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

Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 322 posts

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#311

Post by bayarearefugee »

fragmede wrote: post #270
bayarearefugee wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If AI is making developers (inside Anthropic or out) 10x more productive... where's all the software? I'm not an LLM luddite, they are useful tools, but people with vested interests make a lot of claims that if they were true would result in a situation where we should already be seeing the signs of a giant software renaissance... and I just haven't seen that. Like, at all. I see a lot more blogging and influncer ped…

How much software do you think happened at Google internally during its first 10 years of existence that never saw outside light? I imagine that they have a lot of internal projects that we have no idea they even need.

But this AI boom is supposedly lifting all boats, internal and external.

That's the hype being sold. So where's the software...?

And again, I'm not anti-LLM. But I still think the hype around them is far, far greater than their real impact.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#312

Post by tinyhouse »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #208
tinyhouse wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic is a $1T company in the making (by 2030), already raised their last round at ~$200B valuation. Do you really think Amazon can acquire them? They already invested a lot of money in them and probably own at least 20% of Anthropic, which was the smartest thing Jassy did in a while. Not to mention, if Adobe wasn't allowed to buy Figma, do you think Amazon will be allowed to buy Anthropic? No way it's going to b…

Well, just to show you a microcosm of what happens when VCs find the bigger fool in the public market when they IPO money losing companies…. https://medium.com/@Arakunrin/the-post-ipo-performance-of-y-... > One thing you're right about - Anthropic isn't surviving - it's thriving. Probably the fastest growing revenue in history. Growing revenue and losing money is not “thriving”

Most companies will much rather have the problem of becoming profitable given amazing revenue growth than the problem of not having growth but being profitable. (e.g. Dropbox)

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#313

Post by nickpinkston »

N_Lens wrote: post #236
moffkalast wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you spend your last capital on acetone and ethanol reserves you might be able to stay solvent for a lot longer.

A chemistry joke in MY financial thread?!

And we didn't have to add an amphiphilic to make them mix

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#314

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

tinyhouse wrote: post #312
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, just to show you a microcosm of what happens when VCs find the bigger fool in the public market when they IPO money losing companies…. https://medium.com/@Arakunrin/the-post-ipo-performance-of-y-... > One thing you're right about - Anthropic isn't surviving - it's thriving. Probably the fastest growing revenue in history. Growing revenue and losing money is not “thriving”

Most companies will much rather have the problem of becoming profitable given amazing revenue growth than the problem of not having growth but being profitable. (e.g. Dropbox)

But many of the companies won’t be profitable at all. I’m sure the investors are happy when they find the “bigger fool” after IPO.

But someone who invested in the hypothetical “YC Index Fund” wouldn’t be too happy.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#315

Post by JimDabell »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #309
JimDabell wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they are. The two things aren’t contradictory at all, in fact one strongly implies the other. If AI is writing 90% of your code, that means the total contribution of a developer is 10× the code they would write without AI. This means you get way more value per developer, so why wouldn’t you keep hiring developers? This idea that “AI writes 90% of our code” means you don’t need developers seems to spring fro…

You said: > The two things aren’t contradictory at all, in fact one strongly implies the other. If AI is writing 90% of your code, that means the total contribution of a developer is 10× the code they would write without AI. This means you get way more value per developer, so why wouldn’t you keep hiring developers? Let's review the original claim: > AI will replace 90% of developers within 6 months Notice that the o…

> Let's review the original claim:

> > AI will replace 90% of developers within 6 months

That’s not the original claim though; that’s a misrepresentative paraphrase of the original claim, which was that AI will be writing 90% of the code with a developer driving it.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#316

Post by baobabKoodaa »

JimDabell wrote: post #315
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said: > The two things aren’t contradictory at all, in fact one strongly implies the other. If AI is writing 90% of your code, that means the total contribution of a developer is 10× the code they would write without AI. This means you get way more value per developer, so why wouldn’t you keep hiring developers? Let's review the original claim: > AI will replace 90% of developers within 6 months Notice that the o…

> Let's review the original claim: > > AI will replace 90% of developers within 6 months That’s not the original claim though; that’s a misrepresentative paraphrase of the original claim, which was that AI will be writing 90% of the code with a developer driving it.

Huh. You seem to be right. It seems I was responding to a comment which misquoted Dario.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#318

Post by aurareturn »

jacquesm wrote: post #293
aurareturn wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but check out Cisco's market cap vs Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Meta, Netflx, etc. A few gold diggers will be worth 10x the shovel maker.

That's a risk-return issue. Bezos plays it safe within Amazon, and quite unsafe outside of that. By the time he acquires something from Amazon it is because it has proven long-term revenue generation and the shake-out period is done and consolidation is about to start. With AI the shake-out is still to come. So he can afford to wait to eventually acquire the winner or to copy it if he can't buy it. Having very deep p…

Yes, it is safe but Amazon will be surpassed by an AI company by 10x in the future if history repeats.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#319

Post by vasco »

BoorishBears wrote: post #291
vasco wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon gave away datacenter time share in exchange for stock in a startup. That has nothing to do with electricity futures and private credit revolvers.

They said echoes of the tricks.

I've read thousands of pages of Enron history, this has nothing to do with it.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#320

Post by bcrl »

somebodythere wrote: post #107
hbosch wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? While Amazon doesn't own a "true" frontier model they have their own foundation model called Nova. I assume if Amazon was using Claude's latest models to power it's AI tools, such as Alexa+ or Rufus, they would be much better than they currently are. I assume if their consumer facing AI is using Claude at all it would be a Sonnet or Haiku model from 1+ versions back simply due to cost.

Rufus is a Claude Haiku, yes.

I wonder if that sentence will have any discernible meaning 100 years from now.
Post reply on HN