571–580 of 620 posts
Someone please explain how OpenAI is not Netscape 2026. They had first mover advantage but no network effect, no moat, and are racing to stay ahead of infinitely resourced incumbents.
I can’t. I think they are one viral TikTok away from the pendulum swinging to Chat Gemini, which for most people, the no cost version is perfectly adequate
Someone please explain how OpenAI is not Netscape 2026. They had first mover advantage but no network effect, no moat, and are racing to stay ahead of infinitely resourced incumbents.
Ok where is the Microsoft explorer of this “Netscape”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wrong. They will use the model that gives them an edge. If they are using a PhD but their competitors are using Einstein, they will lose. For some tasks that matters. But for a lot of tasks, "good enough but cheaper" will win out. I'm sure there will be a market for whichever company has the best model, but just like most companies don't hire many PhD's, most companies won't feel a need for the highest end models e…
Models will get smarter and cheaper. For those that are burned directly into silicon, there will be a market for old models - as the alternative is to dump that silicon in a landfill. For models that run on general-purpose AI hardware, I don't know why the vendors would waste that resource on old models.
In terms of price, I can get 1m output tokens from Deepseek for 40 cents vs. 25 dollars for Opus, and a number of models near the 1-2 dollar mark that are increasingly viable for a larger set of applications.
Providers will keep running those cheaper models as long as there's demand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the meme with SoftBank? Just that they're super bad at investments?
Ya. The WeWork debacle and investing $300 million into Wag, an imploded Uber for dog walking, surely wasn't helping.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The model is the moat What model? GPT4o certainly isn’t a moat for open ai. They need to keep training better and better models because qwen3, kimi k2.5 etc constantly nipping at their heels. > Wrong. They will use the model that gives them an edge. If they are using a PhD but their competitors are using Einstein, they will lose. It depends on the business. As much as I’d love to engage a PhD or an Einstein in my V…
It's a moat. Yes, they must keep refilling it, but it's all they have. My PhD vs Einstein analogy was bad. What I mean is stupid vs smart. Nobody is going to pay for a stupid model when they can pay a bit more for smart.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a common misconception OpenAI and others are already profitable on inference (inference is really really cheap) They are just heavily investing into the latest frontier The biggest risk is whether they can stay cutting edge, or if open source or others will catch up quickly.
At the end of the day, they're still burning cash. Even if inference is cheap, it's also not hard to compete on. They aren't going to be a trillion dollar inference company. Eventually there will be a race to the bottom on inference price to the customer by companies that aren't trying to subsidize their GPU investments. OpenAI is spending money because they think they need to for their business to survive. They're h…
I personally think we haven't cracked AGI yet but it doesn't change their calculus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uber and Airbnb have network effects. You cant increase price when there is no cost in switching.
I dont see how network effects applies to Uber/Airbnb because nothing stops drivers/hosts from listing their property in multiple such apps
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's like giving them* $20. And inflate your revenue by $80. Laws on competition make this kind of arrangements illegal, so you would have to exerce influence and have the invested in company pretends you happen to have been picked among competitors. In any case the SEC will be focused on whether the filings aren't made up to fraud investors, so they could reject the IPO, of the invested in company. Your own entity…
> they have good legal goons who find way to make all of it appears fair with regards to the law I thought it was more that the legal goons delay the final judgement until Microsoft can eventually find someone they can (technically legally) bribe to drop the case?