It shouldn’t be, but it is. 20 years ago, in the far-off year of 2005, a lot of tech companies more or less followed the same path, where it took decades for them to actually be profitable, if they were at all.
YouTube ran at a deficit for something close to 15 years. AI companies are likely following this trend, and running mostly on investment money, rather than being self-sufficient.
absolutely should. america lives in an idiocracy. a trump meme coin could be valued at 100trillion $ and thats fine. if you want feudalism with extra steps, this is exactly that. go buy some golden sneakers and maybe they’ll be worth a million some time or not.
As a major investor into Open AI future, I’d gladly exchange all my non-existing stakes for a blowjob by fugly Sam Altman. It wouldn’t turn into any profits, but for some time, he’d have something in his mouth that isn’t a lie or a sketchy promo. I believe, some on Open AI board would even pay me to keep him silent.
Gotta keep in mind, profit can always be distorted based on how much employees are getting paid.
Someone is making money. In fact, a lot of people are.
It’s a “pure play”
Capitalism doesn’t sell performance. It sell ‘potential’ and ‘perceived gains’.
I sell my dates on my potential wealth and potential penis size. People need to get on the capitalism grindset.
It’s what we in the biz would refer to as a “grower”, which is in contrast to a “shower”.
If you’re gonna sell dates you better be a grower! Dates don’t just grow themselves!
And women sell dates on their potential to do that thing that was discussed but then try to backtrack by pretending they thought it was a joke and didn’t even bring a banana.
“I have a great venture Idea for you Susan. What if, and hear me out, what if my penis was at least average size! I already have an investor lined up in the bedroom, you’d be crazy to pass on this opportunity”
That’s because it’s just gambling.
With extra steps.
No.
Aka why not to have headlines in the form of a question.
AKA Betteridge’s law of headlines.
So now we are actually to the point where we can ask if a corporation or more widely anything at all has any value if it makes no profit.
There are people in the world who by luck of birth or circumstance have amassed obscene wealth and they after the fact are trying to convince everyone that profit is the only thing of value. These are the real public enemies.
This is the post-scarcity shift. This is how it happens.
We need to take, by force, those who have too much and give it to those who have too little.
They will be kicking and screaming. That means we’re doing something right, because they are not our allies.
Altman has since said the company is losing money on its $200-per-month Pro subscriptions, which offer limitless access to its most recent model, OpenAI o1, and to its video generator, Sora AI. “People use it much more than we expected,” he wrote in a post on X.
It’s ridiculous. More people use the product, so they’re losing money? What. That’s the complete opposite of what a business is.
Not to mention the environmental damage they’ve been doing for close to no positive results.
It’s not more people using the product, it’s the limited population who are paying $200/month use it way more than they thought they would. So the costs per person paying that are going way over $200/month. Basically, they made the mistake of setting a fuck off price that was too low and a bunch of people did the math and took them up on the offer.
If the product costs that much to run, and most users aren’t abusing their access, it’s possible the product isn’t profitable at any price that enough users are willing to pay.
This is dumb. Moore’s law may be mostly dead, but chips are still progressing at an absurd pace. In 6 years you’ll be able to run the o1 model on a raspberry Pi with no internet access.
lmaoooo
Maybe, but i never mentioned years into the future. Of course technology will improve. The hardware will get better and more effcient, and the algorithms and techniques will improve.
But as it stands now, i still think what i said is true. We obviously don’t have exact numbers, so i can only speculate.
Having lots of memory is a big part of inference, so I was going to reply to you that prices of memory stopped going down at a similar historical rate, but i found this, which is interesting
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/historical-cost-of-computer-memory-and-storage?time=2020..latest
The cost when down by about 0.1x from 2000 to 2010. 2010-2020 it was only about 0.23x. 2020-2023 shows roughly another halving of the price, which is still a pretty good rate.
The available memory is still only one part. The speed of the memory and the compute connected to it also plays a big part in how these current systems work.
I almost shat myself in half when I saw how much water is needed for cooling for every prompt
needed? no, water cooling was a choice
Used was probably a better term there.
Why is the water consumed? Can it not be cooled and recirculated?
Because the people that innovate do not care for business and are not good at it, but everything in this world we created has to be sold so there is always this initial mismatch before the business graduate vultures, who innovate nothing descend on it, beg control and then go way too far in the opposite direction. At that late point the only innovation will be a slightly more rounded set of icons on the website.
pretty typical with tech companies, people get too optimistic sometimes
People want to jump on the bandwagon and assume they know everything about new technology.
It’s really easy to take advantage of these laymen with things like traveling to mars or… building underground highways of tubes so people can use transportation like those bank chutes.
I hope one day, we as a species can recognize these patterns so that we may take steps to break them.
We don’t need some “big new tech” to solve the world’s problems. We need to turn around and help out our fellow man who has less than us. We have the tools, just not the desire.
It’s a cultural problem.
It’s typical for tech companies to organize as nonprofits and then restructure because they are losing cash?
Not sure if I’m misunderstanding you or what part you think is typical
It’s typical for tech companies to reorganize because they are losing cash, yes.
Yeah, but not for shitty companies. I’m down to invest in a mom and pop if it helps get it off the ground. Fuck pump and dumps, and people who inflate bubbles.
Spotify hasn’t made a profit at all since its inception afaik.
deleted by creator
Isn’t it a private company? They could say it’s worth infinity trillion dollars…
No, not quite. They’re funded by venture capitalists, who put money into investment rounds on the understanding (speculative gamble?) that the company will have a given future value. The last funding round was $6.6bn on the basis that the company will be worth $157bn when it is floated on the stock market. Ed Zitron has quite a good analysis on his page, and also why their business is a complete pile of shite:
They still aren’t required to go through SEC regulations and can make up some PR nonsense evaluation.
removing the cost of R&D I would assume its profitable right? Once the model is trained running it takes significantly less computing. OpenAI has a fuck ton of customers so I would assume they are making back the cost of running their model API.
Edit: on further inspection this is covered in the article
thanks and holy shit thats a lot of revenue
I don’t think so
