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

Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

revolutioninai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#51

Post by rsynnott »

pjc50 wrote: post #27
santiagobasulto wrote: post #2

But doesn't $15M/day of inference cost imply "demand" from users? If this is the case, it's just a matter of time until costs can be reduced.

The actual revenue was quoted at $2.1m .. total. Ever. It would require multiple order of magnitude cost reductions to make that worthwhile. Maybe another few decades of Moore's law, if we have that left. This was the Moviepass model of selling $10 bills for $9.

Much worse, really; it was selling $10 bills for half a cent.

The Moviepass thing, I think if you were kinda gullible you could maybe buy into it eventually working on scale. This could never work on scale.

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#52

Post by bot403 »

boredhedgehog wrote: post #46
keiferski wrote: post #15

I would be curious to know if there is actually as much business economic demand for AI video compared to images (logos, product graphics, etc.) or text (blogs, content everywhere, etc.) My impression is that video is too complex to easily fit into an AI pipeline. Either you need something highly specific, like your own product’s UI. Or you need something personable and consistent, like someone talking into his camer…

The aspiration is to replace the movie industry. That's a lot of demand.

As a movie consumer I am not interested in AI movies. You don't get to just keep the existing market and switch to AI. You are creating a new market of AI video consumers and hoping it's big enough.

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#54

Post by orwin »

prodigycorp wrote: post #24

I'm sorry to be this guy but this is an incredibly poor quality article. False structure (thesis/evidence), links to poor quality sources, and a non-examination of the core thesis, which is that it's burning too much money. $15m/day inference? How was that calculated? Forbes? Did they get it right? Is that a reasonable estimate? Still valid? How was revenue calculated? IMO most of the votes had to come from some vote…

The website is worse than anything I've made, and I'm a backend/network/system guy.

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#55

Post by goalieca »

danbruc wrote: post #49

How many seconds of video did they generate per day for those $15,000,000, i.e. what would it actually cost me to generate, say, a three minute music video for my garage band? This should probably take into account how many attempts I would likely need to arrive at something I am satisfied with.

How many minutes would you generate to finally land on your 3 minute final copy?

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#56

Post by sceptic123 »

hk__2 wrote: post #39
Maken wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I specially like the graph-looking picture with no axis, no data and no context.

The context is the text below and under it. The axis doesn’t matter, it’s the shape that does.

but not if it's entirely made up

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#57

Post by mingus88 »

santiagobasulto wrote: post #2

But doesn't $15M/day of inference cost imply "demand" from users? If this is the case, it's just a matter of time until costs can be reduced.

Many things are only in demand because they are free.

And if nobody is willing to pay for it, it hardly matters how low you bring down cost, because it’s always a net negative.

Just look at the general state of the internet over the past two decades. Do you think it would work for Sora to insert ads into the slop?

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#58

Post by mingus88 »

bot403 wrote: post #52
boredhedgehog wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The aspiration is to replace the movie industry. That's a lot of demand.

As a movie consumer I am not interested in AI movies. You don't get to just keep the existing market and switch to AI. You are creating a new market of AI video consumers and hoping it's big enough.

I see this as an extension of the Netflix model: content for people who aren’t actually watching the movie

Why spend the effort making a show for people on their phones? Will they even notice if it’s slop?

Re: Why Sora Failed: $15M/day inference cost vs. $2.1M lifetime revenue

#60

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

keiferski wrote: post #47
simonreiff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Would you like me to give you five reasons why you forgot AI commenters and AI readers?

We're not just AI readers, we're AI commenters too!
Post reply on HN