Retric wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Training costs scale to infinite users making them a perfect moat even if they need to keep updating it. Success would be 10-100x current users at which point training costs at the current scale just don’t matter. Really their biggest risk is total compute costs falling too quickly or poor management.

WSJ reported today that ChatGPT has 250M weekly users. 10x that would be nearly the the majority of internet users. 100x that would be significantly more than the population of Earth.

Someone can be a direct user, be on some companies corporate account, and an indirect user via 3rd parties using OpenAI on their backend.

As long as we’re talking independent revenue streams it’s worth counting separately from an investment standpoint.

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#302

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #207
yifanl wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook made it out by committing click fraud against advertisers on a massive scale, which I don't see as a viable path for sama (even ignoring any legal concerns) considering that openAI isn't a platform company.

Look, I don't care. At some point we're just arguing about the validity of big tech investing. I don't invest money in tech companies. I don't have a strong opinion about Facebook, or, for that matter, about OpenAI. I'm just saying, you don't need a sci-fi story about AGI to see why people would plow this much money into them. That's all.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#303

Post by moralestapia »

petesergeant wrote: post #103
moralestapia wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does. "ChatGPT", GPT, "OpenAI", etc... are strong brands associated with it. Edit: You can downvote me all you want, I have plenty of karma to spare. This is OpenAI's strongest moat, whether people like it or not.

Nobody cares, though, really. My experience is that clients are only passingly interested in what LLM powers the projects they need and entirely interested in the deployed cost and how well the end product works.

Which provider do you use for your clients' AI solutions? Be honest.

Edit: nvm, I already know.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36028029

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41725073

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#304

Post by Mistletoe »

BonoboIO wrote: post #212
dom96 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or after building their own LLM that runs locally on Apple Sillicon they've decided that this technology is crazily overhyped

Apple survived with Siri for 10 years that is absolutely useless beside creating a timer … so they have time to wait and even use open source llms in the future.

I asked Siri how much 500 mL of water weighed the other day and she said 0.13 gallons. I should have remembered a mL weighs a gram but still. Siri is dumber than dirt.

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#305

Post by thedailymail »

lxgr wrote: post #98
giarc wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old is that though? They seem to be making revenue pretty well now, so I suspect this might be quite old?

Revenue isn't profit. They're burning money at an impressive rate: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/27/technology/openai-chatgpt... I wouldn't even be surprised if they were losing money on paying ChatGPT users on inference compute alone, and that isn't even factoring in the development of new models. There was an interesting article here (can't find the link unfortunately) that was arguing that model training costs s…

I think this might be the article you mentioned

https://benn.substack.com/p/do-ai-companies-work

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#306

Post by Mistletoe »

petesergeant wrote: post #96
Rebuff5007 wrote: post #53

I for one can never get over the fact that Mira Murati was not laughed out of the room when she said -- with a straight face -- that GPT4 had high school level intelligence and the non-existent GPT5 will have PHD-level intelligence [1]. IMO -- this is not a serious company with serious people building an important long-lived product. This is a group of snake oil salesmen that are in the middle of the greatest grift o…

> this is not a serious company with serious people building an important long-lived product. This is a group of snake oil salesmen But that’s obviously not a fair description either, because they have the world-leading product in an intensely competitive field that does stuff nobody would have thought possible five years ago. The marketing is obviously massive hyperbole bordering the ridiculous, but the idea that th…

But is it world leading?

https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/chatgpt-vs-g...

Gemini won this one in September. It won another one I read in March. I just use Gemini for free.

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#307

Post by JasserInicide »

mattmaroon wrote: post #80
cs702 wrote: post #4

Given the high risk, investors likely want a shot of earning at least a 10x return. $157 billion x 10 = $1.57 trillion, greater than META's current market capitalization. Greater returns would require even more aggressive assumptions. For example, a 30x return would require OpenAI to become the world's most valuable company by a large margin. All I can say to the investors, with the best of hopes, is: Good luck! You'…

If they accomplish AGI first, they will be the world’s most valuable company, by far. If they fall short of AGI there are still many ways a more limited but still quite useful AI might make them worth far more than Meta. I don’t know how to handicap the odds of them doing either of these at all, but they would seem to have the best chance at it of anyone right now.

People can't even consistently define what AGI is. Ask 10 different people, you'll get 11 different answers.

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#308

Post by mrbungie »

nojvek wrote: post #276
paxys wrote: post #100

$6.6B raise. The company loses $5B per year. So all this money literally gives them just an extra ~year and change of runway. I know the AI hype is sky high at the moment (hence the crazy valuation), but if they don't make the numbers make sense soon then I don't see things ending well for OpenAI. Another interesting part: > Under the terms of the new investment round, OpenAI has two years to transform into a for-pro…

How does OpenAI manage to spend $5B in one year? Is that mostly spend in building their own datacenters with GPUs?

Training and inference costs: Paying for GPU time in Azure datacenters.

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#309

Post by move-on-by »

EasyMark wrote: post #257
nicce wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't used Google for year, and I find better results than ever.

For me ddg and brave search have been fine with an occasional dose of chatgpt . I don’t miss google. I used Kagi for a few months and it was great but I got tired of them aggressively logging me out because I use a VPN that often changes IPs all over the US to find the speediest server. I understand why they do it, but I could not tolerate it forcing me to log back in every couple of days across devices. I was using…

I use private mode on safari as my primary browser experience- so I’m never logged into anything. Kagi has a ‘Session Link’ feature where the URL itself logs you in. It’s pretty easy to get setup and then you never have to log in again unless you want to make account changes. I agree with you that it wouldn’t be worth it if I was constantly having to log in. Anyways, just something to consider, there is a solution.

Re: OpenAI completes deal that values company at $157B

#310

Post by BobbyJo »

tptacek wrote: post #158
nwiswell wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if they don't make the numbers make sense soon then I don't see things ending well for OpenAI. This is pretty much obvious just from the valuations. The wild bull case where they invent a revolutionary superintelligence would clearly value them in the trillions, so the fact that they're presently valued an order of magnitude less implies that it is viewed as an unlikely scenario (and reasonably so, in my opinion).

You don't need science fiction to find the bull case for OpenAI. You just have to think it stands to be the "next" Google, which feels increasingly plausible. Google's current market capitalization is in the trillions.

> Google's current market capitalization is in the trillions.

2 trillion. Approximately 13x OpenAI's current valuation. Google nets almost 100 billion a year. OpenAI grosses 4 billion a year.

Wild numbers.

Post reply on HN