381–390 of 668 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would build their own power lines / grid if they could.
No thanks, I'll just take subsidies to my bill.
If you're actually interested, the reason it's important to build out the grid even more instead of "subsidizing" is because the current grid can't handle renewables well which we need to improve if we want to use sustainable energy.
If I had shovels to sell, I'd definitely announce a strategic partnership to have a huge quarry dug by hand. Seriously, is there anyone in the media keeping unbiased tabs on how much we're spending on summarizing emails and making creatives starve a little more?
Ed Zitron is an AI skeptic from the market perspective, highly recommend his stuff. It’s definitely not comforting to read, but he’s doing the math behind these headlines and it’s not adding up at all[0] 0: https://www.wheresyoured.at/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're doing about a billion per month in revenue by running proprietary models on GPUs like these. Unless they're selling inference with zero/negative margin, it seems like a business model that could be made profitable very easily.
Revenue != profit, and you don't need to become net negative margin to be net unprofitable. Expensive researchers, expensive engineers, expensive capex, etc. Inference has extremely different unit economics from a typical SaaS like Salesforce or adtech like google or facebook.
Indeed. And even if that revenue is net profitable right now (and analysts differ sharply on whether it really is), is there a sustainable moat that'll keep fast-followers from replicating most of OpenAI's product value at lower cost? History is littered with first-movers who planted the crop only to see new competitors feast on the fruit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wtf, and this is from 1 company How many atrophic,xAi,google,Microsoft would be???? having around 5% entire country infrastructure on AI hardware seems excessive no???
Around 5% in the next 5 years for AI alone sounds pretty in-line with projections I've seen.
For someone who doesn't know what a gigawat worth of Nvidia systems is, how many high-end H100 or whatever does this get you? My estimates along with some poor-grade GPT research leads me to think it could be nearly 10 million? That does seem insane.
You could think of it as "as much power as is used by NYC and Chicago combined". Which is fucking insanely wasteful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
100 square miles is small in the American southwest. And a solar farm would disrupt the ecosystem much less than many other land uses. Adding shade and cover will benefit many species.
Next Year: OpenAI announces it is seeking funding for a Dyson Sphere
Framing it in gigawatts is very interesting given the controversy about skyrocketing electric prices for residential and small business users as a result of datacenters over the past three years, primarily driven by AI growth. If, as another commenter notes, this 10GW is how much Chicago and NYC use combined , then we need to have a serious discussion about where this power is going to come from given the dismal stat…
Imagine Ford announced “a strategic partnership with FedEx to deploy 10 giga-gallons of ICE vehicles”
Stating compute scale in terms of power consumption is such a backwards metric to me, assuming that you're trying to portray is as something positive. It's like selling steel by the average fractional number of mining deaths that went into producing it. Sure, at a given moment there will be some ratio between average deaths and steel, but that's a number that you want to be as low as possible.
It's just a different abstraction level.