Bad idea, the AI hype train still has some gas, when it settles in that it's just another tool it's all going to fizzle out.
I can’t wait. It’s gonna be an absolute blast to watch.
OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
81–90 of 159 posts
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good news: GPT-5.6 has been export restricted.
This is patently false, don't spread rumors. Voluntarily delaying release at the request of the government is not the same as imposing export controls.
I would categorize the op as "technically false" but
if they don't voluntarily delay, they would be export controlled.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but the market views these two companies very differently at the moment. Anthropic is seen as having momentum. Open AI is seen as having likely peaked What are you basing this on? Both are currently doing rounds/tenders that are placing without problems. The media treats these two differently, as do financial influencers. But I'd be careful about conflating either of them with the market.
it's not just media. or rather media is reporting based on fund interests.
> media is reporting based on fund interests
Can you give an example that shows funds actually souring on OpenAI? (Like, not less enthusiastic than before. Actually souring. Selling.)
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is momentum fading when their headline product is so good it’s illegal ?
I think they may have overplayed their hand so to speak. The end consequence is that their best model isn’t available right now, people are exploring alternatives, and realizing they work fine. It’s such a fast paced and competitive industry, anyone who takes even a short break is going to have a hard time coming back from it, and that’s basically what they’ve done.
Thankfully, many tech companies have shortened parental leave to 6 weeks!
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh? They’re profitable now? Or anywhere close to it?
No, but the GP wasn't satisfied with that, and had to put in a snide "even on inference" parenthetical. The leaks showed inference having positive margins. The Zitronites will say that the data is fraudulent, and OpenAI must have classified some of their inference as marketing, or R&D, or some other wacky theory of the week. But the actual data does not show that. It is made up. If you want to cherry-pick the worst p…
The inference part requires training the models to keep up to date as far as I am aware(I am open to being convinced otherwise if you have data showing so). Everything I’ve read about it implies that within a few years of reality updating or even just software if we constrain it to models for coding, won’t be able to handle all of the updates within the context windows available.
Given that I don’t know how you(royal you, not you specifically) can constrain an analysis of inference profitability to just the literal running of inference and not include training costs. That’s where it all breaks down for profitability.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
While spcx has room to go up or down from where it is today, the reality is it that didn't drop like a rock on IPO day, so wall street bets vibes-based online "analysis" investing is only good for paper money.
The investment bankers were in there manipulating, but that's over, and gravity is here.
It is funny to mention “gravity” in reference to company that makes rockets that escape gravity
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#87> The A.I. company’s advisers are pushing its chief executive, Sam Altman, to move slowly after SpaceX’s stock has been volatile and as the start-up grapples with financial challenges. SpaceX's stock volatile? It's a shame nobody saw that coming.
> shame nobody saw that coming
Seeing something coming is very different from having it not only confirmed but also quantified.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they are going to coincide lockups with the release of additional stock float from 5% up to 20% of the total "valuation" with a 3x QQQ multiplier so that stock indexes will treat them as 60% float even though 2/3rds of those shares are unavailable. Thus they guarantee that even more shares must be bought by tracking ETFs and institutional buyers. Everybody (that already owns pre-IPO shares) wins!
But that's not a secret, and therefore already priced in, right?
It's also a tiny effect given the total-market funds buy small amounts of each company, and the NASDAQ 100 isn't particularly big.
If S&P had changed its rules for the S&P 500, there would have been an effect. In the end, the drama was almost entirely a spectacle for finance influencers and their viewers.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#89AI exits in America probably have a political cliff approaching fast as populist backlash will hit them, or perhaps they see political winds favorable to regulatory capture in the future and are waiting for that?
> AI exits in America probably have a political cliff approaching fast as populist backlash will hit them
The populist backlash is coming for datacenters. I'm unconvinced that's truly problematic to these companies given data travels close to the speed of light and plenty of countries have energy, data interconnects and governments unresponsive to locals' concerns.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also feeling like that, not a quick burst like dot-com but a deflating bubble over next 24 months. During which AI costs rise and IPO valuation comes down. Maybe my memory of dot-com is fuzzy (likely) and perhaps I didn't see early warning (or even didn't know how to see it). I feel like it all transpired over 3 months. And for those of us in Seattle the "death-knell" was the Nisqually quake that made much of Pio…
One of the things that really strikes me is that there are so many people talking about how great the frontier models are but there's nowhere near as many people talking about open weights and local models. There is this huge knowledge gap here about what the local models could do in terms of consumer queries with a tiny bit of agentic support. If more people could tinker with local models and see what they can do, I…
> If more people could tinker with local models and see what they can do, I think there would be far less belief that only the big two/three hold the keys to the kingdom and far more that the future is a bit more distributed
Eh, I've played with them. They take way more babysitting to do the work reliably, and I have to much-more closely monitor the outputs for hallucinations.
They'll get there. But it might take a decade or so for (a) consumer hardware and (b) SOTA distilled open-source models to converge with the closed-source stuff, and that's enough time for both a slow deflation and plenty of profits to be made.