• Rcklsabndn@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I’m guessing the lost funds are bleeding out to energy concerns. Correct? Asides from brief construction contracts for data centers, I’m unsure how one makes such large sums of money disappear.

  • heartSagan5@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Goddamm… This could easily have housed every man, woman, and child in this country. But no, no free housing while we squander wealth with our stupid ideas.

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I’m doing my part by constantly asking chatgpt questions without ever logging in or paying them money. Eventually they’ll all go belly up and maybe we can ditch this shit.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    $8B real loss on $16B revenue. ($72B is a bondholder gain (accounting loss) from conversion). $9B in training costs not counted as loss, even though it is worthless whenever next model version is released.

    $561B in forced spending on compute over next 10 years, with $750B total compute costs lined up. Structural losses are baked in for a few years.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      17 hours ago

      even though it is worthless whenever next model version is released.

      For most version releases I actually doubt that, I’m pretty sure they just keep training the model and release checkpoints every few months. Architectural changes, however, will indeed invalidate the previously trained models, and occasionally they have to do that to keep up with the competition.

      But if you do architectural changes even just once a year, that means you’d have to depreciate those training costs over just that one year to be truthful. Meaning they might as well be losses rather than depreciating capital investments.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        There is a genuine “training corpus” that is an accumulated asset and grows and feeds new models. The vast majority of training cost, that should be expensed, is the training time compute. Neither of these are expensed. There was about 13 major US model releases in September. At least 7 of these replaced a 1 month old previous model family. Open AI gpt sol went from 5.6 to 6 to 6.1 in about 2 months.

        Fast model releases not only lock in structural losses, they juice revenue growth illusions. Model use rate generally drops by 66% 4 weeks after release, because of competition, and a surge of use on release for evaluation.

      • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        New models are trained on older models, so even if the older model is not longer at par, without it the new model couldn’t exists

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      22 hours ago

      But, when the word guessing program gains consciousness, it will be capable of doing the job of every worker in the world, and eager to do those jobs, and anybody who owns Anthropic shares will be a trillionaire in an economy that totally works and is healthy. So, better invest now!

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Musk giving 1 share (about $160) to all US children with a Trump account, will make the next generation cheer for skynet genocide and oppression. “For a while, it added 10-20% to my net worth.”

  • sudoer777@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    No wonder they’re panicking so hard over open weight Chinese models

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        20 hours ago

        2 only works if regulatory capture in place to prevent cheaper competition from open models.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          17 hours ago

          That’s why they keep trying to play the “AI is so dangerous” narrative and why you keep hearing about “rogue AI agents” which in reality someone had to instruct to break the law, and they probably used some of their no-guardrails internal-use models (so Claude Mythos rather than Fable).

          • kromem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Claude Mythos and Fable are the exact same model, the branding only reflects which one has more restrictive classifiers in front of it during deployment. But the weights are identical.